|
Post by lin on Apr 28, 2009 21:05:22 GMT -5
Incest?
|
|
|
Post by rjs on Apr 28, 2009 21:16:14 GMT -5
Why doesn't Jerome F. publicly inform people of the FACTS and apologize for anything he said or did wrong? The ball is in his court.
|
|
|
Post by bandtroll on Apr 28, 2009 21:19:02 GMT -5
Is it that you can't or that you refuse to accept the truth of the truth My issue has nothing to do with the Truth (religion). It has to do with some expecting the rest to believe things as fact simply because the one saying it believes it as fact. (There's a medical term for this) My friend? I have no idea who BS is, nor who you are. I have never said in all my posts on this topic that I know more than anyone else about what is going on. I have only said that I will not accept things as fact just because someone / anyone "says" its a fact. I hope so, I have been very upfront about it. (Or do you know for a FACT that I'm up to something else) Nothing. But that does not mean I will accept anyone else's story as fact. Seeing where someone was or what they did, or hearing what they said. Those may be facts. What you believe about someone else's motives or feelings are not FACTS.
|
|
|
Post by jhjmr on Apr 28, 2009 21:44:58 GMT -5
Right on rjs. Letting everyone know the facts is all that is required for some peace of mind. But, lets hope he also informs everyone to have a loving spirit. It will take a mighty man to fill those shoes and accomplish those traits.
|
|
|
Post by pianoman on Apr 28, 2009 22:49:24 GMT -5
I feel it is so important at this point to try to see what I have been driving at in my posts.
There are two separate issues here. The system, or the "truth" and then there are the people of the system.
I can not support that system. I can not condemn anyone, least of all those in the "truth".
If I were to be in denial as some are, I would be standing up for a system that is in part, going against truth. Wrong is wrong, no matter who commits it.
Most people that are professing in this way, are thinking that I am attacking the people. I am not, I am simply pointing out the flaws in the system that completely failed me.
Being in contact with some involved, I have seen consistency all the way through their accounting. Before something happens, I have been told the truth, and it turns out to be the truth. Can I ignore that? Nope!
RJS and JHJMR, you are so right. The proverbial ball is indeed in the court of JF, and if he would respond honestly, I think that would be a start.
JHJMR, I must commend you for you pointing out that a loving spirit is needed. Can anyone forget that? The truth will come out at some point, and those that are deceptive, will stand out very clear. It seems that they should come clean, and that would resolve a lot of this situation.
In regards to the shoes being filled, yes big shoes, but if the "truth" were as cohesive as some claim, this would all not be necessary.
Once again, this is about a group/system/way that needs mending and needs it badly.
|
|
White Knight
Senior Member
THE SHADOW KNOWS. In the shadow of the highest is a refuge from all fear.
Posts: 510
|
Post by White Knight on Apr 29, 2009 6:39:12 GMT -5
It is a federal offence for an attorney or law office/law enforcement or any of its affiliates to show or allow anyone access to files in such cases as this type of case. They can be prosecuted. In such a case as this were so many lives have been tarnished and a case has been deemed faults then it is sealed in an envelope never to be opened unless an accused comes forward and desires to see if his /her name is on it, they are not allowed to see no one else’s name. In short that letter never gets destroyed. However if anyone in that letter has been investigated the file is an open file and one has to make certain that the courts and any investigating officer has included/conclude that these were in fact faults allegations’. And that record/ report becomes a hidden file on such accused person for the next time should there be. IN short that file never dies. And yes this opens the State up to law suits in many different aspects; this includes the troopers investigating this case should anything be found/deemed amiss. Also included the fact should a privet citizen/s be found spreading, showing or harassing one with or by faults allegations. We have already checked with the state of MI.
|
|
|
Post by degem on Apr 29, 2009 6:42:22 GMT -5
sometimes I think the situation, etc. is like a dog chasing its tail-going around and around in circles
|
|
|
Post by pianoman on Apr 29, 2009 8:12:20 GMT -5
Yesterday at 8:05pm, lin wrote: I think most friends and workers don't know about the network of outright stalkers the fellowship has. And I think if they did and had the Michigan case would have turned out a bit different.
