Author Topic: WWASP Back in court again  (Read 2511 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« on: August 26, 2006, 06:04:05 PM »
WWASP was sued back in June for fraudulantly claiming they were giving students legitimate diplomas and school credits, when in reality they were not. They are being sued in NY for $100,000,000:
Press release - Ivy Ridge: http://webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?SES ... &aId=17516

On August 25, 2006, WWASPS was sued again, this time with allegations of Child Abuse, Fraud, Breach of Contract, Conspiracy, Gross Negligence, RICO Violations, False Imprisonment, Assault, Battery, and More Salt Lake City. Press release - Cross Creek and High Impact: http://webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=19171

Complaint - Cross Creek and High Impace: http://caica.org/IVY%20RIDGE%20CLASS%20 ... 20SUIT.pdf
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2006, 06:05:15 PM »
Yeah? Really? Which non-WWASPS program did Sue refer him to next?  

You guys act like you're doing something different or better than WWASPS. You're not.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Lawyers are the heros here
« Reply #2 on: August 27, 2006, 08:49:09 AM »
Who cares where the kid is, fact is he is out of WWASPS! You guys are so hung up on this Sue that you can't see the point of this story. My God who cares about Sue.  I am so happy that WWASPS will be spinning their wheels in court and with lawyers it is the main point.  My vote if for the brave lawyers taking them on!  We talked to many that wouldnt touch this, so this firm will be getting my call.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #3 on: August 27, 2006, 09:14:57 AM »
Fuck off, Sue.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2006, 11:03:31 AM »
Yeah, please do talk to the lawyer and be sure and tell them that it's your kid who deserves to be rewarded for their pain and suffering.

What did YOU do to help your kid?  You probably had them abducted and hauled off to one of these facilities and left them there to fend for themselves.

And now you want YOUR money back?

Sorry, that's just too pathetic for words.

THese lawyers should tell the parents they will only represent the child.

The kid signed no contracts.  Didn't hire thugs to yank him out of his bed.  Didn't agree not to have contact with his parents for months, even years.

You parents may be sorry now but no one forced you to pay to keep your kid in a hellhole.  To abuse them behind closed doors.

Shame on you all.  I hope you give every penny to your child.  You robbed them of their dignity and now you are stealing part of their future.  Gluttons! Take your names of that lawsuit.  Show some real remorse.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Lawyers are the heros here
« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2006, 11:21:17 AM »
Quote from: ""Guest""
Who cares where the kid is, fact is he is out of WWASPS! .



And what good is that gonna do if Sue and Izzy tell his parents to send him to yet another mindfuck?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #6 on: August 27, 2006, 05:15:06 PM »
This may be a dumb question, but the lawfim takes about 40% of any amount won by the plaintiffs, right?  Plus their (the lawfirm) expenses because they have to pay themselves back for the costs incurred of conducting an nvestigation, depositions, motions filed, etc.

Does CAICA or PURE get a referral fee for referring parents to this lawfirm?  How does this actually work?

Who is doing the investigative work?  The law firm or someone on the outside who is charging them for their services?  

Just wondering.  These lawsuits are not inexpensive to bring.  A lot of people are gonna be taking their cut of the pie before the kid ever sees a dime.  I guess it's better than nothing but I wouldn't be so naive as to think these people are recruiting clients for "justice" or to shut WWASPS down.  

It's the money, stupid!

 :silly:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #7 on: August 27, 2006, 05:19:34 PM »
Forgot to ask:  Is there a statute of limitations?  How long does a kid have to sue?  What about kids who have been out of the program a long time?

Can we get some details here or do we have to go through CAICA or PURE?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #8 on: August 27, 2006, 06:39:56 PM »
Get an arena.

Put an arsenal of weapons in the dead center, and put all of WWASPS on one side while putting all of PURE and company on the other side.

Put the results on pay-per-view.

