www.3atalk.com

Posted: **Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:53 am America/Denver**

The thought occurred to me

a) What kind of employer would take action on allegations of sexual improprieties of an employee, that were found to be unsubstantiated by the police?

b) What kind of person would keep on spreading these allegations?

c) What kind of person would proclaim and allow posts like that to be continually repeated on a forum?

d) How faultless are the marriages who those condemn another persons marriage and remarriage?

e) What kind of 'brother' would try and expose 'alleged errors or omissions' on someone's personal income tax going back 10 years?

f) What kind of person would act as an authority on interpretations of Trust Audits on something the person really doesn't know jack about, only with the purpose of publicly discrediting a charity?

g) Should a self proclaimed expert on accounting live in a glass house that was financially distraught?

Posted: **Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:47 pm America/Denver**

[quote="Stan"]he thought occurred to me

a) What kind of employer would take action on allegations of sexual improprieties of an employee, that were found to be unsubstantiated by the police?

This is a weak argument. Many acts of sexual abuse has taken place within the official denomination unsubstantiated by police as most involve a he said/she said. The ones making the allegations are the ones that generally get tarred and feathered. I had no proof that the police could substantiate,however the employer could have made a good case for us by being honest about the personal file in his possession. Instead he opted for a year of silence on the topic when in reality he should have been the one tonotify the police of a felony by one man. HIs personal file alone should have made this conference president act swiftly. Had there been denials and waiting to live together,our family would have had a tough time substantiate sexual misconduct

b) What kind of person would keep on spreading these allegations?

If there is wrong doing along these lines Bob and Gailon have sucessfully tainted any potential victim from coming forward. She/they will always now be linked closely to Bob and Gailon and be further raped and molested by them.
Nor does it hold true that those that make others aware of actions like this are somehow less than others by referring to them as "those kind of people"
Had those responsible and the ones expected to do the job been willing to do so, I ,and many survivors of abuse would not have to fall into the catagory of "those kinds of people"

c) What kind of person would proclaim and allow posts like that to be continually repeated on a forum?

Some of you could answer better than I as some of you have been known to do just that.

d) How faultless are the marriages who those condemn another persons marriage and remarriage?

How faultless do you think they have to be to have some concerns over marital problems and related issues of someone that represents the face of adventism. Like it or not he can and will be held to a higher standard,as you and others will be as a representative(employees) of our denomination

e) What kind of 'brother' would try and expose 'alleged errors or omissions' on someone's personal income tax going back 10 years?

Depends if what you refer to as omissions was a deliberate attempt to evade. If going back ten years shows the same pattern it is very relevantf)

Only two people generally can attest to abuse or the lack of it unless abuse is committed publically. Is DS guilty,I have no idea. Just as you cannot say he isn't. That is the problem with people like Bob and Gailon,they don't care.
But to put the idea across that unless someone "credible saw" no one has a right to say anything is as wrong as what Bob and Gailon are doing. Ours took place in a congregation of 500. No one "credible" saw a thing until finally they were forced to admit,"Oh Yeah, we do have a problem, come to think of it

The ones they hurt most of all is the legitamite victims of abuse out there and there are many. Just as Duane Clem is suspect more because of his seeming close ties with Bob and Gailon, anyone coming forward now would have to be out of their minds.

Posted: **Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:52 pm America/Denver**

Try terminating someone for allegations that the police have, in their opinion disproved..

Posted: **Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:27 pm America/Denver**

Stan wrote:Try terminating someone for allegations that the police have, in their opinion disproved..

What allegations have the police disproved?? Many times they cannot rise to the burden of proof and that is all that means. Again, with out the rather proud admission of the pastor in our situation we could not have provided absolute proof. Without acess to his pesonal file it would have been tough for the police to prove anything.
Did they(police) say allegations were disproved by them or there was not enough proof.

Posted: **Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:37 pm America/Denver**

odie1962 wrote:
Stan wrote:Try terminating someone for allegations that the police have, in their opinion disproved..
What allegations have the police disproved?? Many times they cannot rise to the burden of proof and that is all that means. Again, with out the rather proud admission of the pastor in our situation we could not have provided absolute proof. Without acess to his pesonal file it would have been tough for the police to prove anything.
Did they(police) say allegations were disproved by them or there was not enough proof.

