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
August 18, 2018, 12:36:59 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What if MD is found to NOT be....  (Read 20633 times)
WhatIf....
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3



« on: March 17, 2018, 04:10:32 pm »

Newbie on the forum-  Most of us have implied that MD is guilty.  What if there is no evidence to show that he is a sexual abuser (maybe they find that he had some short comings, but not a sexual abuser) who is held responsible? Multiple times it has been shared on the forum that defamation lawsuit could be a slam dunk if MD and/or EC decided to pursue this.  Suzanne would be in the crosshairs of such litigation. Am I correct that anyone else that has posted statements of MD being a sexual abuser online could also be looking at being held accountable as well? According to Jeromy there has been definite damage done to them during all of this.

I have trolled this ordeal on line and many have posted statements of MD being a sexual abuser on Twitter, Facebook, and on De-Commission Forum.  Suzanne shares her statements with multiple people to post on their FB pages.  Others that could be pulled into the crosshairs if this does not play out as expected and defamation lawsuits are initiated would be these individuals that have shared sexual abuse statements on FB.
-   Linda [removed]
-   Terry [removed]
-   Chris [removed] (Go Fund Me for Mark Darling sexual abuse victims)
-   Barb [removed]
-   Tracy [removed]
-   Donna [removed]
-   Lisa [removed]
-   Ben [removed]
-   Megan [removed]
-   Jessi [removed]
-   Matthew [removed]
-   Heidi [removed]
-   Jennifer [removed]
-   Ariana [removed]
-   Uncertain who is responsible for Forum postings
I would expect people would support a fundraising campaign to cover the cost for these suits or maybe a lawyer or two would come forward to provide their services.  Most of us expect or want him to be guilty, but I am starting to have some doubts.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2018, 07:53:47 am by puff of purple smoke » Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 671



« Reply #1 on: March 17, 2018, 04:34:41 pm »

I posted earlier today that I believed Mark to be within his rights to sue for damages, should the findings show that Suzanne was lying.

On second thought, however, it's possible that, as a public or semi-public figure, Mark's ability to sue may be limited. I'm not a lawyer or anything, so this is a best guess.

Layperson that I am, I don't see how people who merely commented on Facebook could be held liable for damages. As far as I've seen, the Facebook commenters aren't saying things like, "I was there and I witnessed Mark doing X." They're mostly just expressing emotional support for Suzanne, which doesn't sound like grounds for legal action to me.
Logged
GodisFaithful
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 322



« Reply #2 on: March 17, 2018, 05:00:42 pm »

Has it occurred to anyone that some people on that list might know some of the people who are the other victims?

It is absolutely not a fact that the other victims are made up.

That might be a hope in some people's mind, but it is not a fact. 
Logged
zeal4god
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 14



« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2018, 05:11:44 pm »

I know Suzanne is not lying because I happen to know two of the other victims personally. The victim accounts that Suzanne is posting are true. It's time for Mark's defenders to stop living in a fantasy land are start facing up to the fact that he will finally be held to account.
Logged
WhatIf....
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3



« Reply #4 on: March 17, 2018, 05:25:22 pm »

Thank you Huldah for your thoughts and you do bring up a fair point with whether or not Mark would be a private or public figure or some place in between.  I agree that making comments on a post would not necessarily cross the line, but the individual that posted that Mark Darling is a sexual abuser would hold responsibility. 

I spent a couple minutes looking into this further and I thought this was interesting summary of public vs private.

“Ultimately, the difference between defamation of a public figure versus defamation of a private person is that a private person who claims defamation only needs to prove that the defamer acted negligently, while a public figure who claims defamation has to prove that the defamer acted intentionally or recklessly.”

GodIsFaithful I am not implying that the other victims are making up their statements and there more victims coming forward yet.
Logged
G_Prince
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 414



« Reply #5 on: March 17, 2018, 05:36:16 pm »

Newbie on the forum-  Most of us have implied that Mark Darling is guilty.  What if there is no evidence to show that he is a sexual abuser (maybe they find that he had some short comings, but not a sexual abuser) who is held responsible? Multiple times it has been shared on the forum that defamation lawsuit could be a slam dunk if Mark Darling and/or Evergreen decided to pursue this.  Suzanne would be in the crosshairs of such litigation. Am I correct that anyone else that has posted statements of Mark Darling being a sexual abuser online could also be looking at being held accountable as well? According to Jeromy there has been definite damage done to them during all of this.

I have trolled this ordeal on line and many have posted statements of Mark Darling being a sexual abuser on Twitter, Facebook, and on De-Commission Forum.  Suzanne shares her statements with multiple people to post on their FB pages.  Others that could be pulled into the crosshairs if this does not play out as expected and defamation lawsuits are initiated would be these individuals that have shared sexual abuse statements on FB.
-   Linda [removed]
-   Terry [removed]
-   Chris [removed](Go Fund Me for Mark Darling sexual abuse victims)
-   Barb [removed]
-   Tracy [removed]
-   Donna [removed]
-   Lisa [removed]
-   Ben [removed]
-   Megan [removed]
-   Jessi [removed]
-   Matthew [removed]
-   Heidi [removed]
-   Jennifer [removed]
-   Ariana [removed]
-   Uncertain who is responsible for Forum postings
I would expect people would support a fundraising campaign to cover the cost for these suits or maybe a lawyer or two would come forward to provide their services.  Most of us expect or want him to be guilty, but I am starting to have some doubts.


LOL is this the ECC hit list?
« Last Edit: July 10, 2018, 07:54:18 am by puff of purple smoke » Logged

Here's an easy way to find out if you're in a cult. If you find yourself asking the question, "am I in a cult?" the answer is yes. -Stephen Colbert
searching
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55



« Reply #6 on: March 17, 2018, 05:39:53 pm »

I have also heard(sitting in front of them) three people's accounts of what has happened to them...but since I have not named myself I will not be believed. I am probably a figment of Suzanne's imagination.

Also every single pastor of ECC should be asked what they know. Many of them have personally heard Suzanne's story as well as others. They are also accountable for what has happened in the past and what is happening now. Oh right, they were told to remain silent...guess that won't happen.

Suzanne is NOT the only person to have accused MD, but you see a gag order or whatever you want to call it was signed by the ECC pastors way back when. The pastors have been given a pass...get out of jail free card because they have been told to remain silent and trust me...they will. Not a single one will incriminate themselves. Why would they?

GCM or whatever they call themselves now should also be asked what they knew over the years. Why haven't they hired a 3rd party investigator?

Defamation lawsuits??? Ha...what about what is being said about John, Suzanne and the other victims?

Logged
GodisFaithful
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 322



« Reply #7 on: March 17, 2018, 05:41:17 pm »

Ok Faith, I see, are you saying that if this went to court because it was found that what Mark did was not actually at the level of sexual abuse, and Mark sued, then you are asking if these people on the list would be drug into it for expressing support for what the victims are claiming. Is that what you are asking.

Sorry, slow to catch it.

Yes, G Prince, it is a bit threatening for anyone looking at the list and seeing their name.  

I don't see God is Faithful, so I'm good.  

 
Logged
GodisFaithful
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 322



« Reply #8 on: March 17, 2018, 05:43:00 pm »

oops, What If, Not Faith
Logged
JessicaNoelDarling
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 37



« Reply #9 on: March 17, 2018, 05:52:37 pm »

I know Suzanne is not lying because I happen to know two of the other victims personally. The victim accounts that Suzanne is posting are true. It's time for Mark's defenders to stop living in a fantasy land are start facing up to the fact that he will finally be held to account.

Wait, you know Suzanne is not lying because 2 other people gave wishy washy stories? Instead of stories, how about giving some evidence. Anyone can gather a bunch of names if they have the same cause (and we've yet to get those names). If the fantasy land you refer to actually requires evidence, then what does that make the land you're living in? How well do you know Mark? My guess is not better than the people here defending him. Edit: (sorry. my anger is coming through. I know. I apologize)
« Last Edit: March 17, 2018, 05:56:49 pm by JessicaNoelDarling » Logged
WhatIf....
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3



« Reply #10 on: March 17, 2018, 05:53:57 pm »

That would have saved me some time if I just had gotten the ECC hit list, if it does exist.

These names were just pulled by looking at who had shared posts created by Suzanne on their Facebook pages as well.  Pretty easy to figure out.

Logged
GodisFaithful
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 322



« Reply #11 on: March 17, 2018, 05:56:12 pm »

So now we have switched from "they do not exist" to they can't be believed and are wishy washy.

The LaLa land was just that they do not exist. 

Now for the evidence....how about a transparent....you know the rest.
Logged
JessicaNoelDarling
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 37



« Reply #12 on: March 17, 2018, 06:02:55 pm »

So now we have switched from "they do not exist" to they can't be believed and are wishy washy.

The LaLa land was just that they do not exist. 

Now for the evidence....how about a transparent....you know the rest.

The existence of abuse is the argument, not whether there are anonymous stories that don't explain much of anything and are inconsistent with what everyone has seen from my father for years and years. On a side note, the constant conflation of terms has been a manipulative tactic we've seen over and over.
Logged
IloveJesusHowBoutYou
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4



« Reply #13 on: March 17, 2018, 06:08:07 pm »

How about for a starting point we figure out what decade these accusations took place?  There has been only a couple of dates shared so far with all of this.
1970's while Mark was wandering the countryside
1980's while Darlings were in trailer park in Ames
1990's while Darlings were in Bloomington
2000's while at current location
2010's while at current location as empty nesters
Logged
GodisFaithful
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 322



« Reply #14 on: March 17, 2018, 06:20:51 pm »

Do you really think we are going to figure this out on the forum?

