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

Round Four: Bob Pickle

< Prev.Next >

Due to the abrogation of the confidentiality agreement by Harold Lance, the following communication is provided for your perusal.

-------- Original Message --------
From:  Bob
To:  Harold Lance
Subject:  Re: Thanks for your note of response
Date:  Mon, 18 Dec 2006 17:36:34 -0600

Hi Harold.


What ****** (who is not pro-Linda) has to say is, in my opinion, as serious as the Tommy Shelton child molestation allegations. However, unless people already know Danny's side of the story regarding ******, ****** will not presently provide ***. I guess that's the way it has to be for now.

****** feels that the way the Tommy Shelton allegations were handled is very, very serious, and should raise the question of whether certain individuals such as Walt Thompson, whom he truly does appreciate and respect, should resign.

You write:

"Regarding the issue of who owned the car?"

That isn't the issue. You do realize that that wasn't the issue, don't you? On Oct. 8, 2006, Danny wrote (skip to the bolded parts if you want to skim):

"Anyway, let me give you just a few things to think about, You claim that Linda passed your truth test. Are you not aware that any one who is a polished liar will not wiggle or squirm when being questioned about their lies, ESPECIALLY if they are confident that the person who is questioning them has already bought their lies hook, line and sinker?


"She told me that she was going to go lay out by the swimming pool. I decided to go look in her car for any evidence to support the PI's claim that had not been mailed to me yet. Our car door was locked. Yes, I'm aware that she claims it was her car but I have proof that it is titled to both she and I even unto this day. She didn't apparently remember that I too had keys to this Toyota Sequoia. I opened the car door and opened the glove compartment. What did I see? Yes, I saw the same watch described to me by the PI.


"I then pulled the picture of the watch from underneath my shirt and showed it to her at which point she yelled out, " 'I can't believe you broke into my car and got into my personal belongings! This is abuse!' "

Danny said nothing about whether Illinois is a community property state or not. He didn't claim to "own" the car. He instead explicitly said that he had "proof" that the car was "titled" in both their names. But his statement is patently false.

You write:

"I suspect Danny hasn't responded to you on that and other issues is a result of my rather insistent messages for him to stop engaging in criss cross exchanges that only lead to further posturing and misunderstandings."

I would strongly recommend that you encourage Danny to follow through on his board chairman's recommendation that I verify the information he had given me. Walt has been unkindly accused of doing whatever Danny says, and of not having any real authority. For Danny to thumb his nose at Walt's request that I verify that information substantiates those accusations, and Danny's excuse that he was merely following your advice will not help the matter.

How have there been any misunderstandings? Did not Walt say that Danny had told him that the molestation allegations were 30 years old, when they were as recent as three years old in 2003? How was that a misunderstanding?

Danny said the car was "titled" in his name, and the fact is that it never has been. Where is the misunderstanding? Now if Danny has an explanation, if he wants to claim that he forgot or some such, he should not be encouraged not to provide his explanation, for that will only leave the impression that there is no explanation and that he has been caught in a lie.

You write:

"I would expect that the answer to that issue would be a matter for the side interested in establishing that fact to present when a hearing occurs. I would think that what ever documents bear on that issue would be identified and produced on what ever time table is agreed upon."

This touches on my question that is still unanswered. Will such discrepancies as whose name is on the title be considered by the panel, since that discrepancy doesn't directly impact the question of whether Danny had biblical grounds to divorce and remarry? Will the question be raised as to whether a possible felony was committed in taping a conversation, and if not, will that conversation still be admissible evidence in the panel process? The same goes for the phone records that John Lomacang asserts exists. Were they legally acquired? And if that question cannot be considered, will those records still be admissible?

As far as the Wild Wild Web goes, take a look at, a site I've done for a group out of a California church that is an attempt to rein in some of the wild things being said on the internet about Ellen White. So I am in full agreement with you regarding the problems of the internet, and I approach the criticisms against 3ABN having had more than six years of personal experience in effectively neutralizing similar criticisms out on the internet.

You write:

"I really think the messages have been heard by the people responsible for operations."

There is no question that they have been heard. But the big question is whether anything is going to change. If the people responsible for operations really, really care about 3ABN, then they need to answer that question in no uncertain terms, ASAP, and waiting for an ASI panel review to conclude before rendering an answer is an absolute mistake.

Wishing we could converse on a more pleasant topic,


< Prev.Next >
Not © 2008