Full Version: J. Stephen Spence joins EJ (unmoderated)
From: (*oo*) (EMBROIDBABE) [#51]
3 Apr 2005
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#7] 3 Apr 2005
Knowing you sold poison like that would make me think twice, whether it's history or not!
From: Rallyguy [#52]
3 Apr 2005
To: gt350ed [#49] 4 Apr 2005
From: (*oo*) (EMBROIDBABE) [#53]
3 Apr 2005
To: Pete (AWARDMASTERS) [#8] 3 Apr 2005
Dave,
I'm with you on this!
Tammy
"everything is proceeding on course" for Michael Jackson also, that does not mean that I would look forward to doing business with him or that I would buy his music.
At least in my mind, there is a tremendous difference in selling grass and the charges that have been brought against Stephen Spence. My litmus test is would I be happy to have him in my home around my wife and children? I could care less about how entertaining his writing is.
When he gets his court appearances behind him and if he is acquitted, then I will revisit my opinion of him.
I know I will hear from many that a person is innocent until proven guilty - and that is a valid point. I am not saying he is guilty, but with the gravity of the charges against him, I personally do not care to offer any support or sympathy until everything that is "proceeding on course" has run its course.
For the same reasons that I would never take a child to "Neverland".
From: (*oo*) (EMBROIDBABE) [#54]
3 Apr 2005
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#10] 3 Apr 2005
Harvey,
What you are missing here is that there were cameras found in the ladies room at his place of business and child pornography on his computer. But then I guess it's only a smoking gun right?
Tammy
Until the trial and verdict, to me he is another person with a cloud over his head. How many innocent people have gone down and out due to suspicions? How many guilty have gotten away with murder?
This is the hardest topic to talk about for me until all of the "facts" come out. "All" will never come out, so there will always be suspicion.
I do not support a person who is truly guilty of what he is 'accused' of doing, but certainly do not want to shun someone who is innocent.
Others must do what they feel is right in their gut and hope that they are correct. As for me, I truly do not know for sure what my feelings are.
From: Pete (AWARDMASTERS) [#55]
3 Apr 2005
To: (*oo*) (EMBROIDBABE) [#51] 3 Apr 2005
From: (*oo*) (EMBROIDBABE) [#56]
3 Apr 2005
To: Pete (AWARDMASTERS) [#55] 3 Apr 2005
I did find a few "interesting" comments in several different posts David made. With an accusatory tone towards Michael Jackson yet support Spence....go figure :-S
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#57]
3 Apr 2005
To: (*oo*) (EMBROIDBABE) [#54] 3 Apr 2005
I have not yet seen proof that there were cameras there, nor that he himself put them there or had knowledge of them.
With that proof, my stance will certainly change to guilty, even if acquitted on some other quirk of the law.
Till then, I only have questions.
From: Rallyguy [#58]
3 Apr 2005
To: Pete (AWARDMASTERS) [#55] 3 Apr 2005
I think the fact that he was a drug dealer explains alot Pete. And I don't mean that in jest. I think that bending of the rules is ok in his eyes if it gets him by.
"as long as he isnt hurting anyone" is the normal excuse given for stuff like that. The problem is that the dealer never thinks they are hurting anyone, neither does the guy that collects child porn.
From: Rallyguy [#59]
3 Apr 2005
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#57] 3 Apr 2005
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#60]
3 Apr 2005
To: Rallyguy [#58] 3 Apr 2005
I think you mistook a line in his post.
"If you found, that in a past life, I was a marijuana dealer, would you demand that I remove myself as moderator of this forum?"
The operative word is "IF".
Was he? I do not know, but I suspect that it was an 'if' point, not an 'I was', point.
From: Rallyguy [#61]
3 Apr 2005
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#60] 4 Apr 2005
Hi Harvey,
I wish I had mistook a line...
Here is a copy of the full post.............
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) 1 Apr 02:07
To: gt350ed 1 Apr 04:41 7 of 60
1049.7 In reply to 1049.6
Ed,
Obviously, since we're dicussing dirty laundry, the issue isn't just hanging there.
Let me ask you this:
If you found, that in a past life, I was a marijuana dealer, would you demand that I remove myself as moderator of this forum?
I was.
David "The Stunt Engraver" Lavaneri
DGL Engraving
Port Hueneme, CA
EDITED: 01/04/05 02:08 GMT Standard Time by DGL
ÂÂÂÂÂ
EDITED: 3 Apr 2005 by RALLYGUY
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#62]
3 Apr 2005
To: gt350ed [#49] 4 Apr 2005
Ed,
Has Stephen been accused of shortchanging a customer, or not paying a supplier? That's an ethics issue.
We don't have a morality committee. You can head that one up.
David "The Stunt Engraver" Lavaneri
DGL Engraving
Port Hueneme, CA
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#63]
3 Apr 2005
To: (*oo*) (EMBROIDBABE) [#51] 4 Apr 2005
Tammy,
Poison?
Try calling it that to the many chemo patients and others who benefit from its beneficial properties. Of course its not being offered by pharmaceutical corporations, therefore, it's just plain old poison.
I'm not claiming I was in the "Medical Marijuana" business. I was a Rock n' Roll guitarist, and at the time (70's/80s) we considered it more along the lines of "art supplies."
David "The Stunt Engraver" Lavaneri
DGL Engraving
Port Hueneme, CA
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#64]
3 Apr 2005
To: Rallyguy [#59] 4 Apr 2005
Brian,
It may be a mistake to support the guy at this stage, but you seem to be OK with condeming him at this stage.
By the way, if memory serves, you're fairly religious.
How do you reconcile your position, with the teachings of forgiveness etc?
What I'm gathering, from what you've said, the death penalty itself would be too humane a sentence.
David "The Stunt Engraver" Lavaneri
DGL Engraving
Port Hueneme, CA
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#65]
3 Apr 2005
To: ALL
This thread is officially closed to posting, until such time that new facts pertaining directly to the Stephen Spence case come to light.
David Lavaneri
Forum Host/Moderator
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#66]
4 Apr 2005
To: Rallyguy [#61] 4 Apr 2005
Sorry David, I must reply to Rallyguy.
My error. You are correct, I missed that even on the second reading. (Very embarrassed by my statement.)
From: Dee (DEENA-ONLY) [#67]
4 Apr 2005
To: ALL
I am speaking for myself and not Harvey & I.
I am tired of the nastiness I see going on here. I thought this was a forum for a group of professionals to exchange ideas, thoughts, and helpful hints on their chosen profession. It is seemingly degrading into a forum where people are vying to one up each other with nasty comments. Why can't we all drop the subject and get back to the business of doing business?
Dee
From: Pete (AWARDMASTERS) [#68]
4 Apr 2005
To: Dee (DEENA-ONLY) [#67] 4 Apr 2005
Dee,
I am sorry that it is uncomfortable for you and I very much understand your feelings.
People have different values and different opinions about the importance of things. I abhor drug dealers. They cause about as much human suffering as anyone alive and are the direct cause of a large part of the crime in our country. I do not see how anyone can sit by and listen to someone who admits to dealing drugs and then tries feebly to justify it. Drug dealers are the scum of the earth.
So I find if very difficult to just stick my head in the sand and go back our regular discussions like none of this ever took place.
I do apologize for any distress I may have caused you. You have always been a particularly helpful and caring person.
From: UncleSteve [#69]
4 Apr 2005
To: Pete (AWARDMASTERS) [#68] 4 Apr 2005
That is about the same way I feel about bars and alcoholics..... keep pouring until they can't stand up and then throw them out in the parking lot to drive home....
Oh, almost forgot! Then the judges charge them with DWI instead of homicide and make them do community service.
From: LtHousLady (NANCY) [#70]
4 Apr 2005
To: Pete (AWARDMASTERS) [#68] 4 Apr 2005
So true Pete, but we can usually have an idea of where a person is coming from by their past comments/behaviors. When you see the importance of things change like the wind with a person who prioritizes according to how well it suits his cause at any given time, it's rather irritating. You'll never be able to guess where they'll come from next.
After claiming freedom of speech for so long, this thread was closed to stop continued comments about a person in the industry, yet comments like the following are allowed to continue still. After all, it's freedom of speech!...copied from post on Apr 2nd.
So as you asked earlier...what kind of person are we dealing with?
I saw the perfect description posted earler......One with situational ethics.
I thought it back then when I argued against the continued derogatory name calling & attacks on a certain member & I still think it now after what I've seen here.
EDITED: 4 Apr 2005 by NANCY
Show messages: 1-10 11-30 31-50 51-70 71-82