On the one hand we are just a handful of pathetic losers, and then suddenly we are going to be able to figure this out even though we weren't the ones making the allegations. 

I guess the victims decided not to put dates in their story.  For some reason. We don't know. How would we know.

And if someone did know one or more of the victims, and heard their story, it is not their story to tell.

So we all have to wait.  But we won't know unless it is transparent.
Logged
zeal4god
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 14



« Reply #15 on: March 17, 2018, 06:23:37 pm »

I know Suzanne is not lying because I happen to know two of the other victims personally. The victim accounts that Suzanne is posting are true. It's time for Mark's defenders to stop living in a fantasy land are start facing up to the fact that he will finally be held to account.

Wait, you know Suzanne is not lying because 2 other people gave wishy washy stories? Instead of stories, how about giving some evidence. Anyone can gather a bunch of names if they have the same cause (and we've yet to get those names). If the fantasy land you refer to actually requires evidence, then what does that make the land you're living in? How well do you know Mark? My guess is not better than the people here defending him. Edit: (sorry. my anger is coming through. I know. I apologize)

I know your dad very well. He has asked me inappropriate questions about me and my wife's intimacy. Your dad has an unhealthy fascination with hearing about sex from other people. As for the other two victims, their stories are not wishy-washy. They are true. I'm sorry for the pain that this is causing you and your family, but your father's sin is finally coming home to roost. It's about time.
Logged
GodisFaithful
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 322



« Reply #16 on: March 17, 2018, 06:25:00 pm »

It seems to me that a victim could come forward with enough evidence of her story being true, and not divulge her name.

Am I wrong? I'm not so sure any of them have to publicly state their name.  

I believe in the case of my sister's abuse, the names of the abused did not have to be public.  They could be private/protected.
Logged
GodisFaithful
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 322



« Reply #17 on: March 17, 2018, 06:37:05 pm »

The report would be public/transparent about what happened, but I am not sure you know this.

It is not like this investigation would be a circus where we are all watching.  But the results would be public. And I do think there is a possibility that names could be hidden, of victims.
Logged
jeromydaviddarling
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 178



« Reply #18 on: March 17, 2018, 06:44:10 pm »

I know Suzanne is not lying because I happen to know two of the other victims personally. The victim accounts that Suzanne is posting are true. It's time for Mark's defenders to stop living in a fantasy land are start facing up to the fact that he will finally be held to account.

Wait, you know Suzanne is not lying because 2 other people gave wishy washy stories? Instead of stories, how about giving some evidence. Anyone can gather a bunch of names if they have the same cause (and we've yet to get those names). If the fantasy land you refer to actually requires evidence, then what does that make the land you're living in? How well do you know Mark? My guess is not better than the people here defending him. Edit: (sorry. my anger is coming through. I know. I apologize)

I know your dad very well. He has asked me inappropriate questions about me and my wife's intimacy. Your dad has an unhealthy fascination with hearing about sex from other people. As for the other two victims, their stories are not wishy-washy. They are true. I'm sorry for the pain that this is causing you and your family, but your father's sin is finally coming home to roost. It's about time.

We know it's you Jason...
Logged
jeromydaviddarling
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 178



« Reply #19 on: March 17, 2018, 06:45:53 pm »

I have also heard(sitting in front of them) three people's accounts of what has happened to them...but since I have not named myself I will not be believed. I am probably a figment of Suzanne's imagination.

Also every single pastor of ECC should be asked what they know. Many of them have personally heard Suzanne's story as well as others. They are also accountable for what has happened in the past and what is happening now. Oh right, they were told to remain silent...guess that won't happen.

Suzanne is NOT the only person to have accused MD, but you see a gag order or whatever you want to call it was signed by the ECC pastors way back when. The pastors have been given a pass...get out of jail free card because they have been told to remain silent and trust me...they will. Not a single one will incriminate themselves. Why would they?

GCM or whatever they call themselves now should also be asked what they knew over the years. Why haven't they hired a 3rd party investigator?

Defamation lawsuits??? Ha...what about what is being said about John, Suzanne and the other victims?



Here's some life rules:

1. Look both ways when crossing the street
2. Don't stare into the sun
3. Don't believe things you read on a random message board by people hiding their identity.

THAT'S why no one believes you friend. You don't get to just post things on a message board like this and expect them to do anything other than falling out of everyone's head the moment they finish reading it.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


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