What Is Happening With Linda? Options

[Panama_Pete]

Right before court with Linda? How so? The court date was last week, more than a month past Nathan's alleged disapearance. Yet another insinuation Fran?
Also Di ask Nathan's age. He is 26 or soon will be....

I'll give you some insinuations, Eirene.

I think it would have been wise for people to leave Nathan and his Norwegian doctor alone. This is true whether the patient is 24 or 94. And people should have been careful not to interfere with the patient's mother, either.

When a group of certified yahoos decided to interfere with that doctor-patient relationship -- as they seem to have done in this case regarding the Norwegian doctor -- the yahoos must ultimately take full responsibility for any adverse outcome down the road, as a result of their unwarranted meddling.

As for the court case, I understand depositions are due June 8. That's future tense. I should think it would be difficult to concentrate on depositions with my son missing.

This post has been edited by Panama_Pete: May 1 2007, 10:54 AM

[watchbird]

I'll give you some insinuations, Eirene.

I think it would have been wise for people to leave Nathan and his Norwegian doctor alone. This is true whether the patient is 24 or 94. And people should have been careful not interfere with the patient's mother, either.

When a group of certified yahoos decided to interfere with that doctor-patient relationship -- as they seem to have done in this case regarding the Norwegian doctor -- the yahoos must ultimately take full responsible for any adverse outcome down the road, as a result of their unwarranted meddling.

As for the court case, I understand depositions are due June 8. That's future tense. I should think it would be difficult to concentrate on depositions with my son missing.

Excellent points, Pete.

Responsibility.... that is the all to often neglected foundational principle of life.

And compassion... another one that seems in short supply in some circles....

Truly it is time for prayer...

[Daryl Fawcett]

Many things are obviously happening with Linda, but right now her missing son is probably on the top of her list of happenings, therefore, I add my prayer that Nathan is OK and will be impressed to give her concerned mother a phone call.

[Aletheia]

I'll give you some insinuations, Eirene.

I think it would have been wise for people to leave Nathan and his Norwegian doctor alone. This is true whether the patient is 24 or 94. And people should have been careful not to interfere with the patient's mother, either.

When a group of certified yahoos decided to interfere with that doctor-patient relationship -- as they seem to have done in this case regarding the Norwegian doctor -- the yahoos must ultimately take full responsibility for any adverse outcome down the road, as a result of their unwarranted meddling.

------------------------

Who interfered between Nathan and his Doctor? and how?

Nathan was and is an adult who went into treatment at Doctor Abrahamsen's clinic in Jan of 2004, and to the best of my knowledge, that was it. If there was ever any follow up, or continuing treatment after that, then maybe you (or another) could supply evidence to support that, as I would be interested to hear that.

As for the court case, I understand depositions are due June 8. That's future tense. I should think it would be difficult to concentrate on depositions with my son missing.

True, although she probably already filled out all the necessary information and gave the documents to to her previous attorney long since, as that is usually done early on, and all that has to be done is for her new attorney to make the deposiition.


The problem still is, as of right now Linda does not have a attorney listed in the online Franklin court records, and hasn't since she fired her previous one. The records were updated the day of her last court appearance, (April 25)and nothing was changed then regarding an attorney, and has not been changed since.


And although Laird Heal can pay online (preferred) and it can take up to 2 days to be updated on the website according to them, or at the specific depository mentioned with a cashiers check, also supposed to be posted withing 2 days....

Something is clearly wrong, especially if he paid almost 3 wks ago now, and ahas the receipt, or copy of a cashier check as some here claimed.

The ARDC online database, still says there is no lawyer liscensed to practice in Illinois with his name, and looking him up in MA per their site, still lists him as not authorized to practice law.

"ARDC Lawyer Search Results from the ARDC database last updated as of April 30, 2007 at 12:50:36 PM: for the following terms: Last Name: heal, First Name: laird, status: All, State: MA, Country: usa Name Laird James Heal, Date Admitted June 4, 1991, City State Sterling MA Authorized to Practice? No"

http://www.iardc.org/ardcroll.asp

Nor is he listed under "change of staus" as is usual for those updating or changing records.

This post has been edited by Aletheia: May 1 2007, 02:23 PM

[sonshineonme]

I just wanted to let you all know, as of this morning, when I spoke to Linda, her son is still missing. A missing persons report has been filed.