Yesterday at 8:23pm, Sharon wrote: Sadly enough, Lin, this is probably very true....but that's because people within the truth's fellowship think it as the only True Church so thus it possibly couldn't have anyone within it that wasn't honest, was evil or negative in behavior towards others.
The reason that this can happen, is that there is too much "handling" done by some workers. They handle this and that, but don't handle other things.
This is where the denial part comes into play. So many of the F&W's get defensive about the fellowship as a whole, and I understand that. The problem is that one can not deny that the problems exist, and they are part of the whole.
I do not want my belief system attacked as much as others don't want theirs attacked. But, if I am wrong in my belief system, and/or someone can point out a fault, IN MY BELIEF SYSTEM, then I must look at what is pointed out, before I start defending it. No one can ever judge me, and I hope no one is thinking that I am judging them.
The fact of the matter is that this all leads back to the principals involved in this Michigan Case. The ones that stand accused, will have this accusation on their permanent record for the rest of their lives. It will not matter what the outcome of this trial is, if they are not formally charged, or prosecuted, they will have to live with the accusation on their permanant record for life. Is that fair? NO, but that is the way our country works. These accusations will come up and not show a dispensation of the case, but merely show what was alleged.
I know what it is like to suffer financial loss because of workers. I know that it is pretty hard to forgive, but that must be done. I also feel that those that have caused any financial loss should be compensated for their loss. I don't mean that they should profit from it, but be restored. I also have had my reputation falsely smeared by F&W's and I will state for this case, that those whisperings never go away and usually are never cleared up.
Often in court, a lawyer or witness will state something, and the judge will instruct the jury to disregard that statement. How can someone un-hear something? When gossip or rumors start in the 2x2 way, they remain. Some live for that while others hate it, but it is a part, again, of the whole.
The important thing to remember is that those that are standing behind the wrong here are losing credibility. How can a worker be involved with standing behind a liar, and then preach the truth? Not in my world.
|
|
|
Post by jhjmr on Apr 29, 2009 9:21:14 GMT -5
It is also unlawful for anyone to have a list of names of people that were accused falsely and to give those names to anyone is also unlawful. All such parties can be sued in the court of law. It is also unlawful to have a list of people that maybe suspected of a crime. And if that is made available to anyone, they also can be sued. All false allegations is to be sealed and kept away from public forever. It is also unlawful to mention a name that maybe is suspected of commiting a crime unless to a law officer and may be sued. So, it sure does appear that a lot of unlawful things have been done and people with list had better check for legal assistance because, only law personal may have that list submitted to them, if it is necessary to check for true or false allegations and then sealed for ever and not to be kept to keep seeing if that name may appear again in a suspected crime. This is why lawyers make good money!