Then snipe the survivors.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #9 on: August 27, 2006, 07:02:19 PM »
***This may be a dumb question, but the lawfim takes about 40% of any amount won by the plaintiffs, right? Plus their (the lawfirm) expenses because they have to pay themselves back for the costs incurred of conducting an nvestigation, depositions, motions filed, etc.

There may be exceptions, and one can certainly negotiate the fee structure with their attorney, but typically any half way decent attorney is going to take 40% which includes all expenses associated with the suit, that you listed above. 50% if it goes to trial.
Our attorney hired support staff (paralegals) to do research/investigative work, which again, was included in the 40%.

***Just wondering. These lawsuits are not inexpensive to bring. A lot of people are gonna be taking their cut of the pie before the kid ever sees a dime.

No, there should not be "a lot of people taking a cut".  If anyone is paying more than the 40-50% to the attorney, something's wrong. No fees should be charged for an attorney referal. If someone needs an attorney well versed on the industry they can post a request here and someone will respond. Do not pay an advocate for a referal.

***Forgot to ask: Is there a statute of limitations? How long does a kid have to sue? What about kids who have been out of the program a long time?

This too may vary, but typically four years.

Kids who are beyond the SoL can provide sworn statements which can show the abuse/neglect/fraud to be a long-term problem, not something that's relately new.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #10 on: August 27, 2006, 07:39:49 PM »
Could someone please show where in the press release that  it says potential plaintiffs or anyone has to go through sue or isabele or caica or pure? actually the press release gives the number to call the firm DIRECTLY and nothings says to call caiaca or pure or sue or isabele.

If any of you knew anything about the law and how things work you'd understand it doesn't work that way. All it looks like they are doing is making an anouncement and letting people know where to go get help. they say to call the lawfirm they dont' say to call them.

can't you people ever see the bigger picture and instead of wasting all this time and energy into negative go out there and do smoethign. seems they did. at least they are out there doing somedthing to benefit this cause. what have you done? what are you doing? are you jealous? cause that's how its' sounding.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #11 on: August 27, 2006, 07:47:03 PM »
Quote from: ""Guest""
Could someone please show where in the press release that  it says potential plaintiffs or anyone has to go through sue or isabele or caica or pure? actually the press release gives the number to call the firm DIRECTLY and nothings says to call caiaca or pure or sue or isabele.

If any of you knew anything about the law and how things work you'd understand it doesn't work that way. All it looks like they are doing is making an anouncement and letting people know where to go get help. they say to call the lawfirm they dont' say to call them.

can't you people ever see the bigger picture and instead of wasting all this time and energy into negative go out there and do smoethign. seems they did. at least they are out there doing somedthing to benefit this cause. what have you done? what are you doing? are you jealous? cause that's how its' sounding.




Fuck you!!  Sue's "cause" is Sue.  When she stops referring to programs, then we'll talk.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #12 on: August 27, 2006, 07:49:48 PM »
The Sudweeks at Whitmore Academy are being sued in a civil case for the SAME charges.  Strange that Sue at PURE seems to think the Sudweeks are just fine folks, and supported them all through the criminal investigation and continued to refer children to this known abusive program.
It has been posted that Cheryl Sudweeks is even negotitiating a plea bargain in the criminal case
.
Neither PURE or CAICA is issuing PRESS RELEASES about the Whitmore civil lawsuit. HOW COME?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #13 on: August 27, 2006, 07:51:40 PM »
Now, who could be "jealous" of someone who makes money from referring children to abusive programs like Sue Scheff, or of someone who supports such a person, like IZZY?
Get real!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
WWASP Back in court again
« Reply #14 on: August 27, 2006, 08:02:18 PM »
Quote from: ""Guest""
can't you people ever see the bigger picture and instead of wasting all this time and energy into negative go out there and do smoethign. seems they did. at least they are out there doing somedthing to benefit this cause. what have you done? what are you doing? are you jealous? cause that's how its' sounding.



So do tell, what has Sue done for "the cause"?  Hmmm?  The bigger picture is that TBS/RTC/BM programs are fucking dangerous.  Period.  What the hell are Sue and Izzy doing about that?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »