Prezidents Riverbark, I have known many fine pastors, I have worked for and with pastors in the past, I continue to work with them at this time and I can tell you one thing for certain Prezz. Reichenfuhrerbarken, YOU ARE NO Pastor!!!!
...with apologies to Lloyd Bentson in reply to Dan Quayle back in 88, was it??
The lawsuit activity represents a method to address the abuse within TWI. Its not like TWI , its leaders, past or present are ever going to acknowledge just how whacked they are and were. I've seen lawsuits initiated over far less serious situations. Guess its cool for someone to sue McDonalds over hot coffee ? Now THATS a legitimate use of the legal system ? I don't hear people whining about that or the woman who tried to sue Wendy's over a finger she planted in the chili ? Where is the righteous indignation about that ? But someone DARES sue the one and only great church...and even worse...without first coming to Gspot and asking for general approval ? The nerve of some people to exclude others ! Gspot is not a judicial system and no one (former way or not) needs the approval of this forum to address the problems in their life using standard legal remedies.
I don't think its this huge problem for people to accept that someone can litigate for medical malpractice yet when someone goes after TWI its like they just have to be mercenary SOBS with no other goal than to "steal the ABS". How convenient a "defense" for those who continue to worship at the altar of VPW and TWI. Anyone who would oppose those who sue TWI are either still in love with their lives as a Wayfer or are just simply jealous that someone might get a payday out of it while other Wayfers are left high and dry. Oh boo hoo. If you don't like it that people are going after TWI then sue those people ! In the meantime let the courts handle it…
… Here is the mind blower. If someone who has left TWI seeks therapy, participates in splinter groups, goes to maintsream churches, or even avoids religion altogether no one much cares because each is free to choose their post way pat without seeking the approval of others.
We see people at GSpot debating the merits of
various approaches all the time but nothing seems to be as polarizing as a lawsuit.
The moment someone launches a lawsuit its like they did something *wrong* or are others feel that "hey they didn't suffer any more than I did" and therefore want to dismiss such activities as the result of greed or petty grievances designed to get a payday. If someone in their post way life wishes to chose this path then thats their business ( or yours or mine should we make that choice). Just like if they wanna buddy up with former Way leaders in a splinter thats their choice also. But no one gets riled unless there is a possible payout.
In the postWay life no one owns another's path to reintegration with society at large. There is no compelling need to be like-minded so let each get on with life as they see fit. If that invloves a lawyer then how does that disturb another's peace ? Some former wayfers can live with others being a die-hard for a splinter but not pursuing the Way in court ? Since when is that a bad thing ?
__________________
The case is currently before the TN Appelate Court in Knoxville with the objective of getting the case remanded back to the TN State Circuit Court in Chattanooga. The attorneys should be presenting their cases before the Appelate court in ~ January or February 2006. Presuming the case is remanded, the Circuit Court jury trial could be scheduled in the ~ July to September 2006 timeframe.
As to why TWI settled the lawsuit rather than going to trial, *If* TWI had liability insurance coverage and the insurance company deemed the issue coverable, the lawsuit became the insurance company's to settle or try as they wished. I can't remember the exact legal terms, but I've seen how it works in a public agency. After all, once the insurance company takes over, it's their money that's at stake and they have the privilege of using their own legal team and choosing a course that they perceive will cause them the least loss.
Furthermore, the insurance company might specify special terms that TWI would have to meet in order to retain future coverage. Like, maybe... get rid of Martindale....
Of course this is all speculation. I don't know whether or not the insurance company granted coverage of the lawsuit. It might be interesting to dig through TWI's financials during that period to see if there was any detectable payout.
As to rich schoolteachers, I once worked for a company that sold voting equipment. Because of the nature of county government, the company found that the most effective tech support team was comprised of a computer hardware/software guy and a retired female schoolteacher. Since I was the hardware/software guy, I went on several trips with these retired schoolteachers. They were all from Texas, and they all seemed to be very well off. They didn't need the money and did the work for the fun of traveling and helping people, which they did very well. They were pretty good at holding their liquoir too, but I digress....
Wouldn't it have served the purposes of exposing truth much much more had they [the Allens]went ahead with the lawsuit?
