tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post7242335653275895517..comments2024-03-07T00:24:23.674-05:00Comments on FBC Jax Watchdogs: Washington Lawyer at Citizen.org Writes About Subpoena Issues in FBC Jax Blogger Case, and Posts Copy of Motion for Summary JudgementFBC Jax Watchdoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10740366031265491559noreply@blogger.comBlogger65125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-42107632112172230822010-11-23T21:49:29.285-05:002010-11-23T21:49:29.285-05:00Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and th...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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-28636316612084865222010-11-22T14:30:39.812-05:002010-11-22T14:30:39.812-05:00I read this blog for several years and I gotta say...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".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-80429623877247408662010-11-22T14:14:00.764-05:002010-11-22T14:14:00.764-05:00I've just read the first part and I am sitting...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?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-69394324910160533322010-11-22T12:49:48.918-05:002010-11-22T12:49:48.918-05:00Anon November 21, 2010 6:36 PM,
Yea normally I wo...Anon November 21, 2010 6:36 PM,<br /><br />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.No One Specialnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-51082209126610571952010-11-21T21:17:24.197-05:002010-11-21T21:17:24.197-05:00"What if the watchdog had been an employee of..."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."<br /><br />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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-23444691911478205932010-11-21T21:05:17.140-05:002010-11-21T21:05:17.140-05:00What if the watchdog had been an employee of a com...<i>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</i>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/09/business/09facebook.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=employee%20facebook%20comments&st=cse" rel="nofollow">NYT > Company Accused of Firing Over Facebook Post</a>Rameshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09728392311602332613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-88949221990102744312010-11-21T20:08:15.339-05:002010-11-21T20:08:15.339-05:00What if the watchdog had been an employee of a com...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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-87471739234485931502010-11-21T18:36:56.922-05:002010-11-21T18:36:56.922-05:00"Wow, 71K to be a church spy, nice. Maybe if ..."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."<br /><br />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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-57483671590553514932010-11-21T18:30:21.143-05:002010-11-21T18:30:21.143-05:00His tithe then: $7,184 per year. So I guess he is ...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.)<br /><br />November 17, 2010 10:31 PM<br /><br />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?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-13525510225040562142010-11-21T12:48:33.342-05:002010-11-21T12:48:33.342-05:00"You are seeing one side of this. The blog is..."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. "<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-47900439672742693942010-11-20T23:03:50.449-05:002010-11-20T23:03:50.449-05:00Great hypotheses you put forth Anon. Problem is, t...Great hypotheses you put forth Anon. Problem is, they've all been debunked by hours and hours of depositions. <br /><br />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?<br /><br />:)FBC Jax Watchdoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10740366031265491559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-32871041617993817812010-11-20T23:01:19.847-05:002010-11-20T23:01:19.847-05:00'Ole Mack-eeesss, back in townnnn..... Cool so...'Ole Mack-eeesss, back in townnnn..... Cool song, bad reality.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />Seemed he felt a 'call' to go to Jacksonville. Hmmm, how timely, and that free land must have looked really purty.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.......<br />'Now why would I want to go to church, or be one of 'dem christian types."<br /><br />Garlando.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-60920278012004024902010-11-20T22:51:57.513-05:002010-11-20T22:51:57.513-05:00Guys,
You are seeing one side of this. The blog ...Guys,<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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. <br /><br />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." <br /><br />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.<br /><br />Sorry you got caught up in a security investigation.<br /><br />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.<br /> <br /><br />If Tom wants a big fight then don't pay him and give him the fight he so desires. <br /><br />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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-51005432319996718722010-11-20T18:08:08.729-05:002010-11-20T18:08:08.729-05:00"Maybe, just maybe, this blog and you are not..."Maybe, just maybe, this blog and you are not as big of a deal as you think that you are..."<br /><br />Such intellectual discourseAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-64495370476904974342010-11-20T17:28:49.797-05:002010-11-20T17:28:49.797-05:00I don't remember the particulars of your other...I don't remember the particulars of your other lawsuit, but I would not want to be the church's lawyer or their insurer.<br /><br />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.<br />___________________________________<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />Thanks for your insights Louis.Paralegalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-80040186036051370512010-11-20T17:22:37.434-05:002010-11-20T17:22:37.434-05:00"Maybe, just maybe, this blog and you are not..."Maybe, just maybe, this blog and you are not as big of a deal as you think that you are..."<br />___________________________________<br /><br />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.<br /><br />And maybe the bully judge's deposition in the pending slander lawsuit will shine more light on who said and did what, and why.<br /><br />The real litigation has yet to even get started.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-75532314432830371162010-11-20T17:19:43.326-05:002010-11-20T17:19:43.326-05:00Banished Blogger - if the church did nothing wrong...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.<br /><br />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. <br /><br />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?<br /><br />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."<br /><br />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?<br /><br />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?<br /><br />Nuff said. Your comments make no sense. You are either a moron or a kool-aid drinking zealot. My opinion only of course. :)Banned Blogger is a MORONnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-38915357114659604592010-11-20T13:59:11.556-05:002010-11-20T13:59:11.556-05:00FBCJax has an attorney? Is this person on staff?FBCJax has an attorney? Is this person on staff?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-89492260707284965962010-11-20T13:58:16.799-05:002010-11-20T13:58:16.799-05:00And people tell us to "trust" our leader...And people tell us to "trust" our leaders.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-19592734231452201452010-11-20T10:01:43.280-05:002010-11-20T10:01:43.280-05:00Before a subpoena is issued to discover facts that...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????Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-82496894370194185192010-11-19T17:55:57.690-05:002010-11-19T17:55:57.690-05:00God was with you WD. And many of us have been pray...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!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-6718352583371439932010-11-19T17:54:39.779-05:002010-11-19T17:54:39.779-05:00Dog:
Thanks for that perspective.
It's alway...Dog:<br /><br />Thanks for that perspective.<br /><br />It's always easy to see things like this in hindsight, after the transcripts are typed up etc.<br /><br />I am sure from your end that it was uncomfortable since you don't do that kind of thing every day.<br /><br />But I bet the lawyers for the JSO and SAO were very uncomfortable, even though they may not have looked it.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />I don't remember the particulars of your other lawsuit, but I would not want to be the church's lawyer or their insurer.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />LouisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-63566125270187305632010-11-19T16:01:09.400-05:002010-11-19T16:01:09.400-05:00Louis - I appreciate your insights.
Next week I w...Louis - I appreciate your insights.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.FBC Jax Watchdoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10740366031265491559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-21795449727067741262010-11-19T15:40:30.144-05:002010-11-19T15:40:30.144-05:00Dog:
Thanks for the plug.
I am still just shakin...Dog:<br /><br />Thanks for the plug.<br /><br />I am still just shaking my head over this. None of it makes any sense.<br /><br />One Anon asked about the "Tone" of the posts (I think that was the word Hinson used).<br /><br />It's not inconceivable that someone might write something that sounded strange and had "tone" to it that justified some investigative action.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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).<br /><br />I suspect that "tone" here for Hinson simply means "I did not like what the blogger was saying."<br /><br />That is supported by the fact that information was sought on New BBC and Christa Brown.<br /><br />I had no way of knowing what the facts of this suit would turn out to be.<br /><br />I suspected that the church would have lined up all the facts - the missing mail, the stalking, getting some independent analysis etc.<br /><br />But they did none of that.<br /><br />And they ADMITTED they did none of that.<br /><br />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?<br /><br />This had to be like catching fish out of a barrel.<br /><br />It's clear that a staff person asked Hinson to do an an investigation - and he did it. And that's it.<br /><br />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).<br /><br />With no basis other than a nebulous, but completely untrained and unexplainable reference to "tone."<br /><br />I bet the Dog and his lawyer fell out of their chairs during these depositions.<br /><br />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. <br /><br />Hinson put that lawyer's job and reptuation in jeopardy. <br /><br />The people of that church deserve a more thoughtful and knowledgeable leadership that does not get them entanlged in lawsuits like this.<br /><br />LouisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-65332278891940027832010-11-19T15:37:10.091-05:002010-11-19T15:37:10.091-05:00To criticize people for their use of superlatives ...To criticize people for their use of superlatives in a post in a blog shows a condescending tone and a superior and arrogant attitude.WishIhadknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12487727353887788291noreply@blogger.com