All questions concerning Mark and Karen's character, competency, and judgement have developed in the past three (3) months in the context of a variety of disputes among Board members about ministry priorities, values, office management and employee issues.
2 questions -- if I may.
Does this mean that this is already public record?
(Since you're posting it here at GSC -- now, tonight)?
And are posts from GSC being used to validate M and KAG's claim?
As soon as a complaint is filed it is public record unless it is about an adoption or child abuse, etc.
I imagine the Graesers are using GS as evidence. Jeff just needs to prove he said nothing false, which I do not think will be difficult. But the lawsuit lists 36 "facts" supporting the Graeser's claim. I think most of their claims are false. I hope some people here will help with that.
CC
2 questions -- if I may.
Does this mean that this is already public record?
(Since you're posting it here at GSC -- now, tonight)?
And are posts from GSC being used to validate M and KAG's claim?
As soon as a complaint is filed it is public record unless it is about an adoption or child abuse, etc.
I imagine the Graesers are using GS as evidence. Jeff just needs to prove he said nothing false, which I do not think will be difficult. But the lawsuit lists 36 "facts" supporting the Graeser's claim. I think most of their claims are false. I hope some people here will help with that.
Wish I could help with that request. What I can't believe is that any lawyer (or judge) would take a defamation suit this seriously, after reading that Prophetic Council litany of prophecies. It seems to me a counter-suit for harrassment would have more merit.
Examples abound. I saw this in the newspaper this weekend. I have removed the names. Sound vaguely familiar?
"She believed he was a prophet, a man who received instructions from God.
Because of that, {Woman} said, she thought the punishment administered by the Rev. {Three Name Pastor}was justified.
Woman said {Pastor} began paddling her -- first with pants on, and later with them off -- for not reading assigned Scriptures or for disobeying orders. Later, she said, Pastor made her exercise to the point of exhaustion, running laps around the church sanctuary or doing lunges across the living room of his home.
Finally, she said, the abuse turned sexual.
"There are certain types of figures you trust," she said. "I gave that trust to him as my pastor. I honestly thought of him as a spiritual father."
Last week, Woman filed suit against {Pastor}, 45, founder and senior pastor of the {such and such} church. The suit seeks unspecified damages for physical and psychological pain."
I'm wondering if you are a lawyer or in the legal profession. My concern is the hearsay rule. It seems dubious at best to seek testimony on a board of this nature - on the other hand, if you are familiar with the law of the state that all this is happening in, then you will know how to proceed if anyone PM's you.
I'm not in the legal profession - but hubby is - so I only know just enough to be dangerous.
I simply can't IMAGINE anyone ever having an integrity issue with Jeff. A nicer man never walked the earth!
I remember Jeff befriended Mathman and I back on Waydale in 2000. He was very sweet and supportive. He cheered us on when he heard we'd met up and were dating. He was super excited for us when we announced we were getting married - he even mailed us a wedding present! I couldn't believe it!
When he basically left Waydale to go to work for CES when he retired from the service, we wished him all the best. It seemed to be everything he was hoping for in his retirement. It's sad that it turned out to be such a nightmare.
I've never met him face-to-face, but to sue this saint - SHAME on them! What non-Biblical morons they are!
Jeff will prevail in this - hell, the man was in the military and retired in good standing. I hope he has some of his brother from his years in the service beside him.
MG & KG... they're ministers of a god forsaken ministry that sucks the life blood outta people, at best. People like that give true Christians a bad name.
"Another big issue is that defamation cases tend to be difficult to win, and damage awards tend to be small. As a result, it is unusual for attorneys to be willing to take defamation cases on a contingent fee basis, and the fees expended in litigating even a successful defamation action can exceed the total recovery."
If this were some famous highly successful author, minister or celebrity there might be sufficient damages to afford the expense of pursuing legal recourse. In this case there appears to be none of the above. Is it being done for principle or hurt feelings?... because the monetary damages would appear to be minimal. Good attorneys will always forwarn a client about the difficulty of winning such cases. Really good attorneys that could possibly prevail in a case like this will charge in excess of $500 per hour in Indianapolis Indiana. The risk versus the reward in this case seems extremely high with a low potential payoff. This guy would be better off buying $500 worth of quick picks on the Hoosier Lottery.
The risk versus the reward in this case seems extremely high with a low potential payoff. This guy would be better off buying $500 worth of quick picks on the Hoosier Lottery.
Exactly. And sorry Groucho had to bite his lip on my previous post, but I thought it was relevant to the topic, since it is an actual case and is current. Ludicrous yes, but unfortunately it's common in every city. My other point being that public records about whacky church stuff have a way of getting to reporters. Anybody seen any press on this yet?
Exactly. And sorry Groucho had to bite his lip on my previous post, but I thought it was relevant to the topic, since it is an actual case and is current. Ludicrous yes, but unfortunately it's common in every city. My other point being that public records about whacky church stuff have a way of getting to reporters. Anybody seen any press on this yet?
I'd submit that very, very few journalists would care.
Exactly. And sorry Groucho had to bite his lip on my previous post, but I thought it was relevant to the topic, since it is an actual case and is current. Ludicrous yes, but unfortunately it's common in every city. My other point being that public records about whacky church stuff have a way of getting to reporters. Anybody seen any press on this yet?
There seems to be a mentality amongst some in the law profession - "You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride," meaning that this suit might be no more than a big ole slap in the face to get back at the "defamers." Yes, the award will be small and MG just might lose altogether, but the others will still have to get involved and go to court and have their lawyers and yadda yadda yadda...
Which maybe could have been better spent. By the people who sent it in.
I would imagine if people knew their "abundant sharing" (or whatever STFI calls it) was going toward payment of lawyers and lawsuits, there would have been second, third and even fourth thoughts about sending it in.
Perhaps, in the future, STFI could amend their business bylaws to establish dedicated "earmarked" financial accounts for their followers. That way, if you want your ABS (for lack of a better term) to go only for outreach, and not salaries, perks or lawsuits, you could earmark your funds into that account.
(I'm not even sure if that's possible; just throwing out some ideas so their followers can choose where in STFI their money is actually going).
There seems to be a mentality amongst some in the law profession - "You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride," meaning that this suit might be no more than a big ole slap in the face to get back at the "defamers." Yes, the award will be small and MG just might lose altogether, but the others will still have to get involved and go to court and have their lawyers and yadda yadda yadda...
Seems like a waste of time and energy to me.
Totally agree...that could be part of the legal strategy in this case. The money, time and effort to defend one's self can be staggering. The plaintiff may in fact simply be looking for some type of negotiated settlement with the defendents. Too bad we don't have the same laws as in the UK where plaintiffs are made to pay a defendent's legal expenses when the plaintiff loses. This would put an end to bogus lawsuits. Lawyers have lobbied hard against any such legislation.
Who benefits most from a lawsuit such as this? The lawyers
I was wondering... can some of the followers/members/donors of CES/STFI get together and countersue M & KAG asking that they not be allowed to use CES/STFI money to fund their legal bills?
It seems like the "membership" should be able to bring some sort of action to keep him from what is obviously going to be a 'bring down the ship' by burning their money attempt...
I was wondering... can some of the followers/members/donors of CES/STFI get together and countersue M & KAG asking that they not be allowed to use CES/STFI money to fund their legal bills?
It seems like the "membership" should be able to bring some sort of action to keep him from what is obviously going to be a 'bring down the ship' by burning their money attempt...
I wouldn't think "M & KAG" would have access to CES/STFI funds to institute a lawsuit which could be detrimental to the organization itself. Wouldn't they have to get the Board to release the funds for that purpose?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
12
8
4
6
Popular Days
Dec 11
5
Feb 12
5
Oct 25
4
Feb 20
4
Top Posters In This Topic
Tzaia 12 posts
Ham 8 posts
Captain Crunch 4 posts
Holy Smoke 6 posts
Popular Days
Dec 11 2008
5 posts
Feb 12 2007
5 posts
Oct 25 2008
4 posts
Feb 20 2007
4 posts
Popular Posts
Ham
I wonder, did M. and K. G. have a lawyer file this with the court, or is this a "do it yourself" kind of litigation?
