Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Rude Intrusion on October 07, 2006, 07:05:41 PM
-
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1160039129767 (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1160039129767)
Jury Awards Woman $11.3M in Internet Defamation Suit
Daniel Ostrovsky
Daily Business Review
October 6, 2006
A Weston, Fla., woman who spoke out publicly against a Utah-based company affiliated with a controversial chain of boarding schools for troubled teens around the world has won an $11.3 million Internet defamation verdict.
On Sept. 19, Susan Scheff and her Weston-based company, Parents Universal Resource Experts Inc., won the jury verdict in Broward Circuit Court against Carey Bock, a woman whom Scheff helped in getting Bock's two sons out of a school in Costa Rica. The judgment included $5 million in punitive damages.
Scheff filed the suit in December 2003, alleging that Bock posted defamatory statements about her on an Internet bulletin board viewed by parents of troubled teens, according to court pleadings.
The verdict is the latest chapter in the increasing volume of litigation around the country over the content of Internet sites, blogs and online bulletin boards.
"This is a new area of law," said Scheff's attorney, David H. Pollack of Miami. "The problem with the Internet is people can post anything about you and it can destroy you."
Pollack said that his client previously offered to settle the case for $35,000.
Scheff, who bills herself as an educational consultant, "tried to do something to help other parents and she wound up sort of being the object of hateful and vindictive statements," Pollack said. Scheff and her company sometimes get paid for their referrals.
The message of the verdict "is you just can't go out there on these blogs and slander and defame people without having any facts to substantiate what you are stating," Scheff said.
Bock could not be reached for comment before deadline. Her former lawyer, Jan D. Atlas of Adorno & Yoss in Fort Lauderdale, did not return a call for comment before deadline.
According to the suit, Bock had sought the help of Scheff and her company to refer her to an educational consultant who could get her sons out of a school affiliated with the Utah-based World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools. Pollack said the consultant succeeded in doing so.
After getting the boys out, from June 2003 through December 2003 Bock accused Scheff and her company of being "crooks," "con artists" and "frauds" who "exploit[ed] families" and place[d ] children in "risky" and "possibly abusive" programs as well as of operating a "scam," and being "no different than [the World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools]," according to Scheff's suit.
Pollack said that a witness at the trial testified that Bock turned against Scheff after Scheff refused to help her contact a minor who allegedly was sexually abused at one of the World Wide-affiliated schools. The witness said Bock wanted to contact the minor for a documentary about the schools.
Among other things, Scheff's company has provided information to parents of troubled teens about World Wide affiliated schools.
The suit originally named Ginger Warbis, the owner of the Internet bulletin board, as a defendant. She later was dropped as a defendant in the suit. Warbis' lawyer, Philip Elberg, of Medvin & Elberg of Newark, N.J., sharply criticized Scheff and other people who refer parents to programs for troubled teens.
"People in this industry have consistently used their money and their access to lawyers to silence critics of the industry and this may be one of those examples," Elberg said. "Sue Scheff is simply another person in the industry of people who make money from the plight of frightened parents."
Scheff had her own experience with World Wide, Pollack said. She had enrolled her daughter at one of the for-profit organization's affiliated schools in South Carolina. She later formed her company, which refers interested parents to schools for troubled teens.
World Wide sued Scheff for defamation in Salt Lake City. World Wide claimed that stories about its schools posted on Scheff's Web site were defamatory. But in 2004 a jury ruled in Scheff's favor.
According to Pollack, Bock was first represented in the Broward Circuit Court suit by Adorno & Yoss, but the law firm dropped out of the case. He said Bock then refused to participate in court proceedings and her pleadings were stricken by Broward Circuit Judge John T. Luzzo.
Bock was not present for the jury trial, which was held to determine damages only, Pollack said.
Poor conditions and physical abuse by the staff at several World Wide schools have been alleged in lawsuits and numerous media reports around the country.
According to the Internet site of the nonprofit International Survivors Action Committee, at least nine schools either directly affiliated with World Wide or personnel affiliated with World Wide have been closed following investigations by authorities.
Articles in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel and the Miami New Times have publicized allegations of abuse at the Jamaica-based school Tranquility Bay, which is popular with parents in South Florida.