The only allegation against TS reported to the police was by Brad Dunning's Mother and Grandfather in the mid 80's and TS had his ministerial liscence suspended pending the investigation. They did not find it of merit, and TS returned as Pastor of that Church. Not in the SDA conference btw, this was all in the Church of God.

According to Dr Thompson when he looked into it .. well I will go find the quote and edit this post to add it...

Here you go:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Possible way to win 3ABN critics.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:04:53 -0600
From: Walt Thompson

Dear Bob,

Thank you for you attempt to understand my sensitivity and that of 3abn administratin and board. We believe we have acted responsibly and wisely, appropriate to the circumstances. While one can always be criticized after the fact and without all of the evidence then available for consideration, often those same critics would have made similar judgments had they been there.

As I recall the events of 2003, I received a call from Brad Thorp from the General Conference telling me of Pastor Dryden's accusations. Brad appropriately told me that it was not his concern, and that it was ours to handle. As I recall, I contacted pastor Dryden and heard his side of the story following which I received the letter that is circulating. I was at 3abn at the time and spoke at length with Danny about the matter. He shared with me the details as he understood them. Whether or not I was aware of what generated the letter at that time, I do not remember. Based upon my understanding that Dryden had had a long standing feud with Tommy over factors unrelated to the above accusations, it did not seem indicated to approach the boys in question directly, having been informed that no case had ever been filed with the courts or legal disposition made. We then discussed the situation with the full board. Given the alleged events had occured many years before, attempts had been made to make things right, and no legal action had been taken, we did not see any reason to pursue the issue further nor to follow through with his recommendations. In my reply to pastor Dryden I merely thanked him for fulfilling his obligation to us. (I will make this one further comment. Whereas there are many accusations on the Internet alledging that Danny cannot be trusted, I disagree. I have known Danny now since the beginning of the ministry. Now more than 23 years. I have been fully appraised of many of the difficulties that he has faced during that time. While Danny sees things from his perspective, as we all do, he is honest and trustworthy. I have found no reason to distrust his reports to me. Yes, there are occasions when after having spoken with both sides of an issue it has been a matter of he said vs she said, but in all situations where I could know the facts, Danny has proven true.)

Subsequently, after this issue has been brought back to the forefront (I think there is only one person who could have known about this and brought it to world wide attention, and that person was then on the board and voted with the concensus) {Linda Shelton] I contacted the only person from the Chruch of God that I could find that knew about the situation, and who had been present and witness to the events. (Accept for pastor Dryden's personal accounts, there are apparently no other records of the allegations) The picture that was painted by that leader of the Church was exactly as portrayed earlier by Danny. Dryden was jealous of Tommy and was out to get him - a jealousy that has continued to the present. I was again informed that the DA knew about the allegations and not finding a basis, refused to act against Tommy. I have been informed that the Church of God is a congregational type or organization with different jurisdictions in different states and that there was no higher authority that I could speak with to resolve the issue further. It was not entirely clear to me how that worked. I was also told that one leader pestered Tommy over and over again until Tommy voluntarily gave up his ministerial license. These are the facts as I have been able to sort them out.

I will not comment regarding ****** except to say that good people sometimes see things from differing perspectives. We ******. We continue to have communication with ****** and consider ****** a friend of 3ABN.

Since you have not described the other allegations against Danny, I am unable to know what you are referring and therefore unable to comment on them.

I hope this is helpful to you.

I would like to request that you not circulate this letter, but that you merely summarize and varify its contents.

Sincerely,

Walt

In addition here are 2 emails to Bob about this, that he also published on his web site which back up the text I have bolded above:

-------- Original Message --------
From: Duane Clem
Subject: Re: Glenn Dryden, Tommy Shelton, etc.
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 07:08:13 +0000

...

To date, I have never spoken with Dr. Walt Thompson regarding this issue, nor at any other time as best I can recall. I will say that I agree with what the unnamed individual from the Church of God reportedly told Dr. Thompson, but it was NOT me, and I can honestly say I have no idea who it was. That's one issue you can finally put to rest.

