Author Topic: Sue Scheff Reveals What Led to the $11.3 M Victory (Read 7734 times)

Anonymous · « **Reply #45 on:** October 18, 2006, 02:24:28 PM »

It is a precedent. That's how the law works - lawsuits set precence. Laws are in place but when a suit is won it helps others down the road and that's why they call it "setting precedence." Not that any law has changed.

Anonymous · « **Reply #46 on:** October 18, 2006, 02:26:21 PM »

Ignorance is bliss I guess.

Still confused about Scheff "declaring she WON this lawsuit against WWASP."

Wasn't she simply just found NOT GUILTY?

That's not actually winning anything, is it?

Of course it's winning when you fight a battle in court with someone - whether you are the plaintiff bringing the suit forward or whether you are the defendant defending yourself, it's a fight and someone wins and someone loses.

Anonymous · « **Reply #47 on:** October 18, 2006, 02:39:23 PM »

Quote from: ""Guest""

It is a precedent. That's how the law works - lawsuits set precence. Laws are in place but when a suit is won it helps others down the road and that's why they call it "setting precedence." Not that any law has changed.

Right, except in this particular case, there was no defense. Nothing to challenge the merits of the plaintiff (Scheff's) allegations. No cross examine of the plaintiff or her witnesses, including any "expert" testimony. Jurors are the "triers of fact". What facts did they try? See what I mean ... it was one-sided. The true test will come on appeal, if there is one. That's where the judge's rulings will be examined by a higher court to determine if there were any errors and if so, how egregious were they. Judges have been reversed on appeal ya know. Happens everyday in this country and Ms. Bock certainly is entitled to pursue an appeal if she so chooses.

Who was the judge in this case? Might be interesting to look up his record on appeal?

Anonymous · « **Reply #48 on:** October 18, 2006, 02:43:10 PM »

Quote from: ""Guest""

When I first heard of this $11.3M judgement, it sounded like Carey was the victim. Now I think maybe, maybe not. It sounds more and more like a business dispute between two women who took shots at each other on the internet...

What business was Carey in to have had a business dispute with Sue?

Anonymous · « **Reply #49 on:** October 18, 2006, 11:20:37 PM »

"Wish somebody would explain who or what the Trekkers are since this name has come up more than once on Fornits.

Also, what is CAICA's connection with PURE and is she a Trekker, too?"

Trekkers is a list serve created by Donna Headrick. she died in the summer of 2002 and Sue Scheff took it upon herself to put people on Trekker or take them off and mostly without the persons knowledge. Donna was convicted of some kind of fraud and she and sue were trying to open programs or refer to programs for money. Marie Peart is now Sues business partner and they split the referral fees they squeeze from parents. I heard but dont know for sure that Marie was convicted of some kind of stealing and she is or was related to Bob Lichfield who runs WWASP.

Does that answer your question? Maybe Sue Scheff can add to this so we knwo the whole story of trekkers. Sue--chime in anytime here. Oh yea Jeff Berryman was a trekker.

Anonymous · « **Reply #50 on:** October 18, 2006, 11:21:39 PM »

CACA was not a Trekker I'm told but she would like to be.

Anonymous · « **Reply #51 on:** October 19, 2006, 10:40:08 AM »

This Trekker list serve still exists?
Who would want to belong to such a thing, with such a seemingly back-stabbing group of people?
Besides Izzy that is.

BuzzKill · « **Reply #52 on:** October 19, 2006, 11:41:04 AM »

I have been a Trekker. I was invited to join sometime around the first part of 03. I left the list the first time due to concerns over how Susan was trying to hijack the plaintiff list in the CA case, to add people to her witness list with out first consulting them. Then, after Carey sold her hard drive to WWASP ( it took awhile to learn just how much she got for it; and that she had actually sold the Hard Drive. At first ,we thought she had just forwarded her files to wwasp ) I went back on the list. This lasted until March of 05, when the situation with Whitmore got so heated, and Susan got so angry with her friends who were counseling her to halt referrals, until matters were settled. As far as I know the list is still going, but I am not on it. Much like the BBS.

Most of the people on the Trekker list are good people. Well intentioned. Jeff included. Some have begun to see that Carey's suspicions regarding Susan were correct after all. Some say so; other do not. Others are so blinded by her aura they can not see the light. But I'd say they are generally a very good bunch of people.

As the above poster says - Trekkers is just a private email group. It was a list serve; meaning that if a member emailed another member threw the list serve account, every member got a copy.

Most of the back stabbing gossip took place off the list serve in private email. Sue was very prone to pick a member and snipe at them privately.

Anonymous · « **Reply #53 on:** October 19, 2006, 06:18:58 PM »

So Scheff wanted something (a list of plaintiffs) from the 1st lawsuit to use for her own defense against WWASPS? Isn't this somewhat akin to what Carey wanted (the name of a staff member who was not a minor) that alleged they were the victim of a sexual assault at Dundee? Or am I reading this wrong? Whatever became of this lawsuit? The one Scheff promoted on her own website? Did some of those plaintiffs from the 1st lawsuit testify at the WWASPS v. PURE trial? And why are Scheff/Zehnder involved in a second lawsuit (Turley)? Why two lawsuits?

Anonymous · « **Reply #54 on:** October 19, 2006, 09:12:04 PM »

Is this for real? Is this total and complete fraud-on-the-public actually pretending she can write now? Or maybe her side kick Cackie-Wackie is doing the writing for Sue-Sue? Hey Sue-Sue maybe you could have cackie-wackie write a lulaby about the torments of your life as a rich person. Maybe you could include touched up pictures of yourself so no one can see how ugle you really are even with a nose job.

"My book, ?At Wits End?, is a place many parents end up when dealing with a difficult teen, as I did. It is also a place I ended up while defending myself. This book will chronicle both trials as well as much more. Look for it in spring of 2007."

Anonymous · « **Reply #55 on:** October 20, 2006, 10:43:53 AM »

How old is this daughter of Sue-SUE's now?
Gotta wonder if this daughter is tired of being the center of what ever one says is Sue-SUE's little money empire--after all, if this girl was abused after her mother enrolled her in a WWASP program; maybe she doesn't want to be the topic of any book about her mother being at her "wit's end."
Gotta feel sorry for this girl.
This girl being sent to a WWASP program by her mother, being part of lawsuits--if Sue-SUE has in fact brought suit against WWASP for her daughter's supposedly abuse in the WWASP facility--now possibly being discussed again in some book.
What kind of person just seemingly flaunts their kids like this?

Anonymous · « **Reply #56 on:** October 20, 2006, 10:51:30 AM »

Quote

after all, if this girl was abused after her mother enrolled her in a WWASP program; maybe she doesn't want to be the topic of any book about her mother being at her "wit's end."

Maybe she'll sue her mother for libel. Wouldn't that be a trip?

Now can we please shut up about this mindless crap? Sue's like the world's biggest troll and all of you just keep feeding her.

Anonymous · « **Reply #57 on:** October 21, 2006, 04:18:42 AM »

This really is kinda stupid. The blogosphere wasn't represented at trial. What's to discuss? Whether this was a default judgement? What else could it be if neither the defendant nor her attorney was present for trial?

Anonymous · « **Reply #58 on:** October 21, 2006, 05:34:36 PM »

Really - this is stupid. :wstupid: All these "trekkers" seem to have one up on each other - a bunch of middle aged people with nothing better to do? What a waste.

Just because "Buzz" says it's so doesn't mean it is - that goes for just about everyone posting here. Remember whatever you hear on this place is one-sided and there are so many people with vendettas against others its impossible to get the truth here. One person's truth is another person's lies here - it's pretty obvious.

Not to speak of the fact it's an open forum that claims has no moderator (not true either) so anyone can say anything they want. WWASPS and others post here, don't kid yourself if you think they don't. :flame:

I think some of these trekkers jumped on the bandwagon with the Turley firm against WWASPS. Really it's more complex and deep than anyone will ever know and the truth just isn't going to be told here. You can't believe a thing anyone says here any more. It's a crying shame. :cry2:

The only thing I think is worth anything on this site is the news and there's so little of that these days it's hardly worth coming here. Just a bunch of angry people click-click-clicking away on their keyboards.

Anonymous · « **Reply #59 on:** October 21, 2006, 07:36:35 PM »

I think some of these trekkers jumped on the bandwagon with the Turley firm against WWASPS. Really it's more complex and deep than anyone will ever know and the truth just isn't going to be told here. You can't believe a thing anyone says here any more. It's a crying shame

And this is important because ....?

:roll:

Fornits
Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry