Pickle again is making the statements of Danny's "kickbacks" from Remnant. Has he been told that no one denies getting legal royalties just like Mark Finley, Doug B and many, many others.
Bob, if the payments from Remnant or PPPA were illegal then why didn't the IRS come down on DS with some kind of punishment? One last time any moneys that changed hands between DS and Remnant and or PPPA was all legal!
You surely aren't so stupid that you deny that all financial exchanges and arrangements were ALL legal...Right! If not the IRS would have long ago handed down sanctions, fines and whatever to get their share!
Bob, this is why people who know you and who have read your accusations really believe that you are a nutcase!
One more thing. You are still denying that it is a sin before God to write accusations and spread them and make false statements blaming your sources for wrong info. Why? Bob if I used your rational I would have published from my sources long ago that you are a homosexual pervert with tendency's toward children and are a terrible father and husband...I've been told that you are not a Christian...and are very, very selfish and that you are a habitual liar..My sources also say that your wife left you because of your 24/7 obsession with 3abn.You have been questioned before about this particular accusation but have never answered. That tells me it is true. Bob these are what my sources are telling me...should I publish details of your private life as told by my sources. Some of these sources may hate you, or may have an ax to grind with you but that shouldn't matter should it Bob? There a source and the motive of a source is not really that important..is it Bob? By the way, your private life is not nearly as private as you think it is. You have placed yourself in the fish bowl of scrutiny... now live with it.
Oh by the way sources are telling me that you are now being investigated by the IRS for......guess what?
So Adam/Alex is busy posting again. Adam and Alex broke up long ago so Alex is using that name to be able to speak since he said he was leaving that place. He keeps saying to "call his mother" about this that and the other but he actually doesn't want that as she would tell anyone that asks her that Alex has lied about the whole Tommy thing. She would say that she and her husband made a video to show in court if this case went to trial (she did that at the time because Mr. Walker was in precarious health) and they say on the video that Alex is a very troubled young man who lies habitually and there is no truth in the "tommy" accusations. People may think what they want but when your own parents say you are lying and are willing to testify to that fact...how could anyone believe Alex's accusations? These are honest God fearing people that were willing to tell the truth about their son, and they did.
The DA was aware of all of this having received a recent letter from Mrs. Walker repeating again that Alex was lying and Tommy was innocent. Mrs Walker was willing to testify that when she asked Alex why he was ruining a mans life that hadn't touched him and why was he trying to sue 3abn...Alex answered "that was where the big bucks were". That was not going to look good to a jury. The DA was also aware that Alex changed his story repeatedly from a relatively minor incident (as reported to pickle) to a huge, all out perverted fantasy. The defense had hundreds of pages of statements from officials saying that Alex was not credible and sighting specific incidents where he has broken the law and/or under suspicion for certain crimes. Alex has a very large family and shouldn't it tell you something that everyone of them was against him in these accusations. They know his history, his threats and his dream of having money without having to do anything for it except to lie. When one lie isn't enough he justs twists, turns and adds to it to make it fit to achieve whatever he is trying to achieve at the time. Kind of like Bob Pickle. Dennis Turley is lying also. How do I know? When all of this junk was put on the internet, years ago, Turley's grandmother read it, decided it was a cash cow since Dennis had taken piano lessons from Tommy, and she tried to extort money from him. An attorney that was called at the time has written proof of that. She told Tommy she had read all of the stuff about him on the net, decided she would say something had happened to Dennis and she wanted Tommy to pay for his college education. All of this would have come out in the trial but with the climate of the country so hot over a famous coach who supposedly molested some of his players, why take a chance on a jury trial when given the option to take the Alford plea and say before God and man that you are innocent?
Adam/alex says he knew it was a possibility his case would be dismissed but then why didn't he admit to it when Pickle challenged the dismissal? Truth is, He may have known it was a possibility but it has crushed him. Why? Because for 2 years he has looked forward to his 10 minutes of fame in the witness chair where he could shed crocodile tears and tell in disgusting detail what had been done to him. Only problem is, it was all made up in his mind. His lawsuit against 3abn will go nowhere as well as there is too much proof to counteract his accusations. His family says he threatened to sue an employer that fired him and, at one time, threatened to sue his own father. Does anyone see a pattern here?
Tommy Shelton
Moderators: Breezy, Lilly, Truth
-
Nestor
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:14 am America/Denver
Re: Tommy Shelton
As is typical in law (not Federal), the specifics will often depend upon the individual State.
HERe is what on authority (Google it) says:
[quote]In an Alford Plea, the criminal defendant does not admit the act, but admits that the prosecution could likely prove the charge. The court will pronounce the defendant guilty. The defendant may plead guilty yet not admit all the facts that comprise the crime. An Alford plea allows defendant to plead guilty even while unable or unwilling to admit guilt. One example is a situation where the defendant has no recollection of the pertinent events due to intoxication or amnesia. A defendant making an Alford plea maintains his innocence of the offense charged. One reason for making such a plea may be to avoid being convicted on a more serious charge. Acceptance of an Alford plea is in the court's discretion.
However, in many states, a plea which "admits sufficient facts" often results in the case being continued without a decision and later dismissed. A conviction under an Alford plea may be used as a conviction for later sentencing purposes. However, one state supreme court has held that an Alford plea, unlike a criminal trial, does not provide a full and fair hearing on the issues in the case, and therefore does not preclude later litigation of the issues.{/quote]
AS I said above, differences will exist between the individual States.
HERe is what on authority (Google it) says:
[quote]In an Alford Plea, the criminal defendant does not admit the act, but admits that the prosecution could likely prove the charge. The court will pronounce the defendant guilty. The defendant may plead guilty yet not admit all the facts that comprise the crime. An Alford plea allows defendant to plead guilty even while unable or unwilling to admit guilt. One example is a situation where the defendant has no recollection of the pertinent events due to intoxication or amnesia. A defendant making an Alford plea maintains his innocence of the offense charged. One reason for making such a plea may be to avoid being convicted on a more serious charge. Acceptance of an Alford plea is in the court's discretion.
However, in many states, a plea which "admits sufficient facts" often results in the case being continued without a decision and later dismissed. A conviction under an Alford plea may be used as a conviction for later sentencing purposes. However, one state supreme court has held that an Alford plea, unlike a criminal trial, does not provide a full and fair hearing on the issues in the case, and therefore does not preclude later litigation of the issues.{/quote]
AS I said above, differences will exist between the individual States.
-
Truth
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 11:09 am America/Denver
Re: Tommy Shelton
Nestor, it has already been made clear that Tommy Shelton pled the Alford plea in which he pled not guilty.
-
Nestor
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:14 am America/Denver
Re: Tommy Shelton
Let me be clear: Nothing that I say will be an attempt to claim that TS is either guilty or innocent.
As I understand it, TS has faced charges under the laws of Virginia and did not face charges under Federal law. If this it accurate, his Alford Plea and what it means would depend upon Virginia law and nothing else. That meaning would differ from State to State. Personally, I generally see an Alford Plea in the same sense as a "nolo contendere" plea. IOW, I see it as neither an admission of guilt or of innnocence. That position is supported by the first citation.
However, the North Carolina case is thought to be important by the legal community. You will note that under the second citation the defendent does not admit guilt but does admit that there is strong evidence of guilt.
Here are two slightly different comments on the possible meaning of an Alford Plea:
As I understand it, TS has faced charges under the laws of Virginia and did not face charges under Federal law. If this it accurate, his Alford Plea and what it means would depend upon Virginia law and nothing else. That meaning would differ from State to State. Personally, I generally see an Alford Plea in the same sense as a "nolo contendere" plea. IOW, I see it as neither an admission of guilt or of innnocence. That position is supported by the first citation.
However, the North Carolina case is thought to be important by the legal community. You will note that under the second citation the defendent does not admit guilt but does admit that there is strong evidence of guilt.
Here are two slightly different comments on the possible meaning of an Alford Plea:
AndAlso known as a "best-interests plea," an Alford plea registers a formal claim neither of guilt nor innocence toward charges brought against a defendant in criminal court. Like a nolo contendere plea, an Alford plea arrests the full process of criminal trial because the defendant -- typically, only with the court's permission -- accepts all the ramifications of a guilty verdict (i.e. punishment) without first attesting to having committed the crime. The name, Alford plea, is taken from North Carolina v. Alford 400 U.S. 25.
I clearly do not know how Virginia considers an Alford Plea. Again, I do not claim that TS is guilty. But, to do not believe that it is clear that TS pled "not guillty." Perhaps under Virginia law he did plead "not guilty." But outside of a citation from Virginia decisions that is not clear.In North Carolina v Alford, the Supreme Court noted that:
"An individual accused of crime may voluntarily, knowingly, and understandingly consent to the imposition of a prison sentence even if he is unwilling or unable to admit his participation in the acts constituting the crime *** when *** a defendant intelligently concludes that his interests require entry of a guilty plea and the record before the judge contains strong evidence of actual guilt"
-
Nestor
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:14 am America/Denver
Re: Tommy Shelton
As I have stated, the critical issue here is how the Virginia Statute is intrepretated by the courts. On opinion on the Alford Plea in the State of Vorginia may be found in the 2007 ruling in "Carroll v. Commonwealth," which innvolved an sexual offender case. One part of that ruling is given below:
The majority frames Carroll's argument as a claim that his Alford plea, alone and by its nature, contains an implicit promise that he will never be required to admit his guilt. Recognizing that this is a question of first impression in Virginia, the majority rejects Carroll's position, finding that a defendant who has entered an Alford plea is not an innocent person for purposes of criminal sentencing and probation.Carroll's Alford plea, standing alone, does not give him an enforceable right to maintain his innocence during sex-offender treatment.
-
Nestor
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:14 am America/Denver
Re: Tommy Shelton
In a December 2011 ruling the Appealate court in Virginia in the case of James S. Williams v. Commonwealth, a sexual assualt case, ruled that Mr. Williams could not change his mind and withdraw his Alford Plea.
-
Nestor
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:14 am America/Denver
Re: Tommy Shelton
Here is another interesting aspect of the Virginia Statute:
My point: It may be that TS has a plea agreement as to what type of sentence he should recieve in return for making an Alford Plea. But, once he enters an Alford Plea the sentence given him if pretty final. If he has a plea agreement his sentence may be light. That remains to be seen at the time he is sentenced. But, whether light or harsh, the Alford Plea is fairly final and if you read the full citations that I referenced, it can be harsh.
Do I take any pleasure in this? Not at all. The issues here are sad for all concerned. I have never said that TS was either guilty or innocent. I have only said that the justice system would work. It seems to have worked with the court accepting an Alford Plea from TS. Now, we can olny wait to see what that wil mean in regard tothe sentence given him. However, since TS seemingly is presently in jail, one would think that his sentence would involve some jail/prison time. Again, very sad for all parties to this. Even those who are glad that "justice has been served," should realize that this is not a time to rejoice.
]
Under this part of the law, once an inmate has been transfered to the DOC, the court which decided the case cannot modify the sentence.There is a common misconception that an inmate's sentence may be reduced (or modified) at any time after conviction. However, courts actually lose jurisdiction to modify or reduce a sentence after a person is transferred to the DOC.
The Virginia statute on point, Virginia Code Section 19.2-303, provides in pertinent part: "If a person has been sentenced for a felony to the Department of Corrections but has not actually been transferred to a receiving unit of the Department, the court which heard the case, if it appears compatible with the public interest and there are circumstances in mitigation of the offense, may, at any time before the person is transferred to the Department, suspend or otherwise modify the unserved portion of such a sentence." Va. Code Section 19.2-303.
My point: It may be that TS has a plea agreement as to what type of sentence he should recieve in return for making an Alford Plea. But, once he enters an Alford Plea the sentence given him if pretty final. If he has a plea agreement his sentence may be light. That remains to be seen at the time he is sentenced. But, whether light or harsh, the Alford Plea is fairly final and if you read the full citations that I referenced, it can be harsh.
Do I take any pleasure in this? Not at all. The issues here are sad for all concerned. I have never said that TS was either guilty or innocent. I have only said that the justice system would work. It seems to have worked with the court accepting an Alford Plea from TS. Now, we can olny wait to see what that wil mean in regard tothe sentence given him. However, since TS seemingly is presently in jail, one would think that his sentence would involve some jail/prison time. Again, very sad for all parties to this. Even those who are glad that "justice has been served," should realize that this is not a time to rejoice.
]
-
Mercy
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 9:37 am America/Denver
Re: Tommy Shelton
Well let me help you out as far as Tommy's thinking and what he wanted. He refused to take any plea this time that made him say he was guilty. You see, last time the defense requested the Alford plea but was denied that opportunity. He was told that taking a guilty plea was a "technicality" of accepting that particular plea bargain. The judge threw it all out anyway so it is a moot point other than to say he has regretted over and over taking that bad advice and made clear he would not do it again. Fortunately the DA was willing this time to let him take the Alford. So, to him there was all the difference in the world as he was able to stand in court and say I am not guilty of these charges but realize the jury could find differently and so on...
This is not difficult to understand or explain. Rules may vary state to state but all that is important in my mind is how Tommy understood the law. And, his understanding was that he was getting his chance to say he was innocent of the charges and would agree to nothing less.
THough he is a very sick man as the stroke destroyed the balance center of the brain (most people die from these type strokes) which keeps him dizzy and nauseated and unable to walk straight without a cane or walker, he determined by the grace of God that he would deal with whatever was handed out though innocent of these charges. He knows that God had a reason for allowing this and has determined to work through the fear and depression of being incarcerated and to let himself be used of God to be a witness to other's while he is there. A tough thing to do if you are a well person...
