Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
March 28, 2024, 02:42:07 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Lawsuit?  (Read 4965 times)
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1062



« on: May 21, 2018, 11:10:48 am »

This was posted in another thread:

Who knows, maybe when the board gets the results from the independent investigation they may decide its to volatile to make a decision,and hand it over to a lawyer in a defamation lawsuit.  Either way the investigation goes it would be plausible, as the Church and many of the members would have good cause from many here, and on social media, that have been doing a lot of defamation. Might want to keep that in mind when throwing people’s names around and making accusations about them, as I see on Suzanne FB... Lawsuits occur at the drop of a hat these days.

My thoughts?

More intimidation from an ECC member. A few of you seem to want nothing more than to shut this forum up, or down, any way you can.

If the report shows Mark to have been an abuser, rest assured that it will be subpoenaed by the defendants if ECC is foolish enough to try to take them to court. You can't claim defamation if it can be shown that you really did what you're accused of doing.

Given all the remarks made by the Darling children and their supporters about Suzanne's mental state, her morals, her financial problems, and her suggested-but-never-proven-probably-nonexistent criminal record, it seems to me that Suzanne would be the one with grounds to claim defamation. And some of her critics have been unwise enough to make their accusations under their own real names.

GCx in general is into cover-ups. Court cases bring things to light.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2018, 11:14:01 am by Huldah » Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1062



« Reply #1 on: May 21, 2018, 11:24:14 am »

From the other thread:

Quote from: GT
Might want to keep that in mind when throwing people’s names around and making accusations about them, as I see on Suzanne FB
Is this some type of threat to intimidate women who are alleging abuse to keep them silent? Pretty sure it’s not libel to tell what happened as long as you tell the truth. Also, wouldn’t a decent church board be appalled if the allegations are true and do something about anyone who abused someone OR anyone who covered up abuse?

Twisting and manipulating my words again as usual. I never said ONE word do the women making accusations, I clearly stated the defamation of the Church and some members.

To the contrary, Greentruth, your post read very much like a threat.
Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2520



« Reply #2 on: May 21, 2018, 11:26:35 am »

Thanks for moving it here, Huldah.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
Greentruth
Guest

« Reply #3 on: May 21, 2018, 11:28:10 am »

Taking my post out of context will get you no where. I clearly stated that if the bot can’t make a decision after getting the results it may have to be handled by another detached entity. And maybe even under a defamation law suit from being manipulated like you see going on here. Nothing to do with the accusers, everything to do with those attempting to manipulate the process. No one said this to me, and it’s just a possible prospective from my view.
Logged
Greentruth
Guest

« Reply #4 on: May 21, 2018, 11:32:51 am »

From the other thread:

Quote from: GT
Might want to keep that in mind when throwing people’s names around and making accusations about them, as I see on Suzanne FB
Is this some type of threat to intimidate women who are alleging abuse to keep them silent? Pretty sure it’s not libel to tell what happened as long as you tell the truth. Also, wouldn’t a decent church board be appalled if the allegations are true and do something about anyone who abused someone OR anyone who covered up abuse?

Threat? That’s a laugh with all the accusations and threats coming from this forum against the Church and the bot. I could care less if some want to continue to manipulate the process, but thought it was an issue that should be mentioned, as I have seen it before. Manipulate and taint the process, and you might not like the that replaces it

Twisting and manipulating my words again as usual. I never said ONE word do the women making accusations, I clearly stated the defamation of the Church and some members.

To the contrary, Greentruth, your post read very much like a threat.
Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1062



« Reply #5 on: May 21, 2018, 11:38:06 am »

You said the church (meaning ECC) had good reason for a defamation lawsuit, and people here and on social media have been doing a lot of defamation, and that someone (presumably the members of this forum) should keep that in mind when we name names.

Have I misrepresented your words in any way in the preceding paragraph?

Because what you wrote comes across as deliberately intimidating. It's difficult to imagine that that was a purely unintended message.
Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1062



« Reply #6 on: May 21, 2018, 11:42:17 am »

What if the people you think are BOT members are not and you are falsely calling them out?
I would be happy to comment on this if you bring it up in the appropriate thread.
Logged
Greentruth
Guest

« Reply #7 on: May 21, 2018, 11:46:14 am »

You said the church (meaning ECC) had good reason for a defamation lawsuit, and people here and on social media have been doing a lot of defamation, and that someone (presumably the members of this forum) should keep that in mind when we name names.

Have I misrepresented your words in any way in the preceding paragraph?

Because what you wrote comes across as deliberately intimidating. It's difficult to imagine that that was a purely unintended message.

I feel I have clearly stated my view. It’s quite clear some here are trying to manipulate the process of resolving the accusations made against MD and the Church. Now calling out names that “might” be on the bot? Twist it how you will, I think I was quite clear. No threat, more of a friendly attempt to make some aware of how that is coming across.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1