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Apr 29, 2009 10:10:51 GMT -5
The fact of the matter is that this all leads back to the principals involved in this Michigan Case. The ones that stand accused, will have this accusation on their permanent record for the rest of their lives. It will not matter what the outcome of this trial is, if they are not formally charged, or prosecuted, they will have to live with the accusation on their permanent record for life.So do you think that all 200 (the number given to us by others who have posted here) will have their names on a permanent record for life? I just have a hard time believing that there is going to be any kind of permanent record for those who were never charged with any wrongdoing. Of those who were investigated and nothing was found incriminating, I can hardly imagine that there will be anything listed anywhere other than in the report held by the investigating office. It has been posted that any names will be in a sealed envelope. If that is the case, then how in the world does this become part of a permanent record if it can't be seen by anyone? It wouldn't make any sense to have a sealed envelope of names, and at the same time have those names listed in a computer system. My guess (and that is all it is) would be that only those individuals who were actually charged with some sort of crime would have any permanent (available for other law enforcement agencies to access) record kept of the proceedings. Scott
|
|
|
Post by jhjmr on Apr 29, 2009 10:32:25 GMT -5
There is a file of all allegations. It was investigated by the police. That investigation was to be of a private matter. Not to be discussed with anyone or posted anywhere. Once a certain individual is investigated they only become as open file. The police can ask questions of anyone they are investigating, but they can NOT discuss the persons file. These files then must be corrected to state if anything they were accused of was false! The original file is now been determined it is false because of admittance to the fact, it is not public record but it is to be kept by the prosecutor, sealed forever. The prosecutor can NOT disclose of what is in the file, names in the file nor facts of the file. They were of false natural. The court will have a sealed file unacessable to the public. It is unlawful to let anyone know or see that sealed file. Since these allegations are false no other law enforcement would need to know what is in the file. Yes, the two hundred will have their names on a false sealed file. No one is allowed to have a list of names that may suspected of a crime. If someone is suspected of a crime, it can be turned into a law enforcement and they will investigate if they feel need too, then it will proceed on to the prosecutor to see if their is a need to file a charge. That is not to be made public. Because if their is evidence of a lie you can NOT show that to anyone. The names of falsely accused are NOT suppose to have ever been entered into a computer system, they are lies. The police is unlawful to share information and investigations with outside sources of a case. That is also a lawsuit which in turn would be against the police which then would become against the state. Anyone that repeated any of that information is open in that lawsuit.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Apr 29, 2009 10:58:25 GMT -5
It is also unlawful for anyone to have a list of names of people that were accused falsely and to give those names to anyone is also unlawful. It has been posted here that some people were passing around a list of names there in Michigan to several people. Does that mean that they are guilty of a crime? If so, then that would mean that those who did so will be getting arrested and charged with that crime correct? All such parties can be sued in the court of law. Not sure what you mean here. Normally if someone is accused of a crime they are investigated and prosecuted by the authorities, not sued. Of course if you are referring to individuals suing for using such a list, (if they have indeed committed a crime) won't any lawsuit have to wait until the authorities have investigated, tried and convicted the individuals of a crime? It is also unlawful for anyone to have a list of names of people that were accused falsely and to give those names to anyone is also unlawful.I am sure that there are a lot of reporters out there that have lengthy lists of names when they are doing investigative reporting about any story they might be working on. Having a list of names isn't in itself unlawful. Using such a list to deliberately harm someone probably could be though. The law pertains to the authorities as well as any other individual, and we see that it is being posted that all those 'falsely accused' will have this on their record for the rest of their life. Wouldn't that mean that the authorities are violating the law just by having the names somewhere? (other than in the sealed envelope that is being mentioned) All such parties can be sued in the court of law. I don't think that anyone can be sued for having a list of names. It is what is done with a persons name in the form of libel or slander that makes for a crime. Again, deliberate harm to an individual must be shown. It is also unlawful to have a list of people that maybe suspected of a crime No it isn't. Neighborhood watch programs routinely have people write down license plate numbers of vehicles that seem out of place and those are given to the authorities when something happens. Likewise if someone writes down the name of someone they think (suspect) has committed a crime there isn't anything wrong with it. Just watch the news. People get arrested for suspicion all the time. Some get released with no charges being pressed against them. If I know an individual by name and I feel they are guilty of a crime and I write that name down and put it in a drawer that certainly isn't a crime. And if that is made available to anyone, they also can be sued. All false allegations is to be sealed and kept away from public forever. If sealed forever, where is the problem? It is also unlawful to mention a name that maybe