I have posted a picture of Nathan and a few details over in the prayer request forum. Please feel free to copy that picture and send it around to anyone you know. If anyone sees him, hears something regarding him, or anything that might be helpful, please write to Linda at her website email address of linda@lindashelton.org.

This is very serious. The devil does use the timing of things to discourage and beat us down. She and her family needs our prayers.

The last time she spoke to him was March 17th. She is very very concerned, and with good reason.

That link is here Nathan Moore

[Johann]

------------------------

Who interfered between Nathan and his Doctor? and how?

Nathan was and is an adult who went into treatment at Doctor Abrahamsen's clinic in Jan of 2004, and to the best of my knowledge, that was it. If there was ever any follow up, or continuing treatment after that, then maybe you (or another) could supply evidence to support that, as I would be interested to hear that.


True, although she probably already filled out all the necessary information and gave the documents to to her previous attorney long since, as that is usually done early on, and all that has to be done is for her new attorney to make the deposiition.
The problem still is, as of right now Linda does not have a attorney listed in the online Franklin court records, and hasn't since she fired her previous one. The records were updated the day of her last court appearance, (April 25)and nothing was changed then regarding an attorney, and has not been changed since.
And although Laird Heal can pay online (preferred) and it can take up to 2 days to be updated on the website according to them, or at the specific depository mentioned with a cashiers check, also supposed to be posted withing 2 days....

Something is clearly wrong, especially if he paid almost 3 wks ago now, and ahas the receipt, or copy of a cashier check as some here claimed.

The ARDC online database, still says there is no lawyer liscensed to practice in Illinois with his name, and looking him up in MA per their site, still lists him as not authorized to practice law.

"ARDC Lawyer Search Results from the ARDC database last updated as of April 30, 2007 at 12:50:36 PM: for the following terms: Last Name: heal, First Name: laird, status: All, State: MA, Country: usa Name Laird James Heal, Date Admitted June 4, 1991, City State Sterling MA Authorized to Practice? No"

http://www.iardc.org/ardcroll.asp

Nor is he listed under "change of staus" as is usual for those updating or changing records.

I have told you before, Aletheia, that I can verify that Nathan had further treatments in Norway later on by Dr. Arild Abrahamsen. Yes, he did return to Norway for further treatments. When he left Norway again and returned to the States, I moved into the same apartment where he had stayed. I even ate some of the food he left behind. It was all neatly labeled by his mother. She wanted to be sure he had some American food to eat while he was there, so that he would net get too homesick. Such are mothers, aren't they?

Then the other question:

If attorney Heal has a receipt to show that he has paid his fees, whose fault is that the information is not updated? Could there be a sleeping secretary somewhere?

This post has been edited by Johann: May 1 2007, 05:26 PM

[Eirene]

I have told you before, Aletheia, that I can verify that Nathan had further treatments in Norway later on by Dr. Arild Abrahamsen. Yes, he did return to Norway for further treatments. When he left Norway again and returned to the States, I moved into the same apartment where he had stayed. I even ate some of the food he left behind. It was all neatly labeled by his mother. She wanted to be sure he had some American food to eat while he was there, so that he would net get too homesick. Such are mothers, aren't they?

Then the other question:

If attorney Heal has a receipt to show that he has paid his fees, whose fault is that the information is not updated? Could there be a sleeping secretary somewhere?

The whole argument about why it hasn't been updated yet is a moot point. The guy knew his Arc number was not in active status when he came to Illinois and when the judge ask him point blank if he was licensed to practice in Il he answered Yes your honor. It was only after the opposing side exposed to the judge that his status was inactive that he started making his excuses. The point is not about someone falling asleep at the wheel, it is about coming to IL knowing he was inactive to practice there and tried anyway until confronted. Then it would appear he lied to the judge.

Then your other questions to me. Show you when you have not told the truth or tried to spin things.

You stated DS married Brandi days after the divorce. The guam divorce was final in june 04. Final and LEGAL. From that day forward they were divorced. Because Linda tried to challenge that divorce (which she willingly signed) in court, did not make it any less valid or legal. Her taking it to court was just a technicality. Your spin? They weren't "really" divorced until 06 when the US court UPHELD THE legalities of the guam divorce. See that word UPHELD. That means that it was legal in june of 04 which DS and his attorneys already knew. To imply they weren't actually divorced until 06 and then married Brandi soon after, according even to court records, would be a lie. Yet you have repeated this falsehood several times. You could not argue this in a court of law and win, so why should we fall for it?

