Sign Up!


Updated 1/10/2013
2011 Form 990

Updated 6/22/2011
3ABN sued
over Tommy!

Added 3/14/2010
Can 3ABN Survive?

Added 11/16/2010
Judge Rejects
Plea Deal

Updated 4/2/2010
Tommy Shelton

Must Read:
Mom in Pain #1

Mene, Mene,
Tekel, Parsin

The Actual Lawsuit
IRS Criminal Investigation

Danny Shelton Admits Surreptitious Recording

A Felony Under Illinois State Law

The Issue

In this section we consider 3ABN president Danny Shelton's admission in two emails to having committed what appears to be a felony under the laws of the State of Illinois. 3ABN board chairman Dr. Walt Thompson has on occasion also alluded to this recording.

What is at issue is an alleged recording of a long-distance phone conversation between Linda Shelton and Dr. Arild Abrahamsen. The conversation is supposed to be so bad and so convincing, that just 30 seconds worth of audio is proof of biblical grounds for divorce.

Whether it really is that bad and convincing we cannot say, since the recording is top secret, and no one is allowed to hear it. That being so, we cannot vouch that in its present form it hasn't been altered, since the Danny Shelton Corruption Scandal also includes allegations of documents being fraudulently altered. So we can't say whether or not the tape really condemns Linda.

Yet one thing does appear fairly certain in Danny's admission about all of this: He appears to have committed a felony, along with all those who have disseminated information obtained from this recording, a recording made without the permission of any of the parties to the conversation.

How the Law Reads

(720 ILCS 5/) Criminal Code of 1961.


(720 ILCS 5/Art. 14 heading)



(720 ILCS 5/14-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 14-1)

Sec. 14-1. Definition.

(a) Eavesdropping device.

An eavesdropping device is any device capable of being used to hear or record oral conversation or intercept, retain, or transcribe electronic communications whether such conversation or electronic communication is conducted in person, by telephone, or by any other means; ....

(b) Eavesdropper.

An eavesdropper is any person, including law enforcement officers, who is a principal, as defined in this Article, or who operates or participates in the operation of any eavesdropping device contrary to the provisions of this Article.

(c) Principal.

A principal is any person who:

(1) Knowingly employs another who illegally uses an eavesdropping device in the course of such employment; or

(2) Knowingly derives any benefit or information from the illegal use of an eavesdropping device by another; or

(3) Directs another to use an eavesdropping device illegally on his behalf.

(d) Conversation.

For the purposes of this Article, the term conversation means any oral communication between 2 or more persons regardless of whether one or more of the parties intended their communication to be of a private nature under circumstances justifying that expectation. ...

(720 ILCS 5/14-2) (from Ch. 38, par. 14-2)

Sec. 14-2. Elements of the offense; affirmative defense.

(a) A person commits eavesdropping when he:

(1) Knowingly and intentionally uses an eavesdropping device for the purpose of hearing or recording all or any part of any conversation or intercepts, retains, or transcribes electronic communication unless he does so (A) with the consent of all of the parties to such conversation or electronic communication ...; or


(3) Uses or divulges, except as authorized by this Article or by Article 108A or 108B of the "Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963", approved August 14, 1963, as amended, any information which he knows or reasonably should know was obtained through the use of an eavesdropping device. ...


(720 ILCS 5/14-4) (from Ch. 38, par. 14-4)

Sec. 14-4. Sentence.

(a) Eavesdropping, for a first offense, is a Class 4 felony and, for a second or subsequent offense, is a Class 3 felony. ...


(720 ILCS 5/14-6) (from Ch. 38, par. 14-6)

Sec. 14-6. Civil remedies to injured parties.

(1) Any or all parties to any conversation upon which eavesdropping is practiced contrary to this Article shall be entitled to the following remedies:


(b) To all actual damages against the eavesdropper or his principal or both;

(c) To any punitive damages which may be awarded by the court or by a jury; ....

("720 ILCS 5/ Criminal Code of 1961.")

Danny's Email on the Afternoon of May 26, 2005

The following email is important for several reasons:

  • It admits that a recording of some sort of conversation between Linda and Arild Abrahamsen does indeed exist.
  • It demonstrates the type of respect Danny Shelton typically shows aged, retired, Seventh-day Adventist ministers that he happens to strongly disagree with.
  • It provides an example of the degree of carefulness with which Danny conducts his investigations before making his accusations. (We are fairly certain Pastor Thorvaldsson did not write the "story" in question.)
  • It shows just how serious one should take Danny's threats of lawsuits. (After nearly two years since these threats were made below, there is still no court case over the "story" in question.)

Why no court case? One real difficulty is that litigation would allow for discovery via subpoena in order to see whether the claims made in the "story" are true or false. Actually, that one real difficulty isn't a difficulty at all, if Danny has nothing to hide.

-------- Original Message --------
From:  Danny Shelton
To:  Johann Thorvaldsson
Date:  Thu, 26 May 2005 13:29


He says I should encourage you and Linda to press charges against me about a certain tape that you believe was taped illegally so that it can be brought to court and become public record. He knows the situation surrounding this certain conversation between Linda and this man in Norway. He believes it would be good to have this tape public so that it would be available to anyone who really wants to find out the real relationship between this man and woman. ...

The more you support them the worse you will eventually look to all of those that you put your credibility on the line to. Especially when they find out that you've known the truth all along and still support a lie. You forget to tell them that you are aware that Linda and the Dr. stay in his home alone while she is visiting him in Norway. Or that he stays with her when he is in Springfield. You must be a miserable man to have dropped your mission of truth to get the gospel into all the world and now in your sunset years have become a fictional novel writer about theft and scandel and **** **** and all the filth that goes along with it. Surely God must be pleased with his servant Johann.

Please Johann, wake up before it is too late to turn back to God.

People are asking me why an retired minister would write a fictional novel with all the filth involved. Someone said that maybe is is now getting to write or act out his own fantasies. I had to admit that possibly that's true.

It would be one thing for you to stand up and make accusations and be willing to put your money where your mouth is and defend your charges in court, but to admit that you are using a fake name and writing **** explicit material and promoting it even over the internet and admitting that it is all made up in you and your co writers minds, who all claim to be Christians, speaks volumes to those listening.

****** says that even though you have now put a disclaimer on what you wrote, that your intent to harm is still undeniable, and you will lose in court. It may take both you and whoever presses charges, years and boo coo bucks, but truth and justice will prevail in such a case. You just keep digging your hole deeper.

Danny Shelton

Danny's Earlier Email That Morning

The following email also demonstrates the type of respect Danny customarily shows the aged that he happens to strongly disagree with. Moreover, it denies that the recording was done through wire tapping. So how was it done?

A source close to the situation indicates that a voice-activated tape recorder was used. Thus Danny is correct that this would not be a violation of federal law, since federal law only regulates wire taps. But the laws of Illinois read a little differently, for they govern the recording of any type of conversation.

My, how easily Danny says he can "prove" things in a "court of law"! He can even prove that he has "never wire tapped or bugged anyones [sic.] phones." We'd really like to see him try to prove that one. If he can roll out video footage of his entire life and play it for us, maybe, but short of that, no way.

-------- Original Message --------
From:  Danny Shelton
To:  Johann Thorvaldsson
Date:  Thu, 26 May 2005 05:54

As I've said many times before, truth has it's way of coming out. Linda just wrote me a strange email. It says and I quote, " Thanks very much for the proof of your illegally recorded phone call."

Why is that strange you say? Well I'm assuming that you sent her my message to you about ******'s daughter in law "knowing first hand" about Linda and the Dr.'s affair.

Johann, even you should get this one! If she were innocent, she should have denied there ever was such a phone call between her and the Dr.! But she doesn't deny it because she is accusing me of recording her illegally! Bingo!

In the past she has told me that she is going to press charges against me for wire tapping. I have challenged her to do it. First of all I have never wire tapped or bugged anyones phones. Yes, I can prove this one and will be happy to in a court of law. I just need her to press a charge that I in turn will have to prove is not true. If I do have a recording then I will be allowed to bring in to court and have it played. Then it becomes a matter of public record. I can prove no phone tapping was involved as that is against the Federal law I'm told. Once such a recording would be played for the court, then it is fair game for anyone to pick it up and spread it on the SDA chat rooms, Adventist Today or to anyone else who has been deceived by Linda and this Dr. That would mean that even you would get a chance to hear your two heroes caught in the act of deception. Of course you would try to explain it away bu! t it wouldn't change the truth. And just think you have risked everything you own when you wrote that book for her. What you have done is against the law and it can be proven in court. You fell hook line and sinker just like a rookie would instead of a supposedly seasoned veteran that you clam to be. Maybe you might even get to hear them talk about "old Johann" who has Alzheimers.

In accusing me of recording that phone conversation illegally she is indeed admitting that such a conversation exits!

Danny Shelton
Not © 2008