is suspected of commiting a crime unless to a law officer and may be sued. So if you see 'Joe Smith' walking away from a house where he doesn't live with a TV under his arm and you mention that you saw 'Joe Smith' with a TV under his arm and you think he may have stolen it you would be committing a crime? So, it sure does appear that a lot of unlawful things have been done and people with list had better check for legal assistance because, only law personal may have that list submitted to them, if it is necessary to check for true or false allegations and then sealed for ever and not to be kept to keep seeing if that name may appear again in a suspected crime. This is why lawyers make good money! It is also unlawful to have a list of people that maybe suspected of a crime No, anyone can make up a list of names. That in itself is not illegal. Again, it is what is done with an individuals name that brings deliberate harm to that individual. And if that is made available to anyone, they also can be sued. All false allegations is to be sealed and kept away from public forever. It is also unlawful to mention a name that maybe is suspected of commiting a crime unless to a law officer and may be sued. So, it sure does appear that a lot of unlawful things have been done and people with list had better check for legal assistance because, only law personal may have that list submitted to them, if it is necessary to check for true or false allegations and then sealed for ever and not to be kept to keep seeing if that name may appear again in a suspected crime. This is why lawyers make good money! It'll be interesting to see how many of those people are sued there in Michigan who were given this list of names. It sounds from the posts here that the list was given to a lot of different people, so lots of people must have a copy of this list there. I haven't quite figured out how the list got into anyone's hands in the first place if the only people that had the list were the authorities who had the names reported to them. Like I've mentioned, neither I (nor WINGS) were ever given any such list. Scott
|
|
|
Post by jhjmr on Apr 29, 2009 12:06:16 GMT -5
If you saw Joe Smith walking from your neighbors house with a TV, you would report it to the authorities or take note of the description of the person. You would give that information to the police if that person was investigated. You could not go around and tell everyone that Joe Smith just stole a TV without knowing he had. When the police investigated, they would not tell you that Joe Smith was a thief but, what did you know. Now in Mi. Bethanie Craig proceeded to ask for information and to give it to the workers and even named IH for sexual abuse. And she had Wings put it on the web with her named signed on it. That was wrongful. I would say that is why she was removed from the case. The names that were given out was wrongful because it was false allegations. It was not investigated or proven anything. That was deliberate harm done. Keeping a list of names in your file doesn't mean diddly doo, but a group of people with suspected names and shares it with others can do wrongful damage. Anyone on the news that is arrested is in the police presence. Not just allegations flying by. If you go into the police and file a report against someone, you had better make sure it isn't a lie because you can be charged with a felony for lying. That was just proven. And if you had a list and passed it out for others to read, which is the list that you also gave the police, that is harmful damage when it is a lie. You can NOT use malice against others for personal reasons without it being wrong and causing damage. So, yes, it is what is done with those falsely accused names. You just can't have people going around on witch hunts. And even repeating names that were accused of a crime is harm to a reputation. That is beyond gossip or hearsay. It is the false accusations that play s the big role in this situations.
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Apr 29, 2009 12:24:09 GMT -5
Yesterday at 8:05pm, lin wrote: I think most friends and workers don't know about the network of outright stalkers the fellowship has. And I think if they did and had the Michigan case would have turned out a bit different. Yesterday at 8:23pm, Sharon wrote: Sadly enough, Lin, this is probably very true....but that's because people within the truth's fellowship think it as the only True Church so thus it possibly couldn't have anyone within it that wasn't honest, was evil or negative in behavior towards others. The reason that this can happen, is that there is too much "handling" done by some workers. They handle this and that, but don't handle other things. This is where the denial part comes into play. So many of the F&W's get defensive about the fellowship as a whole, and I understand that. The problem is that one can not deny that the problems exist, and they are part of the whole. I do not want my belief system attacked as much as others don't want theirs attacked. But, if I am wrong in my belief system, and/or someone can point out a fault, IN MY BELIEF SYSTEM, then I must look at what is pointed out, before I start defending it. No one can ever judge me, and I hope no one is thinking that I am judging them. The fact of the matter is that this all leads back to the principals involved in this Michigan Case. The ones that stand accused, will have this accusation on their permanent record for the rest of their lives. It will not matter what the outcome of this trial is, if they are not formally charged, or prosecuted, they will have to live with the accusation on their permanant record for life. Is that fair? NO, but that is the way our country works. These accusations will come up and not show a dispensation of the case, but merely show what was alleged. I know what it is like to suffer financial loss because of workers. I know that it is pretty hard to forgive, but that must be done. I also feel that those that have caused any financial loss should be compensated for their loss. I don't mean that they should profit from it, but be restored. I also have had my reputation falsely smeared by F&W's and I will state for this case, that those whisperings never go away and usually are never cleared up. Often in court, a lawyer or witness will state something, and the judge will instruct the jury to disregard that statement. How can someone un-hear something? When gossip or rumors start in the 2x2 way, they remain. Some live for that while others hate it, but it is a part, again, of the whole. The important thing to remember is that those that are standing behind the wrong here are losing credibility. How can a worker be involved with standing behind a liar, and then preach the truth? Not in my world. Great clarity Pianoman Thanks for your words of wisdom ken