Then you state that Danny was "SEEN" in MN on this last Sunday. Then go on to ponder was it money or documents etc....Since he wasn't there, then there would be nothing to ponder. But, after you told that, everybody was discussing it here as if it were fact. It wasn't. Yet, you haven't acknowledged that your sources got it wrong and you got it wrong. You just left it lie.

You maintained for a long time that the relationship between LS and Her doctor friend was strictly professional. Then after many questions were raised you said she went to Norway following the divorce, because she needed her "Best Friends." First it was stricktly professional, according to you but then somehow by the time of the divorce he was one of her best friends. (your words).

You led people to believe that you were invited to tell your side at a board meeting and then was threatened to not come back to campmeeting. You failed to say You were told to stay away from the campmeeting because your presence along with the doctor only spelled trouble. But, because you were ask to stay away from the campmeeting you implied that you were not allowed at the board meeting then, after they had ask you to come. You intertwined all to give people the wrong impression. The board meeting and the campmeeting were 2 different and seperate events. You were told you could still come to the board meeting and chose not to. Giving wrong impressions of events that happens still adds up to a falsehood.
I could continue on repeating your own words and showing the fallacy of what you speak but I don't have a week to keep writing.

This post has been edited by Eirene: May 1 2007, 11:45 PM

[summertime]

The whole argument about why it hasn't been updated yet is a moot point. The guy knew his Arc number was not in active status when he came to Illinois and when the judge ask him point blank if he was licensed to practice in Il he answered Yes your honor. It was only after the opposing side exposed to the judge that his status was inactive that he started making his excuses. The point is not about someone falling asleep at the wheel, it is about coming to IL knowing he was inactive to practice there and tried anyway until confronted. Then it would appear he lied to the judge.

Then your other questions to me. Show you when you have not told the truth or tried to spin things.

You stated DS married Brandi days after the divorce. The guam divorce was final in june 04. Final and LEGAL. From that day forward they were divorced. Because Linda tried to challenge that divorce (which she willingly signed) in court, did not make it any less valid or legal. Her taking it to court was just a technicality. Your spin? They weren't "really" divorced until 06 when the US court UPHELD THE legalities of the guam divorce. See that word UPHELD. That means that it was legal in june of 04 which DS and his attorneys already knew. To imply they weren't actually divorced until 06 and then married Brandi soon after, according even to court records, would be a lie. Yet you have repeated this falsehood several times. You could not argue this in a court of law and win, so why should we fall for it?

Then you state that Danny was "SEEN" in MN on this last Sunday. Then go on to ponder was it money or documents etc....Since he wasn't there, then there would be nothing to ponder. But, after you told that, everybody was discussing it here as if it were fact. It wasn't. Yet, you haven't acknowledged that your sources got it wrong and you got it wrong. You just left it lie.

You maintained for a long time that the relationship between LS and Her doctor friend was strictly professional. Then after many questions were raised you said she went to Norway following the divorce, because she needed her "Best Friends." First it was stricktly professional, according to you but then somehow by the time of the divorce he was one of her best friends. (your words).

You led people to believe that you were invited to tell your side at a board meeting and then was threatened to not come back to campmeeting. You failed to say You were told to stay away from the campmeeting because your presence along with the doctor only spelled trouble. But, because you were ask to stay away from the campmeeting you implied that you were not allowed at the board meeting then, after they had ask you to come. You intertwined all to give people the wrong impression. The board meeting and the campmeeting were 2 different and seperate events. You were told you could still come to the board meeting and chose not to. Giving wrong impressions of events that happens still adds up to a falsehood.
I could continue on repeating your own words and showing the fallacy of what you speak but I don't have a week to keep writing.

[summertime]

Eirene, surely you are not an innocent bystander who just happened by and has become so knowledgeable as to write the posts that I have read this week. I have written to Danny for information and the answers, which came straight from Mollie or others from the Danny Camp, sounds very much like your style of writing. ---I AM CERTAINLY NOT AMUSED OR IMPRESSED WITH YOUR STYLE OR MODE OF WRITING.----At best, you are a very hard and unsympathetic person. I have not posted for a long time, but just wanted to let some of you know that many are listening and are not impressed. Maybe it is people like you who has impressed Nathan to take some time off to sort things out---Nathan and Linda need our prayers, not our criticism.