-
What do they put in the water in Florida?
-
Yeah - it sounds wildly out of all reasonable bounds. Do take note though, that Cary failed to appear at her trial. My guess is that had she shown up, and had she defended her comments, this might have had a very different outcome.
-
::puke::
-
***David H. Pollack of Miami. "The problem with the Internet is people can post anything about you and it can destroy you."
No, Mr Pollack. The problem is Programs can "treat" kids anyway they want, and can destroy them, kill them, without any "consequences".
So, which of Carey's statements were lies, and which were truths that were difficult to prove? Will we ever know?
-
No matter how many people Sue-Everyone Scheff sues, she's still a stupid, manipulative cunt who loves referring kids to torture centers for her own profit, and she's not fooling anyone when she says otherwise.
And I'll gladly testify to that indisputable fact in any court of law.
-
Bitch could have at least shown up....wtf?
-
Sue Scheff (PURE) has been chosen as CAICA's advocate of the month, nominated by Isabelle Zehnder, her colleague and friend.
October 2006
CHILD ADVOCATE OF THE MONTH
SUE SCHEFF (click here)
ADVOCATE WHO HAS MADE A DIFFERENCE IN THE LIVES OF THOUSANDS OF FAMILIES, FLORIDA
CAICA would like to recognize the hard work of Sue Scheff, an
advocate for parents and children. Sue helps distraught parents
who are seeking help for their troubled teens.
Sue has worked tirelessly for the past seven years in an effort
to help bring families back together when they have fallen apart.
She provides parents the tools and resources to find help for their troubled teens. Her goals are to help families stay together when possible, and to help locate safe and effective treatment if and when it is necessary.
Her organization, Parents Universal Resources Experts, Inc. (PURE), and the Coalition Against Institutionalized Child Abuse (CAICA), have learned that together we are very effective in helping families - our organizations complement each other. It is our goal to make a difference in the lives of families and to help them recognize the dangers of this unregulated industry.
Sue's daughter was abused at a World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools (WWASPS) facility, Carolina Springs Academy. Upon learning of the abuse not only her
daughter had suffered, but many others as well, she set out to make a difference. In her attempt to warn parents of the dangers of WWASPS, she was sued by this corporate giant.
She fought a legal battle that cost nearly a million dollars in legal fees, won in a jury trial, then was taken back to court on an appeal. She won the appeal. Many people would have given up but she was dedicated to helping families and continued in her quest to make a difference.
If that wasn't enough, she was defamed and her privacy was invaded by a group of people who had a vendetta against her and her organization. They worked tirelessly to bash her on Internet forums. She fought back and just won an $11.3 million dollar jury verdict for Slander, Defamation, and Invasion of Privacy.
$5 million of that was punitive damages meant to punish the defendant. This verdict sends a strong message that free speech can only be taken so far.
Sue is a colleague and she is a friend. I thank her for the tireless work she has done and continues to do.
You can find her website at www.helpyourteens.com (http://www.helpyourteens.com)
-
Shit Speaks! (rolling eyes)
BTW - its seem apparent this is a default judgment due to Carey Bock not being able to attend and defend. This is not a "win". Had a defense been presented, it is quit likely the story would be far different. I wonder if Sue's daughter knows how her momma makes her living? Got a report for us on that Izzy?
-
SUE SCHEFF AND FLORIDA COMPANY WIN EMPTY VICTORY OVER NEW ORLEANS MOM
International Survivors Action Committee (ISAC)
10/7/2006 1:07:27 AM
BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA (October 6, 2006) - On September 19, 2006, Parents Universal Resource Experts, Inc. (PURE) and its founder, Sue Scheff of Weston, Florida won an $11.3 million dollar victory of hollow sorts over a single mom in Texas alleging defamation over the Internet. Although it is doubtful the verdict will be collected, it may serve to chill free speech of those attempting to expose child abuse or untoward business practices and destroy the credit of the mom sued.
The mom, Carey Bock, had publicly criticized the business practices of Scheff and PURE in referring children to allegedly abusive programs. Scheff met the mother?s complaints with a lawsuit.
The mom lacked the financial resources to defend herself or to attend her own trial in Florida. As a result, without the benefit of hearing the mom?s side of the story, a jury had little choice but to award the $11.3 million dollar verdict requested by the lawyer for Scheff and her company.
Before trial, Ms. Bock relocated her small family from the New Orleans area to Texas in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. This, however, did not stop Scheff and PURE from coming full-steam after the mom for alleged defamation and other claims.
According to the Daily Business Review, Scheff also named Ginger Warbis as co-defendant. Warbis, who runs a web site critical of Scheff, obtained a well-know lawyer who successfully defeated Scheff?s claims of defamation: ?Warbis? lawyer, Philip Elberg, of Medvin & Elberg of Newark, New Jersey, sharply criticized Scheff and other people who refer parents to programs for troubled teens. ?People in this industry have consistently used their money and their access to lawyers to silence critics of the industry and this may be one of those examples,? Elberg said. ?Sue Scheff is simply another person in the industry of people who make money from the plight of frightened parents.??
The Daily Business Review, noting that Scheff and her business won effectively only by default, paraphrased Scheff?s attorney, stating, ?Bock was not present for the jury trial, which was held to determine damages only. . . .?
Ironically, a separate lawsuit had been filed in Utah against Scheff and PURE by the World Wide Association of Specialty Programs (WWASP), with similar allegations, resulting in Scheff losing counter-claims. Scheff, however, was not found liable for claims of damage to WWASP that Scheff allegedly caused when Scheff posted Internet statements asserting child abuse by WWASP. Scheff admitted she used false names to do so. Scheff was reportedly told by a Utah federal judge to remove misrepresentations from her web site showing Scheff holds a college degree.
The Florida verdict also ignored abuse allegations at children?s programs to which Scheff refers families because the jury never heard the opposing evidence. The owner of one such program to which Scheff made referrals, Whitmore Academy, recently pled guilty to specified charges in a Utah criminal court.
According to the non-profit International Survivors Action Committee (ISAC), Scheff and her company are on the ISCA ?watch list? for questionable practices that may place children at risk for abuse or neglect. ####
Related Links
www.referralfreezone.info (http://www.referralfreezone.info)
www.isaccorp.org (http://www.isaccorp.org)
Contact Information
Shelby Earnshaw
Founder
International Survivors Action Committee (ISAC)
(540) 522-6231
isaccorp@yahoo.com
-
Why is Sue any different than the rest of those crooks? Honestly, she takes phone calls from frantic parents and (for a referral fee paid to her by the torture chamber chosen) picks one. This makes me ill. I almost lost my son to Bethel Boy's Academy, Lucedale, MS. but rescued him only days later. As a parent I could never imagine starting up my own referral service. Even if I never referred another parent to Bethel. It seems the same way with Sue. She almost lost her daughter to a WWASP school, but turns around, starts up a greedy lowlife business of referring parents to other schools (JUST NOT WWASP). Oh brother. Give me a break. Sue Scheff is right up there with WWASP. She's going to sue anyone who tries to stop her million dollar (child kidnapping) business. Shame on her and anyone else associated with that industry. I also noticed she is listed on ISAC's site as someone to avoid.
-
Scheff, who bills herself as an educational consultant, "tried to do something to help other parents and she wound up sort of being the object of hateful and vindictive statements," Pollack said. Scheff and her company sometimes get paid for their referrals.
I couldn't have said it any better myself! I also wanted to thank Scheff for doing our dirty work, we've been wanting to get back at Carey for a while now! I know, you don't do it for the money, it's all for the kids, right? Suing a mother who helped get an abusive camp shut down, it's all for the kids right?
-
Suing a mother who helped get an abusive camp shut down, it's all for the kids right?
Are you saying that Carey sued a mother who helped get an abusive camp shut down??
-
Sue sued Carey- the mother.
-
Ok... this much I knew, Deb.. But the post almost sounds like it's directed at Carey...
-
Nevermind, I think I get it now... That stuff about the "dirty work" threw me off a little.
-
I wonder if Carey even knows about this?
If she was displaced by Katrina, it seems *possible* that she might not even know there was a trial. Does anyone know if she was properly notified?
