"...When He [Jesus] saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd." Matt 9:36

"Do not rob the poor, because he is poor... for the Lord will take up their case and plunder those who plunder them." Proverbs 22:22-23

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Washington Lawyer at Citizen.org Writes About Subpoena Issues in FBC Jax Blogger Case, and Posts Copy of Motion for Summary Judgement

Readers: go to the link below, and you can read an interesting article just published today by Paul Levy, an attorney from the group called "Public Citizen" a consumer's rights organization based in Washington, D.C.

Mr. Levy contacted myself and my lawyer several weeks ago and was very interested in the blogger case, mostly from the standpoint of why Google and Comcast gave the information Detective Hinson requested, without contacting me to allow me to legally object and fight the subpoenas.


The question Mr. Levy raises is, at what point should ISPs contest subpoenas from the government, especially those which involve freedom of speech and anonymity issues. He calls on ISPs to stand up for their customer's rights in the criminal process as well as civil process.

Perhaps my readers will find more interesting than Mr. Levy's article some of the hyperlinks to documents he has posted to supplement his article. One of them is the motion for summary judgement filed by my attorney just before the settlement at mediation - if you've followed this case for some time, you will find this very interesting. Also is the ruling back in April denying the defense's motion to dismiss, that kept the case moving forward into the very intense discovery phase that lasted most of the summer.

Ironically, one of our posters known as "Louis", a Christian attorney in Tennessee just got his hands on the motion for summary judgement today and had some some very strong words for First Baptist Church and the players involved. He posted those in the comments of the article dealing with the murdering pastor.

65 comments:

Jim said...

I appreciated the posts by Louis in the previous thread related to the murdering pastor. Based on this "first look" at the summary judgement, I believe we will all be shaking our heads when everything regarding your case against FBC JAX comes to light. Louis nailed it when he said it looks like something from "the Dukes of Hazzard." A lingering question for me, as a tax-paying citizen of Jacksonville is, "why are my tax dollars still being used to pay the salary of Mr. Hinson?" Why has he not been fired for his abuse of power?

Thy Peace said...

A well written article by Levy.

The big question here is why throughout the US the police, feds and other agencies are using the pretext of Criminal Subpoenas to get around the notification of the subject in question, so that the subjects can not fight to stop the release of the data.

Of course in Watchdog's case why did Google not prevent Criminal Subpoena against a blogger. Did anyone examine the contents of this blog? And why is it so easy for criminal subpoenas to be issued?

Hinson knew he had to file a criminal subpoena, so that Watchdog was not notified and he released the data to church officials.

At this point all the stomping Mac Brunson did to "Shut them down" appears very buffoonish.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of your tax dollars paying Hinson. Here is HIS salary.

Robert Hinson

City of Jacksonville
Department: Jacksonville Sheriff's Office
Title: POLICE OFFICER
Salary: $64,404.00
Overtime: $7,433
TOTAL: $71,837.00

His tithe then: $7,184 per year. So I guess he is putting at least $138 in the offering plate EVERY week. (Not including his income from the church itself.)

Anonymous said...

Hinson knew he had to file a criminal subpoena, so that Watchdog was not notified and he released the data to church officials.

___________________________________

Here is something Hinson "just didn't understand, and still doesn't"...How in the world did the WD find out about the subpoenas. I destroyed the paperwork and file, never put Rich's name on any of them, and SAO Siegel destroyed or lost documents related to this matter.

I just don't understand how I got caught with my pants down around my ankles. I need to be more careful next time I do the church's bidding. Amen? Amen!

Thy Peace said...

I miss Wade's blogging. If Wade was still blogging, this material would be worth at least a good and choice 3 posts. He can write well and he knew how to present ideas in a clear manner. (WD you are also a good writer)

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Thy Peace: Wade is welcome to be a guest blogger here anytime he wants!

:)

Anonymous said...

After reading all that has happened to you caused by such "godly" men, is it any wonder the world is becoming less and less interested in the Gospel. Who in their right mind would want to take the risk of going through what you, and many others in SBC churches and SBC mission organizations, have gone through.

Someday will be payday for the mega church pastors and any other pastor who demands those who they lead to follow without asking questions.

I know God is in heaven weeping because of the foolishness and arrogance of many leaders in the SBC today.

