AndyH, July 19, 2006, 08:01
Hooray! The system works!
What better way to start the day than to see that GenB's article was shit-canned, as well it deserved to be.  (reply to this post)

Reader, April 6, 2004, 14:22
As Seen in the New York Times Online
BOSTON, April 5 — The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston has reached settlements with four men who say they were sexually abused by the Rev. Paul R. Shanley and who opted out of an $85 million agreement brokered last year with hundreds of people who say they were abused by priests.

The settlements, reached late Sunday night, mean that nearly all of the civil cases against Father Shanley, a central figure in the sexual abuse scandal here, have been resolved.

A court order involving two of the men who settled Sunday had prompted the release of thousands of pages of documents, including personnel files of clergy members, detailing a pattern of shuttling abusive priests from parish to parish. The documents galvanized attention to the scandal here, leading to the resignation of the archdiocese's leader, Cardinal Bernard F. Law, in December 2002.

The two men, Gregory Ford and Paul Busa, said that beginning when they were 6, Father Shanley took them out of religious education classes at St. Jean's Parish in Newton and sexually abused them in the rectory, confessional, bathroom and other places at the church. The names of the other two men who settled Sunday were not released.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs did not reveal specifics of the settlements, but said payments would be larger than the maximum of $300,000 in last year's settlement.

One of the lawyers, Roderick MacLeish Jr., said one victim would receive what he believed to be the highest award for a sexual abuse case in Massachusetts. Until now, that had been $1.4 million, with interest, he said.

Father Shanley, 73, still faces criminal charges involving Mr. Ford, Mr. Busa and two other men, one of those who settled Sunday and another who settled in December. Father Shanley was freed on $300,000 bail in December 2002. His trial is scheduled to start on Oct. 12.

Mr. MacLeish said more than 50 people had accused Father Shanley of abuse. Documents show church officials transferred him from parish to parish despite receiving numerous complaints about him, including that he endorsed sex between men and boys. Father Shanley was assigned to the Diocese of San Bernardino, Calif., in 1989 and removed from active ministry in 1993, when Boston officials revealed complaints of abuse by him.

In a statement, Archbishop Sean P. O'Malley said he hoped the settlement would "bring some measure of healing to the Ford family."
  (reply to this post)

Sakura, February 11, 2003, 06:00
calling them out
Jules, I was wondering if you would consider putting a proper list of abusers up on this website. It could be benificial to any future legal action. Somewhere that the abused could submit names and any other information that might help to identify them or, better still, to get their real names...just a thought.  (reply to this post)

FROMnANGEL, April 4, 2005, 05:43
Be Carful
Just a heads up...

If you are planning to take action against these people, you may not want to make their names public information just yet. Later this could work in the defence attorney's favour. An argument could be made that the information was made public and that the motive for the alegations could be money related. It could also work against you as slander.

Your best to make statements about your experiences with a local Police Dept. or have a physician document the information you have. This way the aligations are dated and documented before hand, before it became public information on your forum... Don't give them something to play against you.

It would be very gratifying to "SHAME" those responsible as they "MUCH" deserve, I do totally agree there.

It would also help you compile similar events and further information on specific individuals. If you are looking to find people with similar experiences you might be better off having them contact you at a locked site or personal email, so that the information is being gathered by one person and not shared public until you have the information and evidence you need.




(reply to this post)

Jules, February 12, 2003, 12:00
Good Idea
That is a good idea Sakura. I actually own the domain name thefamilysucks.com and have been planning to put something like this as a separate site under that domain (sort of like an offenders registry).
(reply to this post)

sakura, February 22, 2003, 14:20

Cool, let me know when you get it running...I've got some names to start up the list.
(reply to this post)

Full Moon, December 10, 2002, 04:12
False fronts
Please tell me if I am wrong, but when you invite someone for lunch/dinner, don't you usually pay for it, since you invited the person in the first place? (I'm not talking about friends you hang out with every week, because we always go half and half on those occasions.) I have received calls/e-mails from a couple of Family members saying, "Let's meet for lunch/dinner.", and then they try to "witness" to me (ie: "You remember so and so? GBH, she's now taking care of all the JETTS, plus she's the personnel TWer, she's always taking the initiative, and such a gem and a blessing. GBH!", or "The recent GNs about prophecy has been so amazing, and the power is there, and if you don't exercise those muscles now...etc, etc, etc."), and then when the bill comes, they always turn a blind eye to it, like it doesn't even exist, or that they just assume I'm going to pick up the tab. I always pay for it (I bet some don't even bring enough money for their meals, probably their transportation there and back), and I see how they must have had this time as "Follow-up" on the home schedule, their CTP. I don't even respond to their "Let's meet together."s anymore. It's stupid. And I'm tired, so good night to all, and thanks for reading my rantings.  (reply to this post)

Jerseygirl, December 10, 2002, 10:02
"You never loose by giving"???
What a shocking lack of etiquette!!(LWOL)The attitude I always get from members is that we're the rich systemites who should do all we can to give to the Lords work. What a joke--now I'm in the system and can CHOOSE my own charities(or not)thank you very much!!
(reply to this post)

JoeH, December 11, 2002, 01:08
yeah
dude, what the hell are you doing having lunch with these people in the first place?
(reply to this post)

Full Moon, December 12, 2002, 00:57

I was trying to still be on good terms with Family folks so that I will be looked on as the "good, sweet ex-member". Yeah, it was stupid. I was just used. Now I really don't care if I have 10,000 people (or is it more?) who hate me, there are 6 billion other people in the world. What was I thinking?! I really don't give a damn about what they think about me. Yeah!
(reply to this post)

BlackAudi, November 26, 2002, 22:14
I really tried to be fair...
Most of my family is still CM, and I really tried to be fair about my outlook on the Family, but when my sibling recently got in trouble and on some restriction for watching something that was not in his age bracket (and mind you, that movie is on the Family rating list, it's just rated for Jr. Teens!), that really pissed me off. He's getting in trouble for something that happened 6 months ago when I was still in the Family, I took him to see it myself in the theater. I blame this one person in the home who has her head up her ass, and nit-picking on my bro, and he's one of the shyest and sweetest boys I know. Aren't there bigger problems to be dealt with?! I feel like reeling my siblings out one by one as they get older.
Oh, and I asked this one CM person to be my reference as I tried to get a job, I asked him, please, just say good things about me so I can a starting job. Well, he apparently talked to my potential employer like he was having an open heart talktime with someone in the Family, and proceeded to mention my NWOs. Thanks. I knew I could depend on you. I was turned down for that job, but I got a system person as my reference the next time, and I got the job. What to think?   (reply to this post)

--, December 3, 2002, 01:19
still upset?
I know when I first left and changing jobs I was scared that my employer was going to talk about all my "nwo's" to my new potential employer. I was comforted in hearing that that is illegal. I'm not sure if the rules are the same when a nonemployer is your reference. But, if you didn't do anything illegal they can't say anything bad about you. Otherwise it's defamation of character which involves wrongfully hurting a person's good reputation. And breaching this duty orally involves the tort of slander. If your still really upset about this you can sue this person, or for future reference:

"In a case alleging slander, however, the plaintiff must prove "special damages" to establish the defendants liability. The plaintiff must show that the slanderous statement caused the plaintiff to suffer actual economic or monetary losses. (Did you get hired at that job?) etc etc etc.
(reply to this post)

BlackAudi, December 4, 2002, 01:38
I see where you're coming from...
...but what am I to do? Sue TF and have them all come after me and pray against me? Unrealistic, right? I think (I hope!) TF person didn't purposely try to make it difficult for me to get a job, but was just ignorant of the whole reference thing, or was so used to pouring out his heart that he couldn't help himself? I didn't get the job where I put TF person as reference, but then for the next interview, I asked friends of the Family that I knew from before, and I got the job, so I really should just forgive and forget...
(reply to this post)

Jules, December 4, 2002, 02:10
Oh no, not the prayers
If you would rather forgive and forget, then good for you. On to bigger and better things. However, I don't think anyone should be afraid of doing something they feel is right because the Family might pray against them though. The Family has being praying against me for quite a long time now, and every year brings more happiness, more friends, a better living standard, more money, progression in my career and more of my dreams realized. So Family members, if you are reading this, please do more of what you are doing. :p
(reply to this post)

JoeH, December 3, 2002, 15:17
actually
They're allowed to say anything truthful that they want, however, most employers will refrain from saying anything to avoid the costs of litigation.
(reply to this post)

Auty, December 4, 2002, 01:44
Clarify Please
I'm under the impression that employers are not allowed to ask past employers or references anything they want. I believe they have to follow a very strict questioning line to avoid legal issues.

Were you talking about references/past employers saying anything they want?
(reply to this post)

FROMnANGEL, April 4, 2005, 05:59
References
An Employer cannot reveal anything negative about an employee or former employee.

The employer calling the reference is not entitled to ask negative questions such as "was she ever late" or "how many days did she miss while employed by your company"...Instead can only ask positive questions such as "Would you hire them back" or "how long did you employ her".

Your employer cannot say you were fired or reveal any problems with your employment such as disiplenary actions eg. written warnings...

This would be against the law!
(reply to this post)

JoeH, December 4, 2002, 15:24
yes
If you say something that's true, you can't get in trouble, but you may have to go through a court case, which is why most business skirt the whole issue by declining to give any information other than dates of employment and salary.
(reply to this post)

Ex-member, December 4, 2002, 10:24

Yeah I was under the impression that all they are actually allowed to say is whether or not you did, in fact, work there. -Nothing about your performance, why you left, punctuality etc. But that is just hearsay. I am also interested in any info or advice anyone might have on a particular situation I have.

I took a job at a "sportsbook" about 6 mos ago. Basically it is a huge bookie company which takes sports and other wagers by phone or internet. I usually work in administration but they don't pay that well here and my boyfriend who has a good position here got me the job as an execitive assistant to the CEO of the company.....problem is, now we broke up and I want to go back to the States. How do I account for this time in my resume? I feel that the mere mention of a sportsbook would be damaging to my chances of gettig any decent job even tho I never actually had anything to do with Wagering and was not planning on even putting it on my resume.

Any ideas......?
(reply to this post)

PompousJohn, December 4, 2002, 17:30
Investment Firm, heh heh
The fact is you were an executive assistant, that's the important part, you don't have to go into the details of what the company does. If it has a neutral sounding name i.e. "Allied Investments" you can just use that. Or you could say that it was an investment firm or something (very, very high-risk, fast-paced, illegal-in-most-states investments) investment is a gamble, so why can't gambling be investment?
(reply to this post)

katrim4, December 4, 2002, 18:12
I had a similar problem
I'd worked as a receptionist for a mens club for a couple of years and when I moved and wanted to get a different sort of job I used the parent name company which didn't sound at all like an entertainment/bar type thing. I got the job I wanted even thought they did find out later what kind of a place it was. Just don't lie about it as that is what can be used against you not having worked somewhere just because it's not quite "kosher".
(reply to this post)

page: 1 | 2     next page>