|
|
|
Post by lin on Apr 29, 2009 12:40:30 GMT -5
Yesterday at 8:05pm, lin wrote: I think most friends and workers don't know about the network of outright stalkers the fellowship has. And I think if they did and had the Michigan case would have turned out a bit different. Yesterday at 8:23pm, Sharon wrote: Sadly enough, Lin, this is probably very true....but that's because people within the truth's fellowship think it as the only True Church so thus it possibly couldn't have anyone within it that wasn't honest, was evil or negative in behavior towards others. The reason that this can happen, is that there is too much "handling" done by some workers. They handle this and that, but don't handle other things. This is where the denial part comes into play. So many of the F&W's get defensive about the fellowship as a whole, and I understand that. The problem is that one can not deny that the problems exist, and they are part of the whole. I do not want my belief system attacked as much as others don't want theirs attacked. But, if I am wrong in my belief system, and/or someone can point out a fault, IN MY BELIEF SYSTEM, then I must look at what is pointed out, before I start defending it. No one can ever judge me, and I hope no one is thinking that I am judging them. The fact of the matter is that this all leads back to the principals involved in this Michigan Case. The ones that stand accused, will have this accusation on their permanent record for the rest of their lives. It will not matter what the outcome of this trial is, if they are not formally charged, or prosecuted, they will have to live with the accusation on their permanant record for life. Is that fair? NO, but that is the way our country works. These accusations will come up and not show a dispensation of the case, but merely show what was alleged. I know what it is like to suffer financial loss because of workers. I know that it is pretty hard to forgive, but that must be done. I also feel that those that have caused any financial loss should be compensated for their loss. I don't mean that they should profit from it, but be restored. I also have had my reputation falsely smeared by F&W's and I will state for this case, that those whisperings never go away and usually are never cleared up. Often in court, a lawyer or witness will state something, and the judge will instruct the jury to disregard that statement. How can someone un-hear something? When gossip or rumors start in the 2x2 way, they remain. Some live for that while others hate it, but it is a part, again, of the whole. The important thing to remember is that those that are standing behind the wrong here are losing credibility. How can a worker be involved with standing behind a liar, and then preach the truth? Not in my world. If you had more facts and understanding of what was behind this incident you could even speak with more clarity. That is the sadness of this case,it was the silent manipulation behind the scenes.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Apr 29, 2009 17:38:44 GMT -5
It is also unlawful for anyone to have a list of names of people that were accused falsely and to give those names to anyone is also unlawful. All such parties can be sued in the court of law. It is also unlawful to have a list of people that maybe suspected of a crime. And if that is made available to anyone, they also can be sued. All false allegations is to be sealed and kept away from public forever. It is also unlawful to mention a name that maybe is suspected of commiting a crime unless to a law officer and may be sued. So, it sure does appear that a lot of unlawful things have been done and people with list had better check for legal assistance because, only law personal may have that list submitted to them, if it is necessary to check for true or false allegations and then sealed for ever and not to be kept to keep seeing if that name may appear again in a suspected crime. This is why lawyers make good money! jhjmr, what kind of lists you are talking about, ones like these? Dave, I too am a WINGS board member and have been from its inception early in 2008. As info, lists of s&c abusers are not a new thing. There were private lists of 2x2 abusers compiled, but never made public, LONG before WINGS began to assimilate its list. I know one list began back in the 1980's after Doug Parkers book The Secret Sect came out. We are not going to track down "the principles" here on this board, that's the job of the courts and lawyers. The 14 requests in the [outdated] Defendant's Demand For Discovery section of the document posted -->> here << give an idea what kind of information is subject to the subpoena power of the courts and attorneys involved in a case like this. With the information gathered from requests like those 14 the courts and attorneys involved would likely get to the roots of what happened, when it happened, where it happened, and maybe even offer clues as to why what happened, happened. Here are a few; 8. Each and every page of any police report concerning the case. 9. All notes, fragmentary or otherwise, prepared by any police officer concerning the case. 12. Any written or recorded statements by a defendant, codefendant, or accomplice pertaining to the case, even if that person is not a prospective witness at trial. 13. Any affidavit, warrant, and return pertaining to a search or seizure in connection with the case. 14. Any plea agreement, grant of immunity, or other agreement for testimony in connection with the case.