Please keep up the good work you have been doing to help us to know what is going on in SBC churches today. It is heart breaking.

Former IMB missionary, now a tent maker missionary back in the country and people he loves,
RPhipps

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

RPhipps - thanks for the comments.

The more I have learned through the discovery phase of this case, the more I am convinced that there was an individual in charge at the church calling the shots that led to stupid decisions like drafting of letters with 16 sins, deciding to trespass my wife, sending two underlings to deliver the letter and trespass warnings on the eve of Thanksgiving, drafting deacon's resolutions to condemn me and warn other church members, calling me names in the paper, the decision to limit what I would be able to speak to the deacons in February 2009....and sadly, that person is a respected judge. He was the president of the trustees during 2007 and 2008, and I have other information that leads me to believe that he was the one who made the calls on what to do to me, how I and my wife would be treated....and here we are 2 years later, with more legal ugliness to come for sure. This is far from over.

It's very clear to me, I was found by this judge to be "in contempt of his church". And when you are in contempt of his court or his church, you pay a heavy price because he has the power to bring the hammer down.

Message to SBC: don't let a judge run the church. That is why we have loving pastors who are supposed to rule with love and grace and humility, instead of judges who rule with a gavel and the law and edicts.

Anonymous said...

WD, did Google or Comcast violates any laws that would allow a win in a lawsuit?

Anonymous said...

Is there anything worse than an unjust judge?

Scripture speaks about this.

Anonymous said...

Once again we "thank you" for posting original comments with facts.

Same Judge:
Even this week, the Judge brought National Media to his doorstep about the way bankruptcies have been handled here in Jacksonville under his care. Wasn't a pretty picture - how would you feel knowing a judge was stamping 25 document b/r per hour. No one's paperwork who really had a hardship case could have fairly been looked at. I feel bad for those families.

As a former member who left FBCJ I feel the entire leadership needs to be booted out. They have tarnished the testimony of a once well known church because of their greed for money, control and power.

Shameful, per my opinion. We appreciate you and your family W/D.

Anonymous said...

"Here come da judge". There go the members. I could have told you this story, have been around for many years. Keep your chin up WD. Many of us appreciate you and your wife more than you know. My opinion from years of observation.

Anonymous said...

This church is nothing like it once was...nothing. I would be very nervous attending this church now. Sort of like living in a country that is ruled by a dictator and his enforcers. What a shame because it once was a great church, with great pastors and deacons that tried to do right. This church was centered around JESUS then. In my opinion, now, it does not represent in any way the Gospel, the caring of the members for one another, a loving, serving pastor or deacons. I would be afraid to give an opinion about anything. I don't trust anyone there. All of this and I haven't mentioned the constant badgering for money..and where does it go, or how much goes where or to whom. No I don't need this particular church in my life thanks. I avoid problems like this. Guess you could say I had enough. However, there are still some good members there, trying to hold on. Hoping to bring the church back to Jesus. I hope they can...truly. Pray for them and pray for the body of believers in general that are there. It's a ship afloat without a captain or direction.

Anonymous said...

It's very difficult to watch all of this unfold. 99% of this charade is Dog's issues. You put stink bait on a hook, you will not pull a rose out of that swamp. You keep putting garbage on the internet and pretty soon you start stinkin'! What a shame that Christians are acting like this...Going to court and suing....shut this website down! We love ya Bro but we don't support this mess!

Anonymous said...

"It's very difficult to watch all of this unfold. 99% of this charade is Dog's issues. You put stink bait on a hook, you will not pull a rose out of that swamp. You keep putting garbage on the internet and pretty soon you start stinkin'! What a shame that Christians are acting like this...Going to court and suing....shut this website down! We love ya Bro but we don't support this mess!

November 18, 2010 10:08 AM
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You got to be kidding when you say "we love ya Bro" as banning his wife from being on church property is in my eyes nothing but showing the City of Jacksonville how BULLIES at First Baptist really behaves.

Forget it, the Watchdog supporters are behind him 100% of going forward with this blog!

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

I can feel the love bro!

Long Time FBC Jax Member said...

Just when I thought that FBC Jax could not be more corrupt, there is the story about Judge A.C.Soud. Another disgrace this Deacon and Trustee has brought to this church!! Will it ever end?