My opinion. Both NO & yes on the surface. NO when all aspects are factored in.
Nevertheless, this opinion does not negate in the least the phenomenal amount of benevolence done by the public exposure of TWI which was accomplished via WayDale via the Allens, which exposue ostensibly led to the development of gsc, whose posters continues to expose the thought reform, fraud, misrepresentations, deceptions, lies, & plagiarism of the TWI scam 'ministry.'
I would have to surmise that a major reason for not proceding to trial was the emotional toll that it would take on the Allens, especially Fern, in view of the inevitable quesions she would have been asked by TWI's degenerate Counsel regarding very personal and sensitive issues. The Allens could have probably increased their litigation return by 500-1000% by going to trial. Apparently the obviation of the emotional stress factor was worth the 'hit' of a lesser settlement, & the roulette of a jury trial.
However, there is litigation ongoing, Peeler vs. TWI et. al., which appears to be proceding to jury trial in approximately September 2006. While it is possble that the Peelers would settle out of court, my opinion is that it would be highly unlikely. The infrastructure of this litigation began in 08/2001, the case being filed in 06/2002, with the Peelers perservering through a series of TWI cowardly legal obstructions up to the present.
Hopefully this jury trial will publically conclude what the admirable courage of the Allen's initiated.
RP has requested that I ask you to clarify the conflicts of interest that you & MT represent in the Peeler vs. TWI et al litigation.
A conflict of interest is a situation in which someone in a position of trust has competing professional and/or personal interests. Such competing interests can make it difficult to fulfill his or her duties fairly. [/size][/font]
More generally, conflict of interest can be defined as any situation in which an individual or corporation (either private or governmental) is in a position to exploit a professional or official capacity in some way for their personal or corporate benefit.
A conflict of interest can, however, become a legal matter if an individual tries to (and/or succeeds in) influencing the outcome of a decision, for personal benefit.
[Personal information removed by the moderator]
By the way, why did your Corps brothers & sisters refer to you as a 'toad?'[/size]
Toad friend, do you think that your rancor with the peelers over past issues might have clouded your judgement on this lawsuit issue?
If there were anyway I could recoup my losses to twi I would do so as well. They were not what they represented themselves to be.
The money they required from me on God`s behalf was used for awfull purposes......
I would rather anybody else had that money.
I think that it takes someone educated to be able to recognise the illegality of what was endured in twi, and to know what legal recourses are available.
I think that it takes someone with courage to face down twi and their horrible attornies.
I do not wish to discuss this online ... except to say that my Corps brothers and sisters (to my knowledge ... you can ask Radar or Al Poole or waterbuffalo if they did) did not call me Toad ... my screen name came from the fact that I have a GOOD FRIEND who has nothing to do with GreaseSpot that has the affectionate nickname "Toad" based on the lovable Mr. Toad from Wind in the Willows and his somewhat erratic driving, which was the case with my friend when we were teenagers ....
[personal information removed by the moderator]
I humbly request of Pawtucket that he remove my post and yours ... and I will keep further comments to myself. I don't really care enough about the lawsuit/RP/TWI to be a "conflict of interest." I should just be quiet and let God keep the score.
Having gotten OUT of twi in 1988, I totally do not care or want to know the details about the lawsuit or any of the goings on at twi now or then. So, please forgive me if I decline to comment regarding those things.
My beef is with your comment about Toadfriend's Corps peers calling her toad. That is ridiculous.
Name calling is a little juvenile, don't you think?
SP signs her posts as 'ToadFriend.' Also, while in the Corps (?13th), for whatever reason, many on the in-res Corps had an obvious tendency to hassle SP. Why? I don't know for sure, I wasn't there. Per SP, "...my screen name came from the fact that I have a GOOD FRIEND who has nothing to do with GreaseSpot that has the affectionate nickname "Toad" based on the lovable Mr. Toad from Wind in the Willows..." This was news to me.
Therefore I presumed 'Toad' or some similar appelative was her Corps nickname.
JKBoehme .. Odd, I don't recall that "many of the in-residence Corps" hassled me ... no more than they hassled anyone else ... I'd be interested just to know where you get your info ... I think someone is passing on less than accurate information to you in LOTS of categories.
nice jkb... I have no freaking idea what you guys are talking about but it sure looks like you've got the "public bully" thing down pretty good... nice job...