The word "accomplice" implies anyone who had contact with the twins/media/investigators/workers and/or anyone else involved with this case, it could mean any e-mail, PM, etc to or from any such "accomplice", if I'm reading the request right. Anyone who maintained even a private list a list of alleged and suspected offenders and had contact with anyone in the MI case could be subject to subpoena into a trial as an "accomplice". The prudent thing for all to do is let the courts settle the issue, and/or ultimately remember; "For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment."
|
|
|
Post by jhjmr on Apr 29, 2009 18:51:20 GMT -5
Jesse, you are right. Anyone that had any dealings with anyone in this case can be subpoenaed for questioning as an accomplice or with talking about details of the case with the law officers. Any name that could have been provided by anyone would have to be explained why that name was given if it was condemnation of that person. If any name was provided to be given to the law officer that also could be subpoenaed as to why and that would be grounds for that person to claim damage. This is not just some silly incident that everyone wanted to provide help or names or assist in a terrible case. Their is much damage that has been done and reputations have been tarnished, harassed and etc. If wings has a list of names and kept it in a lock box, so be it. But if they contributed to the demise of this case as to why so many names had been turned in and if those names on wings list left that lock box and was provided to anyone that would be damage to character and that would be an accomplice to false allegations. Why did the law officer have so much contact with wings as that had nothing to do with the charges that had been filed at the beginning. They were no where in the original charges that they would need to be contacted. Who even gave the name Wings to the law officer? Questions that are serious in dealing with all of this. There were no sexual abuse charges at first for wings to know about or even be concerned about since nothing was being hid, the police was very much involved. So many questions, so few answers. Was there manipulation going on?
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Apr 29, 2009 19:54:44 GMT -5
I don't know how much WINGS as an official entity was involved with the MI case as WINGS went online in April 2008 - the accused were most likely named in the last part of 2007/very early 2008. I think the overall effect of WINGS has been good. But apparently there were lists of convicted, suspected, and alleged offenders prior to WINGS becoming an official entity. As I said, I think figuring out the primary sources/principles in the MI case is the domain of the courts and attorneys involved. I don't think anyone is going to solve it here at TMB, and I do feel it's high time for mercy not judgment.
|
|
White Knight
Senior Member
THE SHADOW KNOWS. In the shadow of the highest is a refuge from all fear.
Posts: 510
|
Post by White Knight on Apr 29, 2009 20:48:21 GMT -5
"Of those who were investigated and nothing was found incriminating, I can hardly imagine that there will be anything listed anywhere other than in the report held by the investigating office." Tell you tell you what, go have some one charge you with a nature of these sorts. Then come and tell me about IT, before any of you go spouting off to us, what should/could be, maybe, it is what it is and that can't be changed no matter which way one wishes it to be.
|
|
White Knight
Senior Member
THE SHADOW KNOWS. In the shadow of the highest is a refuge from all fear.