I think we just have to keep in mind what Brother/Pastor Rod always says...."worse and worse."

May God have mercy !!

Grateful FBC Jax Mom said...

Somewhat off topic, but still relevant:

I would just like to take this opportunity to give sincere love and thanks for the Revs. Marcus Allen, (South Campus pastor), Chris Eppling (High School pastor), and Dan Elkins (Middle School pastor) serving at FBC Jax.

These men, and many others, faithfully serve their respective flocks week in and week out, and very rarely get the kudos and appreciation they deserve. No one refers to them as "anointed" or "God's man", yet they work extrememly hard as humble servants of the Lord. Our kids are shown fine examples of what being a Christian brother/servant really is.

I am greatly encouraged by these men. Keep up the great job, and know that there are many who respect and admire you!!

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Well said FBC Mom. Thanks for expressing that.

Anonymous said...

25. Hinson testifies that “I think the tone, the rhetoric–the tone and the–I don’t want to use rhetoric as a word because–the tone and the comments that were made by this unknown blogger, the fact that he was unknown, the fact that he had made the comments that he did, the facts that he had independent information that I thought wasn’t commonly known about the residence, I think–I think that all addressed issues for why I had warrant enough to ask for an investigative subpoena.” (Hinson p84 ln 13-21 attached as Composite Exhibit B)

26. When questioned about the tone of the articles Hinson explained that unknown author was “calling members of the church sheeps [sic] or goats or something like that. And I might not be exactly accurate on that, but it was derogatory [sic] speaking of members that blindly followed.” (Hinson p83 ln 25, p84 ln 1-3 attached as Composite Exhibit B)

27 Generally, Hinson felt that the publication of information regarding the Pastor that was “not generally known” combined with “derogatory” remarks about the congregation and staff justified the issuance of the investigative subpoena. (Exhibit G)

Me thinks that Hinson just justified why church sheeps [sic] were justified in being called sheeps [sic] or goats or something like that. Seems to me Hinson is not really smart enough to be in his position at the sheriff's office on his own abilities. This is just one person's opinion.

Anonymous said...

WD, did Google or Comcast violate any laws that would allow a win in a lawsuit? Are they required to contact a company or an individual to let them protest a reveal of identity that you are aware of? If not, can cases such as yours get the laws change to at least allow a company or individual to put up a defense in court to not release an identity?

Anonymous said...

Question?
Does anyone know if Hinson, member of the Sheriff's Department is still on the payroll of FBCJ for security. He's surely a poor representative of law enforcement.

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

I think the obvious question is:

- who invited Hinson to be on the newly formed discipline committee? Why would a committee that is made up of wealthy, influential church members who are trustees, invite a police officer to be on the committee? Hmmm....

- Whose idea was it to form a discipline committee in the first place in the bylaw changes of December 2007?

Hmmmmm.....

Yaakov said...

Tom, I am still really angry about what happened to you and your wife. I was so relieved to read the document describing what Hinson did spelled out so clearly. He should lose his job and his certification at a minimum. He does not deserve to be an officer of the court. He has discredited the profession and actions like his are what cause people to dislike and not trust law enforcement. I have always maintained that he violated your Constitutional rights and that is a grievous sin. He was showing off to FBC Jax higher ups and they could care less and will throw him under the bus if push comes to shove. Thank you for hanging in there. I hope everyone realizes that what happened to you could happen to us. If it does, I hope that we would have the courage that you have exhibited and fight back as you are. Shalom

Anonymous said...

Me thinks that Hinson just justified why church sheeps [sic] were justified in being called sheeps [sic] or goats or something like that. Seems to me Hinson is not really smart enough to be in his position at the sheriff's office on his own abilities. This is just one person's opinion.

November 18, 2010 2:57 PM

Hinson was trying to deflect this away from Brunson to some degree...in other words, not make it only about him.

No One Special said...

Wow, 71K to be a church spy, nice. Maybe if there was true justice, he would lose his golden parachute city pension. HAHHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, ok, like that would ever happen, but it should.

Bannished Blogger said...

It seems to me that Hinson was smart enough to determine that the unknown blogger was a very good reason to investigate. Mr. Hinson was certainly justified to investigate. Here you have an unknown blogger with information, public or not, about Brunson. Your writing was and still is a bit more than a passing fascination and bordering on obsession.(in my opinion)

Say what you would like, but that is my church, my pastor, and my family. If someone is conducting themselves in this manner then I want it...no, I demand that it get investigated.