Tzaia
My understanding from talking to MG was that they were in mediation.
Ham
Sooo.. its been another (roughly) three months.. any soap yet? Are they still on the highway of litigation? jl seems to be hidden under a rock somewhere.. you'd think they'd just learn how to "get
dmiller
2 questions -- if I may.
Does this mean that this is already public record?
(Since you're posting it here at GSC -- now, tonight)?
And are posts from GSC being used to validate M and KAG's claim?
Thank you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captain Crunch
As soon as a complaint is filed it is public record unless it is about an adoption or child abuse, etc.
I imagine the Graesers are using GS as evidence. Jeff just needs to prove he said nothing false, which I do not think will be difficult. But the lawsuit lists 36 "facts" supporting the Graeser's claim. I think most of their claims are false. I hope some people here will help with that.
CC
Edited by Captain CrunchLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Well -- as long as it is legal, and above board.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Holy Smoke
Wish I could help with that request. What I can't believe is that any lawyer (or judge) would take a defamation suit this seriously, after reading that Prophetic Council litany of prophecies. It seems to me a counter-suit for harrassment would have more merit.
Examples abound. I saw this in the newspaper this weekend. I have removed the names. Sound vaguely familiar?
"She believed he was a prophet, a man who received instructions from God.
Because of that, {Woman} said, she thought the punishment administered by the Rev. {Three Name Pastor}was justified.
Woman said {Pastor} began paddling her -- first with pants on, and later with them off -- for not reading assigned Scriptures or for disobeying orders. Later, she said, Pastor made her exercise to the point of exhaustion, running laps around the church sanctuary or doing lunges across the living room of his home.
Finally, she said, the abuse turned sexual.
"There are certain types of figures you trust," she said. "I gave that trust to him as my pastor. I honestly thought of him as a spiritual father."
Last week, Woman filed suit against {Pastor}, 45, founder and senior pastor of the {such and such} church. The suit seeks unspecified damages for physical and psychological pain."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
After that last post, I'm biting my lip.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Captain Crunch,
I'm wondering if you are a lawyer or in the legal profession. My concern is the hearsay rule. It seems dubious at best to seek testimony on a board of this nature - on the other hand, if you are familiar with the law of the state that all this is happening in, then you will know how to proceed if anyone PM's you.
I'm not in the legal profession - but hubby is - so I only know just enough to be dangerous.
I would still tread lightly in this matter.
OK - carry on....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I wonder, did M. and K. G. have a lawyer file this with the court, or is this a "do it yourself" kind of litigation?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Billy D
They have retained a lawyer and he has written the letters and filed the suit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captain Crunch
We would not use testimony from the forum. But if someone PM'd me or I PM'd them after posting, we would have them write a letter.
This is what happened on Waydale, remember?
CC
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Actually, I was never on Waydale. If this works, fine. Just putting my two cents in to make sure all the ducks are in a row.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
I simply can't IMAGINE anyone ever having an integrity issue with Jeff. A nicer man never walked the earth!
I remember Jeff befriended Mathman and I back on Waydale in 2000. He was very sweet and supportive. He cheered us on when he heard we'd met up and were dating. He was super excited for us when we announced we were getting married - he even mailed us a wedding present! I couldn't believe it!
When he basically left Waydale to go to work for CES when he retired from the service, we wished him all the best. It seemed to be everything he was hoping for in his retirement. It's sad that it turned out to be such a nightmare.
I've never met him face-to-face, but to sue this saint - SHAME on them! What non-Biblical morons they are!
Jeff will prevail in this - hell, the man was in the military and retired in good standing. I hope he has some of his brother from his years in the service beside him.
MG & KG... they're ministers of a god forsaken ministry that sucks the life blood outta people, at best. People like that give true Christians a bad name.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i don't know who's suing whom
but sorry to hear this about a nice gentleman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Calflor
I pulled this off the website expertlaw.com
"Another big issue is that defamation cases tend to be difficult to win, and damage awards tend to be small. As a result, it is unusual for attorneys to be willing to take defamation cases on a contingent fee basis, and the fees expended in litigating even a successful defamation action can exceed the total recovery."
If this were some famous highly successful author, minister or celebrity there might be sufficient damages to afford the expense of pursuing legal recourse. In this case there appears to be none of the above. Is it being done for principle or hurt feelings?... because the monetary damages would appear to be minimal. Good attorneys will always forwarn a client about the difficulty of winning such cases. Really good attorneys that could possibly prevail in a case like this will charge in excess of $500 per hour in Indianapolis Indiana. The risk versus the reward in this case seems extremely high with a low potential payoff. This guy would be better off buying $500 worth of quick picks on the Hoosier Lottery.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Holy Smoke
Exactly. And sorry Groucho had to bite his lip on my previous post, but I thought it was relevant to the topic, since it is an actual case and is current. Ludicrous yes, but unfortunately it's common in every city. My other point being that public records about whacky church stuff have a way of getting to reporters. Anybody seen any press on this yet?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Outin88.
I haven't read all the posts, but noticed exactly 666 views for this thread! Is that a sign?
Sorry!
I just think it's sad that there's a lawsuit amoungst Christians, really pathetic imo! :(
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Holy Smoke
I see that the STFI Admin and Staff pages have been updated.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I'd submit that very, very few journalists would care.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
There seems to be a mentality amongst some in the law profession - "You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride," meaning that this suit might be no more than a big ole slap in the face to get back at the "defamers." Yes, the award will be small and MG just might lose altogether, but the others will still have to get involved and go to court and have their lawyers and yadda yadda yadda...
Seems like a waste of time and energy to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevlar2000
And money.
Other people's money.
Other people's hard-earned money.
Which maybe could have been better spent. By the people who sent it in.
I would imagine if people knew their "abundant sharing" (or whatever STFI calls it) was going toward payment of lawyers and lawsuits, there would have been second, third and even fourth thoughts about sending it in.
Perhaps, in the future, STFI could amend their business bylaws to establish dedicated "earmarked" financial accounts for their followers. That way, if you want your ABS (for lack of a better term) to go only for outreach, and not salaries, perks or lawsuits, you could earmark your funds into that account.
(I'm not even sure if that's possible; just throwing out some ideas so their followers can choose where in STFI their money is actually going).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Calflor
Totally agree...that could be part of the legal strategy in this case. The money, time and effort to defend one's self can be staggering. The plaintiff may in fact simply be looking for some type of negotiated settlement with the defendents. Too bad we don't have the same laws as in the UK where plaintiffs are made to pay a defendent's legal expenses when the plaintiff loses. This would put an end to bogus lawsuits. Lawyers have lobbied hard against any such legislation.
Who benefits most from a lawsuit such as this? The lawyers
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Holy Smoke
Are you kidding me??? Spiders, demons, church strife... that stuff sells papers!
Of course if there were some drugs, sex or financial fraud involved, it would be more interesting....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FullCircle
*shakes my head sadly and leaves the thread*
Edited by FullCircleLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
I was wondering... can some of the followers/members/donors of CES/STFI get together and countersue M & KAG asking that they not be allowed to use CES/STFI money to fund their legal bills?
It seems like the "membership" should be able to bring some sort of action to keep him from what is obviously going to be a 'bring down the ship' by burning their money attempt...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevlar2000
I wouldn't think "M & KAG" would have access to CES/STFI funds to institute a lawsuit which could be detrimental to the organization itself. Wouldn't they have to get the Board to release the funds for that purpose?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.