...

Duane Clem:
"Your "informant", Glenn Dryden, is not a credible source of information. He also made some hideous accusations against me a few years back. They were for the same reason as the ones he is leveling against Tommy Shelton: JEALOUSY. Glenn Dryden is a spiteful, vindictive backstabber when someone crosses him. He has done this with numerous people over the past several years, and took the Ezra Church of God down nearly to the point of closure. I had to threaten him with legal action myself to get him to shut his mouth."

From: Duane Clem
To: Glenn Dryden
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 06:44:54 +0000

Let this serve as a warning. If you mention my name in any of the letters and emails you're sending to anyone in your latest attack on Tommy Shelton, you WILL regret it.

Duane Clem

Posted: **Fri Dec 12, 2008 4:13 pm America/Denver**

The only allegation against TS reported to the police was by Brad Dunning's Mother and Grandfather in the mid 80's and TS had his ministerial liscence suspended pending the investigation. They did not find it of merit, and TS returned as Pastor of that Church. Not in the SDA conference btw, this was all in the Church of God.

According to Dr Thompson when he looked into it .. well I will go find the quote and edit this post to add it...

It was unclear if it was allegations against TS or the recent crop on adventtalk concerninf DS.

TS in the letter that was produced does not sound like an innocent man. A pastor that engages in that type of behaviour has no business in that role. None.
Was TS returned to that role before or after the writing of the letter I pursume was by him? Most acts of this nature are not turned over to the police. Most are she said/he said. Most victims believe they are the only victim,many blame themselves and stay silent out of shame.

If this is actually referring to DS the lack of police involvement is not proof of much of anything. I have no idea but when the bar is raised to the level it was it would eliminate almost everyone of saying anything.

Does the state of my marriage have any bearing on the whether or not I, as an adventist may have legitimate concerns over the face of adventism that is being shown by 3ABN? I don't watch it so I have no idea,but that is what seems to be said.

DS/TS and others have a higher bar to attain with their public visibility. May not be fair but that is the way it is.

I don't know if what Bob and Gailon say have even a resemblence of truth. One area does kind of keep nigling at me. The sheer number of complaints. Bob and Gailon beyond a doubt are capable of manufacturing most anything they think will work. Have they manufactured all.

Stan brought up past taxes as if that were an area off limits because of the time element.
I still assume the IRS investigation is over but I do not believe it is over as portrayed by DS. I have spoken with the IRS and asked questions without giving names. I just recently had an occasion to speak to two others that are in a position to know.
Tax attorney and a CPA
The story of no letter simply does not seem to be true. The IRS issues a letter when a audit has been completed,with the details of the findings. The IRS has one, the taxpayer,and his legal counsel or his CPA. The resolution is spelled out in detail and they all sign

The IRS never issues a apology for doing an audit. For much the same reason our church will pay out the nose in a lawsuit but never admit their responsibility.

The liklihood of a lengthy audit or investigation coming up with NOT ONE infraction is about as likely as we will all be translated in the morning. But if true it would be readily apparant in the letter of resolution. Regardless of how or why this
audit began,the IRS saw area's of concern or they would not have wasted their time

I do believe someone here is not telling the truth but are we all to remain silent as Stan suggests . Org like this have a enormous responsibility to those that donate and support their ministry and personal lifestyle

Posted: **Fri Dec 12, 2008 4:30 pm America/Denver**

When you have sexual misconduct allegations against anyone it needs to be taken seriously. Most,not all mind you,but most are telling the truth But if I were to take Stan's thoughts and they do reflect the thoughts of many, as my rule of conduct,a pastor with a thrity year history of what I was accusing him of would still be destroying lives.

I have no idea as to the guilt or innocence of TS or DS other than I believe Duane Clem. This conduct should to most any rational person signal a red flag. You do not put such in a areana where they have acess to vulnerable potential victims.