I do not think that any more needs to be said about the motivation behind the investigation. I hope and pray that you understand why the motivational issue should not be dealt with publicly on this blog.

Maybe, just maybe, this blog and you are not as big of a deal as you think that you are and the investigation was conducted with integrity and you were outted as a result.

Let's see if you have the guts to print the opposing point of view.

All in my opinion.

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Thanks anon. Spoken like a true religious zealot. Too bad most people outside of your church circles downtown see just the opposite of what you do.

"Your church, your pastor, your family" - maybe that is your obsession, keeping you from seeing things as they are.

No One Special said...

Banished Blogger, or is it Det. Hinson, nice try, there was no reason to investigate other than the fact the Chairman Mao wanted to know who it was making the statements. He had his henchmen do the dirty work and he can now claim he knows nothing like Sgt. Schultz from Hogan's Heroes. Plausible Deniability is what they call it normally.

Banned Blogger said...

Who are these "Most" people?

The ones that like some anonymous "blogger" tearing down their church? The ones that like your insulting and condescending tone and superior arrogant attitude? The ones that like to be dragged into a lawsuit? Is it the "most" people that like to be compared to as lemmings because they disagree with you?

Are those the "most" people that you refer to?


Is it that "vast majority" that you write of? Do you really think that this blog and it's poster's represent "most?" You think that you are some kind of authority on what "most" people think?

I think most people think that you are just a mean, spiteful, and rude person. (all my opinion)

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

I'm not going to persuade you, but just open your eyes to information that is available on this case. You're in the minority.

Bill said...

Just reading through the Partial MSJ Motion file, Hinson gave some interesting answers.

Somebody else said it, reading it in this form really puts it all together.

So many questions that I have, too bad I can't ask Hinson myself.

What independent information that is not commonly known about the residence did you publish?

I would like to see Jack McCoy ask some hard questions, (no offense to your current counsel).

I read the article you linked to the other day about the special court to speed up the process of foreclosures. Good to see the good judge is doing the Lord's work in extracting His money from these sinners, 25 sinners per hour! POOF!!

Anonymous said...

Who are these "Most" people?

The ones that like some anonymous "blogger" tearing down their church? The ones that like your insulting and condescending tone and superior arrogant attitude? The ones that like to be dragged into a lawsuit? Is it the "most" people that like to be compared to as lemmings because they disagree with you?

Are those the "most" people that you refer to?


Is it that "vast majority" that you write of? Do you really think that this blog and it's poster's represent "most?" You think that you are some kind of authority on what "most" people think?

I think most people think that you are just a mean, spiteful, and rude person. (all my opinion)

November 18, 2010 9:19 PM

I think MOST people value their civil rights and do not like government employees breaking the law. Except those in cults of personality.

Anonymous said...

@624, What law was broken?

Lynn said...

It really doesn't enter into it how many people agree or disagree on either side. This country is based on the rule of law-not majority rule. Which comes in handy if you ever find yourself in the minority. YOU have rights also.

Katie said...

Dear Banished Blogger,

I find your comments to be lacking any substantiation, maybe even outright lies. How dare you speak out against WD in an anonymous fashion? I have a good friend who is in law enforcement. Shall I ask him to unmask you simply because we disagree? I'm thinking there is a house in Afghanistan with your next address on it. That is the nature of the TaliBan you know? Disagree and be stoned to death. That's how they silence their critics.

The Framers weep at your sick argument.

Anonymous said...

The ones that like your insulting and condescending tone and superior arrogant attitude? The ones that like to be dragged into a lawsuit? Is it the "most".........

Arrogance? Supeior attitudes? Condescending? The rabid defenders of their celebrities is amazing, especially when the facts are clearly documented. Stop your baptiist jihad against those who date to question the so-called leadership. Sir, look at the lack of integrity among the ranks of FBCJAX and legal system and tell me that is not some kind of abuse.

Another clueless, sightless worshipper of a celebrity. What a country club, how dare we complain about how they conduct the finances, the by-laws, and now using law enforcement to institute their inquisition.