Posts: 510
|
Post by White Knight on Apr 29, 2009 21:02:45 GMT -5
I don't know if I'll take in a convention this year or for the next couple years. Gets pretty bad having to have a witness/s were ever one goes and yes that includes the washroom!!
|
|
|
Post by rjs on Apr 29, 2009 21:22:23 GMT -5
The problems in the "truth" are no worse than any other group EXCEPT FOR HOW IT WOULD BE HANDLED. Lack of accountability and sweeping stuff under the rug makes problems worse. JF has an obligation to be forthcoming even if he has to sign certified mail to prove he has read concerns about this issue. Close to a year has been wasted with the same old allegations being raised.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 29, 2009 21:32:51 GMT -5
I don't know if I'll take in a convention this year or for the next couple years. Gets pretty bad having to have a witness/s were ever one goes and yes that includes the washroom!! Might be a good time to attend a Christian retreat put on by another denomination or church, where no one knows you...? Turn lemons into lemonade or something like that maybe??? You might be surprised at how much spiritual bread there is at one of these functions...this week I listened to 4 CD's from one held in Canon Beach Conference Center in Oregon. It was wonderfully spiritually uplifting and very refreshing.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Apr 29, 2009 21:47:20 GMT -5
"Of those who were investigated and nothing was found incriminating, I can hardly imagine that there will be anything listed anywhere other than in the report held by the investigating office."
Tell you tell you what, go have some one charge you with a nature of these sorts. Then come and tell me about IT, before any of you go spouting off to us, what should/could be, maybe, it is what it is and that can't be changed no matter which way one wishes it to be.
When you use the word 'charge' are you referring to the authorities bringing charges? Or do you mean 'accused' as in the girls naming names? I could be confused on your meaning here. My point is that of the 200 names you say were given to the authorities, I can't imagine that they are all going to be listed somewhere. I could be wrong, but I would tend to believe that if an individual is looked at by the authorities and dismissed as not being involved as accused, then there would be no reason to list their name anywhere other than in the investigative report, which should clear them rather than incriminate them. If on the other hand there were people who were investigated and issues were found in the investigation, but not enough to charge them with a crime then I imagine that their name MIGHT be listed as a 'person of interest' somewhere. I don't know how the authorities handle that, so I am not trying to state any facts here, just my thoughts. What do you think needs to be done by the court/authorities to clear those 200 people that you say are on the list you told us about? Scott
|
|
White Knight
Senior Member
THE SHADOW KNOWS. In the shadow of the highest is a refuge from all fear.
Posts: 510
|
Post by White Knight on Apr 29, 2009 23:14:45 GMT -5
"Of those who were investigated and nothing was found incriminating, I can hardly imagine that there will be anything listed anywhere other than in the report held by the investigating office."
Tell you tell you what, go have some one charge you with a nature of these sorts. Then come and tell me about IT, before any of you go spouting off to us, what should/could be, maybe, it is what it is and that can't be changed no matter which way one wishes it to be.
When you use the word 'charge' are you referring to the authorities bringing charges? Or do you mean 'accused' as in the girls naming names? I could be confused on your meaning here. My point is that of the 200 names you say were given to the authorities, I can't imagine that they are all going to be listed somewhere. I could be wrong, but I would tend to believe that if an individual is looked at by the authorities and dismissed as not being involved as accused, then there would be no reason to list their name anywhere other than in the investigative report, which should clear them rather than incriminate them. If on the other hand there were people who were investigated and issues were found in the investigation, but not enough to charge them with a crime then I imagine that their name MIGHT be listed as a 'person of interest' somewhere. I don't know how the authorities handle that, so I am not trying to state any facts here, just my thoughts. What do you think needs to be done by the court/authorities to clear those 200 people that you say are on the list you told us about? Scott No sense passing the buck here.
|
|
|
Post by pianoman on Apr 30, 2009 1:18:40 GMT -5
Some facts and points of law to help those reading in understanding what is involved here.
The following are just facts and what really happens, not my ideas or thoughts.
First, SLANDER. Slander is spoken accusations that are shared with others that cause damage to ones reputation and can cause loss of future income to the victim of the slanderous allegations.
Second, LIBEL. Libel is written word that when shared with others implicates a person and makes allegations that can cause damage to them a loss of income in the future.