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
7
5
6
6
Popular Days
Apr 16
11
Apr 14
10
Apr 15
10
Apr 18
7
Top Posters In This Topic
ChasUFarley 7 posts
ToadFriend 5 posts
Belle 6 posts
jkboehme 6 posts
Popular Days
Apr 16 2005
11 posts
Apr 14 2005
10 posts
Apr 15 2005
10 posts
Apr 18 2005
7 posts
alfakat
Prezidents Riverbark, I have known many fine pastors, I have worked for and with pastors in the past, I continue to work with them at this time and I can tell you one thing for certain Prezz. Reichenfuhrerbarken, YOU ARE NO Pastor!!!!
...with apologies to Lloyd Bentson in reply to Dan Quayle back in 88, was it??
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkboehme
Per diazbro (re Peeler vs. TWI et. al.):
__________________
The case is currently before the TN Appelate Court in Knoxville with the objective of getting the case remanded back to the TN State Circuit Court in Chattanooga. The attorneys should be presenting their cases before the Appelate court in ~ January or February 2006. Presuming the case is remanded, the Circuit Court jury trial could be scheduled in the ~ July to September 2006 timeframe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim
A couple of quick notes.
As to why TWI settled the lawsuit rather than going to trial, *If* TWI had liability insurance coverage and the insurance company deemed the issue coverable, the lawsuit became the insurance company's to settle or try as they wished. I can't remember the exact legal terms, but I've seen how it works in a public agency. After all, once the insurance company takes over, it's their money that's at stake and they have the privilege of using their own legal team and choosing a course that they perceive will cause them the least loss.
Furthermore, the insurance company might specify special terms that TWI would have to meet in order to retain future coverage. Like, maybe... get rid of Martindale....
Of course this is all speculation. I don't know whether or not the insurance company granted coverage of the lawsuit. It might be interesting to dig through TWI's financials during that period to see if there was any detectable payout.
As to rich schoolteachers, I once worked for a company that sold voting equipment. Because of the nature of county government, the company found that the most effective tech support team was comprised of a computer hardware/software guy and a retired female schoolteacher. Since I was the hardware/software guy, I went on several trips with these retired schoolteachers. They were all from Texas, and they all seemed to be very well off. They didn't need the money and did the work for the fun of traveling and helping people, which they did very well. They were pretty good at holding their liquoir too, but I digress....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
I believe rosie amassed her fortune from her husband's family, not because of anything she did.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkboehme
I don't think there was any 3rd party Directors & Officers Insurance held by TWI. They are too stingy.
It appears to me that ALL of the money used to pay legal expenses comes from & came from TWI members' hard earned Tithing, ABS, & plurality giving.
The financial support of the idolatrous twi god {whose god is their own belly} is rather expensive.
Edited by jkboehmeLink to comment
Share on other sites
jkboehme
Per OM:
My opinion. Both NO & yes on the surface. NO when all aspects are factored in.
Nevertheless, this opinion does not negate in the least the phenomenal amount of benevolence done by the public exposure of TWI which was accomplished via WayDale via the Allens, which exposue ostensibly led to the development of gsc, whose posters continues to expose the thought reform, fraud, misrepresentations, deceptions, lies, & plagiarism of the TWI scam 'ministry.'
I would have to surmise that a major reason for not proceding to trial was the emotional toll that it would take on the Allens, especially Fern, in view of the inevitable quesions she would have been asked by TWI's degenerate Counsel regarding very personal and sensitive issues. The Allens could have probably increased their litigation return by 500-1000% by going to trial. Apparently the obviation of the emotional stress factor was worth the 'hit' of a lesser settlement, & the roulette of a jury trial.
However, there is litigation ongoing, Peeler vs. TWI et. al., which appears to be proceding to jury trial in approximately September 2006. While it is possble that the Peelers would settle out of court, my opinion is that it would be highly unlikely. The infrastructure of this litigation began in 08/2001, the case being filed in 06/2002, with the Peelers perservering through a series of TWI cowardly legal obstructions up to the present.