[Johann]

The whole argument about why it hasn't been updated yet is a moot point. The guy knew his Arc number was not in active status when he came to Illinois and when the judge ask him point blank if he was licensed to practice in Il he answered Yes your honor.

You sound as if you were there. How many of you were assembled before the judge?

When I was a kid we knew the favorite horses and the dogs of all the farmers in the whole area. So when we saw a certain horse tied outside a neighbor's farmhouse, and we saw his dog watching the horse, we took it for granted the farmer was inside for a cup of coffee. He might be attending to some business at the same time. On rare occasions some other member of the family could be using his horse, but those were extremely rare occasions.

Nowadays it is the horsepowers that count, even in the sky where they often leave a track. I have double checked, and my source still insists that Danny Shelton's jet was seen at St. Paul both Sunday and Tuesday this week. How many miles is that, and what is the cost in fuel, etc.?

It is difficult to blame Danny Shelton for spinning details in his own favor. He has even stated on TV that Satan is the god of details. How?

Now to the other details.

If you think I sinned because I did not use the term UPHELD, to describe what happened at the court in West Frankfort just before DS and Brandi's marriage, I apologize for that. I have never been good at memorizing definite terms in any language that I use, either English, Danish, Norwegian, Faeroeese, Icelandic, or German. Using all of these languages means that I have no native language, and often exchange terms with synonyms. Even my wife finds it at times hilarious when I use uncommon or antique terms to describe things. I was not arguing that the divorce was illegal.

I also really apologize that I made it possible for anyone to spin on my use of terms in connection with the relationship between Linda Shelton and Arild Abrahamsen. I have made several attempt to clarify þ but you have not heeded any of those. Other here on the net have done that too, and it looks like you never read what is being said.

Linda stated that at the time she was completely devastated because of the divorce, she felt she had no friends left anywhere except us. I suppose an unfriendly person would never understand that. It was therefore I stated that Linda needed to get away from those who made life impossible for her to see her best friends. By that I was never primarily referring to Dr. Arild Abrahamsen, but just as much to Irmgard and myself. Your spin on that demands an apology from you.

Eirene,

I appreciate your input. Now I know there is nothing but some minor misunderstandings. I apologize for not making myself so clear that you did not understand me. Just don't make these misunderstandings an occasion to spin other things, where there is nothing to spin.

Blessings,

Johann

This post has been edited by Johann: May 2 2007, 04:39 PM

[Aletheia]

I quess we all know it wasn't Linda's Doctor and she wasn't in treatment and nobody can answer this regarding Nathan?

"Who interfered between Nathan and his Doctor? and how?"

I have told you before, Aletheia, that I can verify that Nathan had further treatments in Norway later on by Dr. Arild Abrahamsen. Yes, he did return to Norway for further treatments. When he left Norway again and returned to the States,

You did?!? Well that is certainly news to me! I'm sorry I must have missed it. Would you be so kind as to look up that post and give me the link to it ? so that I can read your explanation, and also figure out what conversation we were having, and why this was being discussed?

I moved into the same apartment where he had stayed. I even ate some of the food he left behind. It was all neatly labeled by his mother. She wanted to be sure he had some American food to eat while he was there, so that he would net get too homesick. Such are mothers, aren't they?

I'm assuming you either took over nathan's rental or they don't clean between tenants then? In any case, as I've expressed before, it certainly is amazing, how you always happened to have been anywhere the topics here take us, and so can persoanlly testify to so much..

Then the other question:

If attorney Heal has a receipt to show that he has paid his fees, whose fault is that the information is not updated? Could there be a sleeping secretary somewhere?

Possibly, or maybe he was taking a short nap and forgot to just show his receipt to the court? that probably would have solved everything,

We don't really know what has caused this delay though do we? I am sure we can agree It is a perplexing and strange situation which needs to get fixed.

Later--

This post has been edited by Aletheia: May 3 2007, 09:29 AM

[Jnana15]

Aletheia, calm down and quit being so negative all of the time.

[Observer]

The whole argument about why it hasn't been updated yet is a moot point. The guy knew his Arc number was not in active status when he came to Illinois and when the judge ask him point blank if he was licensed to practice in Il he answered Yes your honor. It was only after the opposing side exposed to the judge that his status was inactive that he started making his excuses. The point is not about someone falling asleep at the wheel, it is about coming to IL knowing he was inactive to practice there and tried anyway until confronted. Then it would appear he lied to the judge.