The evilness of those that have tried to do harm to Danny, 3abn and Tommy will not win! God promises us in his word that evil will be defeated! Rumors, lies and gossip will not prevail. Has it done plenty of damage? Of course. Has it disrupted innocent lives and hurt many? Absolutely! But God has continued to prevail.
Pickle and Joy did not win any motions in court all these years and their appeals turned down repeatedly. In 7 years of trying to get even more money that she got, Linda has not won a thing. When these people brought down the IRS on Danny and 3abn, not one infraction was found. They were not sighted for one violation after reviewing hundreds of thousands of records and documents. When Danny was accused of being the real father to his stepdaughter, 2 independant lab results proved differently. When the person responsible for that lie said it was a different little girl used to trick everyone, yet another lab test was sent in and proved that indeed it was the right little girl. 7 years ago when these people said Linda was mistreated and had only a professional relationship with the doctor, they were proved wrong time and again when people saw them together at airports, restaurants and by her own admission how many trips she had made to norway and now has been living in Norway supposedly on the doctor's property! Only a professional relationship? Please. She herself has proven differently by her actions.
Then we have Alex who has blown continually about his famous lawyers and what was going to happen to Tommy etc etc. Then the first 2 law firms dropped him. Suspicious huh? Then he blew about this other guy and what they would do to 3abn. He went on about the trial coming up and he would make Tommy and Danny pay and on and on. 2 years of his rantings and his case was dismissed. Too many holes in it and he changed his stories too many times. Then he said Tommy pleaded guilty and that would help his 3abn case sooo much. Tommy pleaded innocent and Alex's case was dismissed...hum...Don't think that will help his lawsuit against 3abn very much. Then sometime ago he found out his parents made a video testifying against him and his credibility. Eventually he started tripping himself up with all the lies.
I say all of this to show that God is still on the throne and in control and though 3abn and those that work there have been and are going through some fire, God is still keeping his hand over that ministry and through all the lies, rumors, gossip and accusations, not one of the accusers was won anything, in court or out.
This is not difficult to understand or explain. Rules may vary state to state but all that is important in my mind is how Tommy understood the law. And, his understanding was that he was getting his chance to say he was innocent of the charges and would agree to nothing less.
THough he is a very sick man as the stroke destroyed the balance center of the brain (most people die from these type strokes) which keeps him dizzy and nauseated and unable to walk straight without a cane or walker, he determined by the grace of God that he would deal with whatever was handed out though innocent of these charges. He knows that God had a reason for allowing this and has determined to work through the fear and depression of being incarcerated and to let himself be used of God to be a witness to other's while he is there. A tough thing to do if you are a well person...
The evilness of those that have tried to do harm to Danny, 3abn and Tommy will not win! God promises us in his word that evil will be defeated! Rumors, lies and gossip will not prevail. Has it done plenty of damage? Of course. Has it disrupted innocent lives and hurt many? Absolutely! But God has continued to prevail.
Pickle and Joy did not win any motions in court all these years and their appeals turned down repeatedly. In 7 years of trying to get even more money that she got, Linda has not won a thing. When these people brought down the IRS on Danny and 3abn, not one infraction was found. They were not sighted for one violation after reviewing hundreds of thousands of records and documents. When Danny was accused of being the real father to his stepdaughter, 2 independant lab results proved differently. When the person responsible for that lie said it was a different little girl used to trick everyone, yet another lab test was sent in and proved that indeed it was the right little girl. 7 years ago when these people said Linda was mistreated and had only a professional relationship with the doctor, they were proved wrong time and again when people saw them together at airports, restaurants and by her own admission how many trips she had made to norway and now has been living in Norway supposedly on the doctor's property! Only a professional relationship? Please. She herself has proven differently by her actions.
Then we have Alex who has blown continually about his famous lawyers and what was going to happen to Tommy etc etc. Then the first 2 law firms dropped him. Suspicious huh? Then he blew about this other guy and what they would do to 3abn. He went on about the trial coming up and he would make Tommy and Danny pay and on and on. 2 years of his rantings and his case was dismissed. Too many holes in it and he changed his stories too many times. Then he said Tommy pleaded guilty and that would help his 3abn case sooo much. Tommy pleaded innocent and Alex's case was dismissed...hum...Don't think that will help his lawsuit against 3abn very much. Then sometime ago he found out his parents made a video testifying against him and his credibility. Eventually he started tripping himself up with all the lies.
I say all of this to show that God is still on the throne and in control and though 3abn and those that work there have been and are going through some fire, God is still keeping his hand over that ministry and through all the lies, rumors, gossip and accusations, not one of the accusers was won anything, in court or out.