You are a pitiful. Soud, Hinson and 'teflon-Mac' lead that charade. Go ahead, get in lock step with them, you seem so loyal to their cause. But is their cause, really HIS cause?

Think about it kool-aid man.

Garlando

Anonymous said...

@624, What law was broken?

November 19, 2010 8:17 AM

Did you not read Louis' analysis? It is not so simple to say a "law" was broken. But there are processes and rights that have to be considered and we see that they were not.

Did you also not read the link Tom gave in this article? Should google or comcast contacted Tom before giving the information out?

It was harder to determine since Hinson destroyed the files...which most likely he knew and did not want a trail. That was very clever of him to wait the time period, destroy the investigation information and then give the name out. Very clever, indeed. It could have been worse.

Mac and Hinson were trying to censor free speech. And they used a government employee to use his influence to do so. Serious business.

You probably don't mind this if Mac is doing it but would mind when it is Obama. I mind when anyone misuses their position whether a pastor or a government employee. And here, both claim to be Christians. I do wonder at what the unbelievers think reading the link Tom provided. FBCJax looks like the Gestapo.

Anonymous said...

At least Tom publishes their comments and interacts with them. Perhaps he could try to find out who they are through a law enforcement buddy on his payroll...wait! Tom does not have a law enforcement person on payroll.

Tom, that sort of thing is reserved for celebrity preachers...sorry. But then, you are not as thin skinned as Mac.

Anonymous said...

At least Tom publishes their comments and interacts with them. Perhaps he could try to find out who they are through a law enforcement buddy on his payroll...wait! Tom does not have a law enforcement person on payroll.

Tom, that sort of thing is reserved for celebrity preachers...sorry. But then, you are not as thin skinned as Mac.

WishIhadknown said...

To criticize people for their use of superlatives in a post in a blog shows a condescending tone and a superior and arrogant attitude.

Anonymous said...

Dog:

Thanks for the plug.

I am still just shaking my head over this. None of it makes any sense.

One Anon asked about the "Tone" of the posts (I think that was the word Hinson used).

It's not inconceivable that someone might write something that sounded strange and had "tone" to it that justified some investigative action.

But it is clear that even Hinson did not know what he was talking about when he mentioned the "tone" of the letters. He was pressed for an explanation, and could give none. His deposition is tortuous. He is just twisting in the wind.

If I were asked as a member of a board or something about the "tone" of a blog, I would recommend that an expert be consulted to see if there was any basis for concern determined by an objective third party who was trained in such things - psychiatrist or such (btw - who did NOT go to the church and sit on the Discipline Committee).

I suspect that "tone" here for Hinson simply means "I did not like what the blogger was saying."

That is supported by the fact that information was sought on New BBC and Christa Brown.

I had no way of knowing what the facts of this suit would turn out to be.

I suspected that the church would have lined up all the facts - the missing mail, the stalking, getting some independent analysis etc.

But they did none of that.

And they ADMITTED they did none of that.

Dog, I have to ask, how could you and your lawyer not keep your mouths from dropping open or laughing your heads off at this?

This had to be like catching fish out of a barrel.

It's clear that a staff person asked Hinson to do an an investigation - and he did it. And that's it.

It would be like the administrator asking me at church to "file a lawsuit against Joe Smith", and I just hauled off and did it. And when asked later why, I said, "Well, I was told to. And I did not like the way Joe Smith acts (even though nothing he did was a criminal or civil wrong).

With no basis other than a nebulous, but completely untrained and unexplainable reference to "tone."

I bet the Dog and his lawyer fell out of their chairs during these depositions.

I bet the State Attorney's office is really angry. If I had been the lawyer who authorized the subpoena, I would be really hot.

Hinson put that lawyer's job and reptuation in jeopardy.

The people of that church deserve a more thoughtful and knowledgeable leadership that does not get them entanlged in lawsuits like this.

Louis

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Louis - I appreciate your insights.

Next week I will be telling a story that no one knows about that came out of deposition. It was one of the "oh crap" momemts that one would expect in hours and hours of depositions. If you think leadership at the church is inept, wait until you hear this. But let me tell you, if we believe that Brunson had nothing at all to do with this mess as he testifed to, then it points primarily to one man, and that man is the most respected judge in Jacksonville. I was found in contempt of his church, so to speak, and this set the whole ball into motion.

And as far as laughing our heads off at Hinson's deposition....not in the least. I can tell you when Blount, the adminstrator admitted that Hinson was a deacon AND on the discipline committee, I nearly fell out of my chair in disbelief because this never came up in Hinson's depo. But this all was serious business like I've never experienced before. Someone like myself that is completely inexperienced in legal processes, I can't tell you what it is like to be in a room with your very young (although talented and BRAVE) lawyer, and sit in a room with a police officer who pulled subponeas on my blog, and next to HIM are 3 lawyers from the city of Jacksonville, 2 lawyers from the Attorney General's office in Tallahassee, 1 lawyer from the FBI (since Hinson does work for them), the church's lawyer - and some of these lawyers, one in particular with the city, was incredibly disrepectful to my lawyer during depositions...and there is me, my wife, and my lawyer and his assistant. It was truly David vs. Goliath, and my lawyer kept Hinson for the full 6 or 8 hours, the same amount of time they deposed me for and did a great job in digging for the truth.

Anonymous said...

Dog:

Thanks for that perspective.

It's always easy to see things like this in hindsight, after the transcripts are typed up etc.

I am sure from your end that it was uncomfortable since you don't do that kind of thing every day.

But I bet the lawyers for the JSO and SAO were very uncomfortable, even though they may not have looked it.

I have seen this situation more as a civil rights and privacy case. Hinson was a layman, and did not get paid for what he did, though the administrator was in the loop and ordered it.

I don't remember the particulars of your other lawsuit, but I would not want to be the church's lawyer or their insurer.

They are boxed in by the testimony that has been given. The facts seem pretty much set in stone, as far as I can see.

Louis

Anonymous said...

God was with you WD. And many of us have been praying and will continue to do so. You may have been outnumbered, but not with the Lord on your side. Right is right, and you were in the right!

Anonymous said...

Before a subpoena is issued to discover facts that are not known the individual who is acting as a plantiff I believe has to sign an affidavit. Also, there is a fee that is paid for the service of process. Did this occur and if so, who signed it before the SAO and who endorsed the check? I cannot believe that the detective would/could have started this all by himself????

Anonymous said...

And people tell us to "trust" our leaders.

Anonymous said...

FBCJax has an attorney? Is this person on staff?

Banned Blogger is a MORON said...

Banished Blogger - if the church did nothing wrong, why they didn't just call Tom up, or go visit him, and say "Hey Tom, we didn't want to accuse you wrongly, so we had Robbie do some investigative work and find out the identity of the blogger critical of our church. So we now know it is you and would like to ask you if there is anything we can do that might address your concerns so that this blog would not be necessary? We love you and Yvette and are here to minister to you and your family. We will be glad to do what we can to address your concerns, but please stop criticizing the pastor and staff. We believe it is wrong and that it hurts our church and hurts you and your family. Thanks.

Or, why not tell the truth. Why not say, we had Robbie open an investigation and subpoena your records. Because they KNEW what they did was wrong. They tried to keep it a secret and thought they would never be found out.

And, why have sermons about "shutting em down" and "your not as anonymous as you think you are" and "the wheels of the God's grind slow" and then issue a deacon's resolution and make a presentation at a deacon's meeting about Tom where he is not afforded any due process, and demand he appear before a discipline committee without any witnesses,and why trespass his wife, and on and on?

They mishandled this every step of the way and you now suggest that "Maybe, just maybe, this blog and you are not as big of a deal as you think that you are and the investigation was conducted with integrity and you were outted as a result."

You are scary. And it is people like you that made our forefathers want to get away from the state church of England and the Catholic church of Europe. Ever hear of the establishment clause?

And one more question for you....finally, if everything was conducted with integrity as you suggest...then why after hundreds of hours of discovery did the city and state voluntarily pay Tom $50,000?

Nuff said. Your comments make no sense. You are either a moron or a kool-aid drinking zealot. My opinion only of course. :)

Anonymous said...

"Maybe, just maybe, this blog and you are not as big of a deal as you think that you are..."
___________________________________

We don't think the blog is a big deal. But Soud's actions. And Hinson's involvement, and perhaps Mrs. Brunson thought it was a huge deal that had to be shut down and confronted. Maybe some day we will all find out how Mrs. Brunson viewed this little insignificant, not a big deal, beauty shop gossip, blog. Hmmmmm.