-
As posted on CAICA:
Group rates programs for troubled teens
After her own harrowing experience, a Weston mom formed Parents Universal Resource Experts.
By Yvonne Carey
Oct. 08, 2006
Special to The Miami Herald
After failed attempts at family therapy and private counseling, Weston working mother Sue Scheff decided to send her troubled teen to a therapeutic boarding school to ease the tension for both mother and daughter.
Scheff and daughter Ashlyn, 14 at the time, pored over the literature from the few available facilities and settled on one run by The World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools (WWASPS), a Utah-based organization that claims its programs can correct inappropriate behavior in children 12 and older.
Scheff learned her daughter was being abused only after Ashlyn became gravely ill from food poisoning at the facility.
''Another parent from the program called me and asked how Ashlyn was doing and it was only then I found out because her daughter had managed to leak the information to her,'' Scheff said. ``They either told me [Ashlyn] was lying in her letters asking for help or that contact with her was detrimental to the treatment.''
The experience led Scheff to start P.U.R.E., or Parents Universal Resource Experts, an organization that assists parents in finding trustworthy programs for their children struggling with issues like addiction, violence and attention deficit disorder.
''Before P.U.R.E., there was nowhere to go,'' Scheff said. ``We do all the research and legwork for them to find what is available, and then they decide where to place their teens. We prescreen these schools and programs by visiting them and interviewing not only the parents and teens who completed the program or attended the school but also those who are currently in the program or school.''
P.U.R.E. also has a suggested reading list for parents and teens. It is financed by several schools and programs as well receiving private donations, Scheff said, so the service is free.
Terri Pardo of Pembroke Pines said the referral list of doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists and group therapy included an out-of-state source that was perfect for her son, Robert.
''She has firsthand experience to know what it's like to need help. You feel all alone,'' Pardo said of Scheff, noting the popular perception that the parent is at fault and that more punishment is the answer. ``This gave me an alternate source from someone who went through the same thing and it was a great comfort.''
Scheff's plight, and her solution, have gained the attention of the media. Dr. Phil McGraw, host of the popular psychology TV talk show, Dr. Phil, has recommended P.U.R.E. to parents.
According to a June Miami New Times article, at least six other WWASPS programs around the world have been investigated or closed during the past decade, following allegations of abuse or questionable practices.
''Teen boot camp abuse is widely known and a very serious, hot topic,'' Scheff said. ``We don't want to separate the kids from the parent. We want to bring families back together.''
Scheff has written a book based on similar experiences of parents, At My Wit's End, which she hopes to have published by next fall.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on P.U.R.E., visit www.helpyourteens.com (http://www.helpyourteens.com) or call 866-798-2285.
-
http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?t= ... c&start=60 (http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?t=2196&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=60)
Sue Scheff refers chldren to programs for MONEY.
She is paid by the programs.
It has been "said" that Sue Scheff has insurance to pay most of her legal fees. But, you'd have to ask her about that.
In the WWASP vs PURE transcripts: testimony reveals that Sue Scheff was referring children to WWASP programs at the same time she was referring children to other programs through PURE.
It appears that Sue Scheff was, and is in the referring business to line her pockets with money, and BIG MONEY at that.
It also appears that WWASP is a "competitor" of PURE.
Sue Scheff referred the children to the abusive program, Whitmore Academy; and she is supportive of the owner, Cheryl Sudweeks, who is facing a criminal child abuse trial in September.
What's the difference between Whitmore Academy and WWASP, except its size?
~~
You can read the WWASP VS PURE transcript to read the exact testimony that verifies that Sue Scheff continued referring to WWASP programs at the same time she was referring to other programs through PURE. She continued this practice for several months, according to sworn testimony.
It is a FACT that Sue Scheff continued to refer children to Whitmore Academy during the criminal investigation against the Sudweeks; and that Sue Scheff supported the Sudweeks during this criminal investigation, and after Cheryl Sudweeks was charged with criminal child abuse.
~~
The WWASP transcript gives a "time-line:
Sue Scheff enrolled her daughter at Carolina Springs Summer 2000.
She removed her daughter January 2001.
Scheff established Pure February 2001.