-
Mercy
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 9:37 am America/Denver
Re: Tommy Shelton
You are correct this isn't a time to rejoice. The only good thing as far as incarcaration now is that it will go towards time served when he is sentenced. I will take issue with you though on the justice system at work. Things that have happened in this case have proven that we have no rights in America anymore. But, people do not realize this that haven't dealt with the system. American people would be terrified to know what can be done to a person just on someone else's word. I can call the police and say Joe Blow molested me or beat me and with no evidence, no proof whatsoever, Joe will be arrested, locked up and it will be in the newspapers and TV the next day. This is without one question being asked of Joe. Just like that his reputation is ruined on nothing but someone's word. After 2 years of this mess hanging over Tommy and his family, he has never been questioned by any law officials, the DA's office or anyone else. All of this nightmare happened to him because 2 men got together and decided to make an accusation with big ulterior motives in mind. They had no evidence, no eye witnesses, no proof of any kind and the allegations were supposed to be 10 and 15 years old. That is all it took to end up where he is now. People need to be aware that this kind of thing could happen to anyone of us. Anybody that has an ax to grind or wants revenge for something can make this kind of accusation and you will be ruined without ever being questioned to tell your side.Nestor wrote:Here is another interesting aspect of the Virginia Statute:
Under this part of the law, once an inmate has been transfered to the DOC, the court which decided the case cannot modify the sentence.There is a common misconception that an inmate's sentence may be reduced (or modified) at any time after conviction. However, courts actually lose jurisdiction to modify or reduce a sentence after a person is transferred to the DOC.
The Virginia statute on point, Virginia Code Section 19.2-303, provides in pertinent part: "If a person has been sentenced for a felony to the Department of Corrections but has not actually been transferred to a receiving unit of the Department, the court which heard the case, if it appears compatible with the public interest and there are circumstances in mitigation of the offense, may, at any time before the person is transferred to the Department, suspend or otherwise modify the unserved portion of such a sentence." Va. Code Section 19.2-303.
My point: It may be that TS has a plea agreement as to what type of sentence he should recieve in return for making an Alford Plea. But, once he enters an Alford Plea the sentence given him if pretty final. If he has a plea agreement his sentence may be light. That remains to be seen at the time he is sentenced. But, whether light or harsh, the Alford Plea is fairly final and if you read the full citations that I referenced, it can be harsh.
Do I take any pleasure in this? Not at all. The issues here are sad for all concerned. I have never said that TS was either guilty or innocent. I have only said that the justice system would work. It seems to have worked with the court accepting an Alford Plea from TS. Now, we can olny wait to see what that wil mean in regard tothe sentence given him. However, since TS seemingly is presently in jail, one would think that his sentence would involve some jail/prison time. Again, very sad for all parties to this. Even those who are glad that "justice has been served," should realize that this is not a time to rejoice.
This is prophecy being fullfilled people. Our rights have evaporated and we just don't realize it. It is only going to get worse until we are ran out of our homes and imprisoned.
-
Nestor
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:14 am America/Denver
Re: Tommy Shelton
When I said that the justice system has worked, I did not mean to imply that it worked either perfectly or that it worked imperfectly. I will leave that to other observers to decide for themselves as to how it has worked.
Personally, I have too much knowledge of the legal system to ever say that it works perfectly. However, with the knowledge that I have of the justice system in other countries, I would much rather subject myself to the justice system of our country than what happens in other countries.
Regardless of that, with his Alford Plea TS has agreed to submit himself to the penalty of a conviction on the counts for which he took the Alford Plea. Regardless of what the sentence will be, he will live with those consequences and that will not be easy.
The reality of an Alford Plea is that both TS and the judge of the court both believe that if a trial had taken place the evidence available would have likely resulted in a conviction. That isthe central issue in an Alford Plea. It is not whether or not the defendent is guilty or innocent. It is that a trial would likely have resulted in a conviction.
Personally, I have too much knowledge of the legal system to ever say that it works perfectly. However, with the knowledge that I have of the justice system in other countries, I would much rather subject myself to the justice system of our country than what happens in other countries.
Regardless of that, with his Alford Plea TS has agreed to submit himself to the penalty of a conviction on the counts for which he took the Alford Plea. Regardless of what the sentence will be, he will live with those consequences and that will not be easy.
The reality of an Alford Plea is that both TS and the judge of the court both believe that if a trial had taken place the evidence available would have likely resulted in a conviction. That isthe central issue in an Alford Plea. It is not whether or not the defendent is guilty or innocent. It is that a trial would likely have resulted in a conviction.