And maybe the bully judge's deposition in the pending slander lawsuit will shine more light on who said and did what, and why.

The real litigation has yet to even get started.

Paralegal said...

I don't remember the particulars of your other lawsuit, but I would not want to be the church's lawyer or their insurer.

They are boxed in by the testimony that has been given. The facts seem pretty much set in stone, as far as I can see.
___________________________________

Louis - I agree. It was another monumental mistake in a long line of mistakes in the handling of Tom and his religious blog. To actually settle this case AFTER hours and hours of deposition locked in the church, and key players, under oath subject to penalties for perjury, will only hurt them as they try to defend the malicious slander per se suit against Mac Brunson, and potentially, A.C. Soud may be brought in as a co-defendant for his actions and words. Just like he threatened a legal aid attorney with contempt for no reason, he may have to be held accountable for his actions in slandering a good man like Tom.

Soud is already on record as drafting the initial 16 sins letter hand delivered to Tom, drafting and reading the deacon resolution, barring Mrs. Rich from hearing her daughter sing on a Wednesday night, serving on the discipline committee, denying Mr. Rich the right to speak at the deacon's meeting, denying him the right to have a witness or record the discipline committee he was "summoned" to attend. This is the same judge that was called a liar, a fraud and a bully by the Rolling Stone magazine article.

Thanks for your insights Louis.

Anonymous said...

"Maybe, just maybe, this blog and you are not as big of a deal as you think that you are..."

Such intellectual discourse

Anonymous said...

Guys,

You are seeing one side of this. The blog is not that big of a deal. I doubt that anyone is taking it very seriously. I really doubt that the blog was at all central to the investigation that was conducted. It would not surprise me that Tom and the Blog get minimalized in the trial proceedings.

I learned of Tom's identity from news stories and I am not sure who spilled the beans. It would not surprise me to learn that Tom is the one that went public. It seems that the church responded and perhaps over reacted to learning that Tom was the unknown blogger in the broad investigation. You have to admit that he is a menace and should have absoulutely been put on notice and invited to explain himself to the church.

If the explanation is "I have the right to free speech and to say what I want, no matter who gets harmed, then that explanation might be deemed unacceptable."

I doubt that anyone is going to get roped into playing Tom's game. I would think that the best defense here is just an ole. Apologize to Tom for getting his feelings hurt and calling him a name. If Tom believes that he is out some money then just pay the man what is reasonable.

Sorry you got caught up in a security investigation.

The church did send out a couple of pastor's to Tom's home and met privately. As far as I can tell, they had every intention of keeping the matter private.


If Tom wants a big fight then don't pay him and give him the fight he so desires.

If Tom wants to admit he was wrong for starting a blog designed to harm the church and agrees to behave himself then maybe one day he might be allowed back on property.

Anonymous said...

'Ole Mack-eeesss, back in townnnn..... Cool song, bad reality.

Mac left us here in Dallas right in the middle of 'God's Vision' for a $45 or 48 million dollar facility. (whats a few million anyhow, it's not a big deal as you think it is.....) Sure.

Seemed he felt a 'call' to go to Jacksonville. Hmmm, how timely, and that free land must have looked really purty.

Thought that was strange that he up and left like that, with us to hold the bag. My apologies for thinking you guys 'stole' our preacher.

Nahhh, you can have him. You wanted him, you got him, warts and all. And some lawsuits, and some dischord among the brethren, and all this noise the world is watching and thinking.......
'Now why would I want to go to church, or be one of 'dem christian types."

Garlando.

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Great hypotheses you put forth Anon. Problem is, they've all been debunked by hours and hours of depositions.

And if I need to admit that I'm a dirty rotten sinner out to hurt the church to get back on the church property, what is the path for my wife to be allowed back on the property? To publicly apologize for "associating with" me?

:)

Anonymous said...

"You are seeing one side of this. The blog is not that big of a deal. I doubt that anyone is taking it very seriously. I really doubt that the blog was at all central to the investigation that was conducted. "

One of the problems with your entire comment is that you will NEVER see the other side because the mega does not want you to see behind the curtain. On many other matters, too. The lawsuit is opening the curtain just a tiny bit.