Page 165 of the WWASP transcript:
"PURE was established as a 501(c) under the PURE Foundateion, and later changed within a year to a S-Corp." From a non-profit to a profit.(Scheff testimony).
Kevin Richey testimony:
He testified he worked for Teen Help for 7 years.
Page 219
"Sue Scheff had a lot of referring parents that were coming into the program. I was doing my best to help her get paid on the referrals."
Question:
"How long did Scheff continue to send referrals?"
Richey:
"August of the year I left...2001"
Recap:
PURE was established in February 2001.
Scheff continued to send referrals to WWASP until August 2001.
Add it up Ladies and Gentlemen:
Ms. Scheff was sending children to WWASP programs for MONTHS; and at the same time referring children to other "not so UN-ABUSIVE programs" through PURE.
Now, how does a MOM criticize/accuse WWASP for abusing her OWN DAUGHTER, and continue to send other parents and their children to these "abusive WWASP PROGRAMS?"
HOW does anyone do THAT?
~~
This is a COMPLETE list of PURE programs some they stopped refering to for a differnt number of reasons (non-payment and conditional licesing and the program simply ask that PURE stop refering to them then spoke out against them.
Red Rock Academy
Cedar Mountain Academy
Sorenson?s Ranch
Lost Legacy Ranch
Oak ridge military academy
Turning Point
Reality Ranch
Summit Achievement
Skyline Journey
Glacier Mountain Academy
Kids Peace
Harbor House for Girls
Safe Harbor
Harbor House for Boys
High Top Ranch
New Horizons Youth Ministries
Whitmore Academy
~~
There are documents to read about Sue Scheff that are available to the public other that "what you read here."
There's Sue Scheff's deposition that she gave for the WWASP vs PURE trial which is filled with "Sue Scheff lies."
Examples:
Scheff claimed she had a degree: LIE
Scheff claimed to have lawyers and psychologists on her staff: LIE
She merely had an office in the same OFFICE BUILDING with attororneys and psychologist.
Scheff claimed credentials she was lacking.
ETC ETC......
And there is the WWASP vs PURE transcript, itself which presents tesitmony about her referral business and how she was paid by WWASP and other PROGRAMS for referring children to these abusive programs.
~~
If you read the WWASP vs PURE transcript: Sue Scheff testifies about Katie Lank's death at Red Rock, and defends this abusive facility with words to the affect: "Katie didn't die at Red Rock Academy, this girl died AT THE HOSPITAL."
As if it makes any difference exactly where this poor girl drew her last breath of life.
This remark by Scheff makes about as much sense as her testimony about the rape at Sorenson Ranch, when Scheff tries to explain away the rape of a young teenage girl with the words, "....everyone makes mistakes."
Since when is it a "MISTAKE" to rape a child?
~~
-
Sue Scheff is Awarded $11.3 Million in Internet Defamation & Invasion of Privacy Claim in Jury Trial
Parents Universal Resources Experts, Inc.
10/8/2006 11:41:59 AM
The jury sends a strong message that freedom of speech has limits
Broward County, Florida (October 8, 2006) ? The Internet can be as destructive as it can be useful. This case will make people think twice before setting out on a campaign to destroy others.
Sue Scheff?s attorney David Pollack stated, ?No good deed goes unpunished.? Sue Scheff has been a victim of Internet Defamation. After her daughter was abused and harmed at a teen help program (World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools, WWASPS, Carolina Springs Academy), she set out to help others so they would not fall into the same trap.
WWASPS, a corporate giant, filed a lawsuit against Ms. Scheff in 2002 in an attempt to silence her. Ms. Scheff prevailed in a jury trial. WWASPS filed an appeal and again Ms. Scheff prevailed.
It is not often a person is awarded $11.3 million dollars from a jury of their peers. But in the case of Sue Scheff and her organization Parent?s Universal Resource Experts, Inc. (PURE) v. Carey Bock, the jury felt compelled to send a very strong message ? which they have. Included in their $11.3 million dollar verdict, they awarded Sue Scheff and PURE $5 million in punitive damages. ?The punitive damages speak volumes,? says Scheff, ?it was set to punish the defendant for what she did to my children and me. Just because you don?t like someone or what they do, it does not give you carte blanche to post false statements about a person on the Internet.?