Hopefully this jury trial will publically conclude what the admirable courage of the Allen's initiated.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ToadFriend
I beg to differ ... but I think there will surely be a monetary settlement by the Peelers.
[personal information removed by the moderator]
In my opinion, neither the Peelers nor TWI deserve to win. I realize this is not a popular sentiment, but I stand by it.
TF
Edited by ModaustinLink to comment
Share on other sites
jkboehme
Hey Toad,
RP has requested that I ask you to clarify the conflicts of interest that you & MT represent in the Peeler vs. TWI et al litigation.
A conflict of interest is a situation in which someone in a position of trust has competing professional and/or personal interests. Such competing interests can make it difficult to fulfill his or her duties fairly. [/size][/font]
More generally, conflict of interest can be defined as any situation in which an individual or corporation (either private or governmental) is in a position to exploit a professional or official capacity in some way for their personal or corporate benefit.
A conflict of interest can, however, become a legal matter if an individual tries to (and/or succeeds in) influencing the outcome of a decision, for personal benefit.
[Personal information removed by the moderator]
By the way, why did your Corps brothers & sisters refer to you as a 'toad?'[/size]
Edited by ModaustinLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Toad friend, do you think that your rancor with the peelers over past issues might have clouded your judgement on this lawsuit issue?
If there were anyway I could recoup my losses to twi I would do so as well. They were not what they represented themselves to be.
The money they required from me on God`s behalf was used for awfull purposes......
I would rather anybody else had that money.
I think that it takes someone educated to be able to recognise the illegality of what was endured in twi, and to know what legal recourses are available.
I think that it takes someone with courage to face down twi and their horrible attornies.
When asked ... I didn`t have the guts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ToadFriend
TO JKBoehme:
I do not wish to discuss this online ... except to say that my Corps brothers and sisters (to my knowledge ... you can ask Radar or Al Poole or waterbuffalo if they did) did not call me Toad ... my screen name came from the fact that I have a GOOD FRIEND who has nothing to do with GreaseSpot that has the affectionate nickname "Toad" based on the lovable Mr. Toad from Wind in the Willows and his somewhat erratic driving, which was the case with my friend when we were teenagers ....
[personal information removed by the moderator]
I humbly request of Pawtucket that he remove my post and yours ... and I will keep further comments to myself. I don't really care enough about the lawsuit/RP/TWI to be a "conflict of interest." I should just be quiet and let God keep the score.
Edited by ModaustinLink to comment
Share on other sites
waterbuffalo
Hi jkboehme, I don't believe we've met.
Having gotten OUT of twi in 1988, I totally do not care or want to know the details about the lawsuit or any of the goings on at twi now or then. So, please forgive me if I decline to comment regarding those things.
My beef is with your comment about Toadfriend's Corps peers calling her toad. That is ridiculous.
Name calling is a little juvenile, don't you think?
I think you owe her an apology.
wb
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkboehme
Hi wb,
SP signs her posts as 'ToadFriend.' Also, while in the Corps (?13th), for whatever reason, many on the in-res Corps had an obvious tendency to hassle SP. Why? I don't know for sure, I wasn't there. Per SP, "...my screen name came from the fact that I have a GOOD FRIEND who has nothing to do with GreaseSpot that has the affectionate nickname "Toad" based on the lovable Mr. Toad from Wind in the Willows..." This was news to me.
Therefore I presumed 'Toad' or some similar appelative was her Corps nickname.
SP & wb, I am certainly sorry for any offence.
jkb
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ToadFriend
JKBoehme .. Odd, I don't recall that "many of the in-residence Corps" hassled me ... no more than they hassled anyone else ... I'd be interested just to know where you get your info ... I think someone is passing on less than accurate information to you in LOTS of categories.
TF
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkboehme
LIKEWISE, regarding the one-sided info you get from MT regarding RP........
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ToadFriend
This post is the end of ToadFriend's exchanges on GreaseSpot ... about any subject.
Farewell to all the decent folks here. Thanks, Pawtucket.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
nice jkb... I have no freaking idea what you guys are talking about but it sure looks like you've got the "public bully" thing down pretty good... nice job...
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.