Mega's hide all sorts of things behind the curtain all the time. Most folks would be appalled at what goes on back there. But being an ignorant pew sitter is just as well with most. They have no clue how much sin they are enabling by liking their ignorance and following man. They want to pay someone else to tell them what to think, believe and do. They want to be entertained and told they will have no financial problems if they just pay 10% to the church. Much like Indulgances. All of thiss is easier than abiding in Christ.

Anonymous said...

His tithe then: $7,184 per year. So I guess he is putting at least $138 in the offering plate EVERY week. (Not including his income from the church itself.)

November 17, 2010 10:31 PM

I'm pretty sure that regardless of what you can access thanks to the Sunshine laws of this state, the amount that Hinson tithes or does not tithe is none of your business, unless of course you are God. Anon- how much do you pay to charity, to your church, to your bills and other obligations and personal desires? You have the audacity to post these suppositions regarding this guy, how about you post your own?

Anonymous said...

"Wow, 71K to be a church spy, nice. Maybe if there was true justice, he would lose his golden parachute city pension. HAHHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, ok, like that would ever happen, but it should."

Spoken like a TRUE Christian. You people are the poster children for what is wrong with religion in this country. Go ahead. Say I'm a Brunson supporter, I attend FBC, yadda yadda yadda. No matter how you deflect my comment, saying that someone's retirement should be taken for unmasking a guy who was too afraid to make these comments using his own name is absurd. Tis the season- for you "Christians" to demonstrate why there are so many lost people in the world.

Anonymous said...

What if the watchdog had been an employee of a company and was terminated because the president of the company didn't appreciate his comments. Wouldn't he have a legal right to bring an action against that company and also get back pay and his job back. I think he would and maybe even more if a jury awarded him so.

Thy Peace said...

What if the watchdog had been an employee of a company and was terminated because the president of the company didn't appreciate his comments.

NYT > Company Accused of Firing Over Facebook Post

Anonymous said...

"What if the watchdog had been an employee of a company and was terminated because the president of the company didn't appreciate his comments. Wouldn't he have a legal right to bring an action against that company and also get back pay and his job back. I think he would and maybe even more if a jury awarded him so."

Well, luckily he's not an employee of a company who terminated him. He's just a guy that has nothing better to do with his time than to stir up controversy in an already destroyed society. It's guys like this, and the frivolous lawsuits they file, that clog up our legal system, and place additional burden on Joe Q. Taxpayer. Never fear ANON, WD will continue having an impact on impressionable minds for years to come, almost like the mega-church pastors he is so against.

No One Special said...

Anon November 21, 2010 6:36 PM,

Yea normally I would say that the pension should be off limits, but he is a city employee, a officer of the court in a position of authority, performing a function at the direction of a private church. As far as I am concerned, he should be fired and an appropriate punishment would be to lose his pension or at the very least pay a large fine of at least 50,000, the amount of money the the City, we the taxpayers, had to pay due to the stupidity and actions of this city employee.

Anonymous said...

I've just read the first part and I am sitting here with my mouth dropped. At the number of times I read the words..."possible criminal overtones". Stunned. What the heck?

Anonymous said...

I read this blog for several years and I gotta say I don't see the need for all the stink, FBI lawyers, what the heck...dont these people have anything better to do like go catch some freaking terrorists or something? People are people and people have opinions and until we become Communist China...uh, thats the way the cookie crumbles so stop wasting our taxpayers money and investigate TRUE CRIMES. So, the thought police aren't supposed to exist in the United States of America. I may not agree with a word watchdog says or his thoughts, but his THOUGHTS and writings don't make him a criminal....MY GOSH I NEVER IN MY LIFE SEEN SUCH A STRETCH OF LOGIC!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is truly scary. And if Dr. Brunson really said, "leave it alone" then more power to him. And if thats a lie, I hope its "discovered".

Anonymous said...

Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression, to turn aside the needy from justice and to rob the poor of my people of their right, that widows may be their spoil, and that they may make the fatherless their prey! What will you do on the day of punishment, in the ruin that will come from afar? To whom will you flee for help, and where will you leave your wealth? Nothing remains but to crouch among the prisoners or fall among the slain. For all this his anger has not turned away, and his hand is stretched out still.