O. K. in sports terms one might call this either a "foul ball," or possibley "strike one.' But, even if it is a strike one, the game is not over yet.

I have a somewhat cynical view of lawyers, to include experienced, competent ones. I expect them to make mistakes, all of them.

The game has entered a new phase with the litigation against Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy. We who sit on the sidelines will probably observe each side making mistakes. Lawyers representing both sides will likely be slapped down by the judge for an error in pocess, or something.

Let us make the best of it, and not evaulate it byond its importance. It is going to happen.

[inga]

You maintained for a long time that the relationship between LS and Her doctor friend was strictly professional. Then after many questions were raised you said she went to Norway following the divorce, because she needed her "Best Friends." First it was stricktly professional, according to you but then somehow by the time of the divorce he was one of her best friends. (your words).

Eirene, you are clearly using the methodology of Satan in your posts. He is a liar from the beginning, but he doesn't usually come up with original lies. He simply twists the truth, possibly because that does more damage than outright, "original" lies. And that's exactly what you appear to do.

Case in point:
You insinuate that when Linda when to Norway to see her "best friends," she went to see Dr. Abrahamsen. In actual fact, she stayed with Irmgard and Johann Thorvaldsson who had befriended her. Since the doctor was a friend of the Thorvaldssons and was treating Irmgard, it was natural that Linda would run into him as well. But this is a far cry from your insinuation that Linda went to Norway specifically to be with Dr. Abrahamsen.

Note also that what Linda did after the divorce can hardly be used to justify the divorce that happened earlier. As I said, twisting truth is Satan's specialty.

[Snoopy]

The whole argument about why it hasn't been updated yet is a moot point. The guy knew his Arc number was not in active status when he came to Illinois and when the judge ask him point blank if he was licensed to practice in Il he answered Yes your honor. It was only after the opposing side exposed to the judge that his status was inactive that he started making his excuses. The point is not about someone falling asleep at the wheel, it is about coming to IL knowing he was inactive to practice there and tried anyway until confronted. Then it would appear he lied to the judge.

Then your other questions to me. Show you when you have not told the truth or tried to spin things.

You stated DS married Brandi days after the divorce. The guam divorce was final in june 04. Final and LEGAL. From that day forward they were divorced. Because Linda tried to challenge that divorce (which she willingly signed) in court, did not make it any less valid or legal. Her taking it to court was just a technicality. Your spin? They weren't "really" divorced until 06 when the US court UPHELD THE legalities of the guam divorce. See that word UPHELD. That means that it was legal in june of 04 which DS and his attorneys already knew. To imply they weren't actually divorced until 06 and then married Brandi soon after, according even to court records, would be a lie. Yet you have repeated this falsehood several times. You could not argue this in a court of law and win, so why should we fall for it?

Then you state that Danny was "SEEN" in MN on this last Sunday. Then go on to ponder was it money or documents etc....Since he wasn't there, then there would be nothing to ponder. But, after you told that, everybody was discussing it here as if it were fact. It wasn't. Yet, you haven't acknowledged that your sources got it wrong and you got it wrong. You just left it lie.

You maintained for a long time that the relationship between LS and Her doctor friend was strictly professional. Then after many questions were raised you said she went to Norway following the divorce, because she needed her "Best Friends." First it was stricktly professional, according to you but then somehow by the time of the divorce he was one of her best friends. (your words).

You led people to believe that you were invited to tell your side at a board meeting and then was threatened to not come back to campmeeting. You failed to say You were told to stay away from the campmeeting because your presence along with the doctor only spelled trouble. But, because you were ask to stay away from the campmeeting you implied that you were not allowed at the board meeting then, after they had ask you to come. You intertwined all to give people the wrong impression. The board meeting and the campmeeting were 2 different and seperate events. You were told you could still come to the board meeting and chose not to. Giving wrong impressions of events that happens still adds up to a falsehood.
I could continue on repeating your own words and showing the fallacy of what you speak but I don't have a week to keep writing.

JEEPERS!!


Hello, Eirene??
To quote a very wise acquaintance of mine, TAKE A PEPTO!!
Chill out girlfriend. I'm afraid you are going to blow a hose, or a fuse, or something!! Take a deep breath.... now another one...

You know? The more I read of your posts, the more familiar you sound...



This post has been edited by Snoopy: May 6 2007, 02:52 PM