I do know I do not believe the glowing tale of the IRS. I know that what I read of TS,including his own letter he would never have acess to a young vulnerable son of mine. Because of so many reports DS would never have acess to my teenage granddaughters if I had my way. Maybe that is unfair to him but with all the allegations floating around and because of attitudes that seem to dictate if I am to be a good christian,I must have a perfect marriage(not perfect BTW,but very happy with the same man for 46 years) I must not question etc.
Bob and Gailon have done enormous damage in the event their is a victim the way they have conducted this

Posted: **Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:10 pm America/Denver**

I sure have no desire to spend hours responding to this..

I still maintain the same position.

and add

"Why should a BOD spend hours of time, responding to those who are not even donors?"

Posted: **Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:44 pm America/Denver**

odie1962 wrote: Stan brought up past taxes as if that were an area off limits because of the time element.
I still assume the IRS investigation is over but I do not believe it is over as portrayed by DS. I have spoken with the IRS and asked questions without giving names. I just recently had an occasion to speak to two others that are in a position to know.

Tax attorney and a CPA

The story of no letter simply does not seem to be true. The IRS issues a letter when a audit has been completed,with the details of the findings. The IRS has one, the taxpayer,and his legal counsel or his CPA. The resolution is spelled out in detail and they all sign

The IRS never issues a apology for doing an audit. For much the same reason our church will pay out the nose in a lawsuit but never admit their responsibility.

The liklihood of a lengthy audit or investigation coming up with NOT ONE infraction is about as likely as we will all be translated in the morning. But if true it would be readily apparant in the letter of resolution. Regardless of how or why this
audit began,the IRS saw area's of concern or they would not have wasted their time

I do believe someone here is not telling the truth but are we all to remain silent as Stan suggests . Org like this have a enormous responsibility to those that donate and support their ministry and personal lifestyle

Odie, yes they do have an enormous responsibility to those who donate and support them, but they can not force those who do not do so to believe them...

Part of the problem with the info you got maybe due to some confusion. It wasn't an audit.

Internal Revenue Manual
irs.gov
Part 9. Criminal Investigation
Chapter 5. Investigate Process
Section 14. Closing Procedures
9.5.14.13

Notification to Subjects When an Investigation is Discontinued
...

If the SAC decides not to notify the subject, a memorandum setting forth the reasons will be prepared. Letters will not normally be sent in the grand jury investigation, nor investigations involving multiple filers or individuals related to other prosecution investigations.

In investigations declined by DOJ, Tax Division, letters of notification will not be sent by the IRS.

See? No letter.

For others who may be confused by conflicting claims by Fran, Pickle, Joy and others that this is all still going on. Think! The IRS does not return or destroy copies of records if they still need them. This has all been testified to under oath in court by 3abn's attorneys, and lawyers don't like to stand up in court and perjure themselves about the IRS... would you?

So, here again is the letter from 3abn's attorneys informing 3abn of the closure of the IRS investigation: http://www.3atalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=11
for those who haven't read it.

FYI This is not going to keep being rehashed here unless someone has new facts or evidence to add, or a new or unique question.

..ian

Posted: **Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:52 pm America/Denver**

Stan wrote:I sure have no desire to spend hours responding to this..

I still maintain the same position.

and add

"Why should a BOD spend hours of time, responding to those who are not even donors?"

I am quite sure that I never asked or demanded a BOD respond to anything; but It is not only donor's to be considered when the position of the party involved is quite literally the face of adventism to many.
Didn't ask you to spend hours to this. You simply are in no position to speak or act on DS behalf in this. None of us are. None of us can say he has engaged in this behaviour and none of us can say he didn't. DS and any alleged victim if one exists is the only ones that can. Bob and Gailon have made it so if one were to come forward she will be molested all over again by both sides.
The bar you raised for anyone having a concern over this means almost literally no one should care or is not on a high enough platform warrent a concern.

www.3atalk.com

Acting on allegations

Acting on allegations

Re: Acting on allegations

Re: Acting on allegations

Re: Acting on allegations

Re: Acting on allegations

Re: Acting on allegations

Re: Acting on allegations

Re: Acting on allegations

Re: Acting on allegations

Re: Acting on allegations