Third, DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER. Defamation is what happens when one is libeled or slandered. This can cause losses of income and prestige to the victim of these allegations, and can be sued for, to gain the projected losses, including damages for the false exposure to this kind of public display of one's character.
To address the legality of the lists, and the allegations remaining on record.
I am not a conspiracy theorist, and I know for a fact, that these charges, while not being made public, will remain in the shadows lurking and waiting for the chance to reappear. They can be used in court against the person that did stand as a suspect.
Mitigating and Aggravating issues:
Mitigating circumstances or issues are those that show that the behavior was mitigated, or lessened in some manner.
Aggravating circumstances of issues are those that compound or worsen the facts and make the case more serious and damaging.
If one of these that are accused here, should ever show up in court, a record from this incident would be allowed, as a aggravating circumstance, and the current court hearing could receive a statement of "prior allegations" to aggravate or make the case worse for the formerly accused.
White Knight is absolutely correct in stating that this will remain on record forever.
Case in Point: The Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King assassinations are sealed documents, and although the government claims they have been completely revealed to the public, there are too many people that were alive and still live today, that know differently. In about 15 - 20 years or so, this will become the official position of the government, and those that know differently will be dead, and thus the government will be believed. The fact remains that the documents do exist, and will exist forever. They are seldom destroyed, as they are used to keep certain ones on the defensive, and keep them in line, while they live.
These are just facts, not opinions.
I hope this explanation helps those that read here to understand a little about the law and the charges and record practices of our government.
..........................................Pianoman
|
|
White Knight
Senior Member
THE SHADOW KNOWS. In the shadow of the highest is a refuge from all fear.
Posts: 510
|
Post by White Knight on Apr 30, 2009 6:28:00 GMT -5
I don't know if I'll take in a convention this year or for the next couple years. Gets pretty bad having to have a witness/s were ever one goes and yes that includes the washroom!! Might be a good time to attend a Christian retreat put on by another denomination or church, where no one knows you...? Turn lemons into lemonade or something like that maybe??? You might be surprised at how much spiritual bread there is at one of these functions...this week I listened to 4 CD's from one held in Canon Beach Conference Center in Oregon. It was wonderfully spiritually uplifting and very refreshing. Well, well what do we have here, this does not mean I’m giving up as you wish so badly and I know how badly you want truth to implode in on its self. It’s no hidden fact what your real agenda is. WE have taken notice what you have done to your family and or almost anyone that you’ve been in contact with. Also I am aware of you and your friend doctoring up the Jean T case. I really don’t think you want me to go further? Or do you? ;D
|
|
White Knight
Senior Member
THE SHADOW KNOWS. In the shadow of the highest is a refuge from all fear.
Posts: 510
|
Post by White Knight on Apr 30, 2009 6:29:45 GMT -5
Scott: Do you really want to open the door to our discussions did I not tell you /advise you back in the summer and fall of 2008 to clean the wings site up that you and others were opening your selves up to real problems and to lawsuits , and that you were being used by certain ones. Lets say before Sandra’s husband passed away, throughout that tragedy and afterwards not only myself but others to have forewarned you as well…
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Apr 30, 2009 7:35:59 GMT -5
I hope we all can step back and realize something about this whole mess...and that is this....no one likes to admit when they've been wrong...that's called false pride! And it's something that tends to make matters worse, imo!
I'm deeply sorry for those who've suffered horrendous physical, financial and spiritual pain due to this MI debacle.....my prayers are consistent that those who are in leadership positions whether In or Out of the truth's fellowship can be humbled, whether by their own cognition or whether God can bring it on them....then maybe they can "see" the awful need of apologies, mercy and love from themselves to others within the issue.
I agree that JF and others of his staff have taken a beating to their effectiveness as ministers....as much as I love other friends & workers, I do not care to ever see or hear any of the MI ones again....even if it means I'll miss a conv. or a spec mtg. I know that I can harden my heart too much in that direction and end up making mistakes myself.....oh to have the Christ-like spirit in all of us...then we'd know just how to conduct ourselves, wouldn't we?
|
|