Since 2001 PURE and Sue Scheff have helped thousands of families providing various resources for their children as well as works closely with the Coalition Against Institutionalized Child Abuse (CAICA). Isabelle Zehnder of CAICA, said ?you just can?t go around destroying people on the internet. The $11.3 million verdict should send a strong message.? She went on to say, ?We work closely together, our organizations complement each other. We are both against abuse but not against treatment ? there is a big difference.?
In the meantime, Carey Bock maliciously and intentionally started a campaign on an Internet forums against Sue Scheff and her organization, PURE. According to a witness during trial, Ms. Bock?s animosity towards Ms. Scheff had to do with the fact Sue Scheff would not disclose the name of a minor who was raped and Ms. Bock needed this child?s name for a potential documentary she would profit from. Ms. Bock lost that opportunity and went on a campaign to destroy Sue Scheff and PURE. Bock accepted $12,500.00 from WWASPS? attorney, the very organization she claimed harmed her two boys, and the organization that Sue Scheff successfully defeated in a jury trial in August 2004.
One of the witnesses testified Carey Bock was infuriated that Sue Scheff would not provide her with the information about the child. The jurors saw Ms. Bock?s e-mails and postings, one of which threatened: ?Sue, you are going down, I bet you are scared to death!?
With no other way to defend herself and her children, Ms. Scheff filed a lawsuit against Carey Bock and Ginger Warbis/Fornits Website in December 2003.
Ms. Bock was represented by Jan Atlas of Adorno and Yoss until June 2006 when Mr. Atlas withdrew as counsel, shortly after Ms. Bock was deposed and revealed the only reason she defamed and nearly destroyed Sue Scheff and her organization was simply because she didn?t like her. After Jan Atlas withdrew from the case, the Judge postponed the trial to give Ms. Bock ample time to find new counsel or represent herself. Obviously, Ms. Bock chose to ignore these options and did not even attend her own trial.
What is rather shocking is that after Sue Scheff was awarded $11.3 million because she was defamed and harmed on the Internet, and after the Daily Business Review reported this tremendous victory, a press release was submitted filled with false allegations and inaccuracies in an attempt to deflate this victory and to further harm Ms. Scheff. The inaccuracies are as follows:
? They claim Philip Elberg defeated Sue Scheff and PURE on behalf of his client, Ginger Warbis/Fornits.
The case was dismissed without prejudice - meaning it can be brought back to court on the same claim. It was the decision of Sue Scheff and her Attorney, David Pollack, to focus on one defendant. Philip Elberg won nothing in this case.
? They claim Sue Scheff filed a counter-suit against WWASPS that was dismissed.
They fail to say the case was dismissed on a jurisdictional issue, not on the merits of the case.
? They claim Sue Scheff refers children to abusive programs due to her referrals of children to the Whitmore Academy.
For over 30 years The Whitmore had a successful program with no allegations of abuse.
? They claim Cheryl Sudweeks, owner of the Whitmore Academy, pled guilty to specified charges in a Utah criminal court.
Cheryl did not admit any guilt. There was NO substantiated evidence against the Whitmore. The state admittedly had no case and agreed to a plea in abeyance. An article misstated facts and later corrected their mistakes, claiming Cheryl could never run a youth program in the county for the rest of her life. This is not true and they corrected their error.
? They assert Ms. Scheff makes money from the plight of frightened parents.
Ms. Scheff does not charge the parents for her services. To the contrary, Ms. Scheff is a parent and child advocate.
? They claim a Federal Judge told Ms. Scheff to remove misrepresentations from her website showing she had a college degree.
Ms. Scheff?s bio was written by a third-party. Within 24-hours she found the error and had it immediately corrected and removed; the Judge had nothing to do with it.
? They claim Sue Scheff won by default.
A jury of her peers reviewed evidence, deliberated for hours, and concluded her damages equaled $11.3 million dollars, $5 million of which were punitive.
? They claim the case had no merit.
This case had merit - it was defended for over 2 years - the facts spoke for themselves. The trial with a jury verdict of damages over $11.3 million sends a loud message. You can?t post lies and false statements about people simply because you don?t like them or what they do.
? They claim this was an empty and hollow victory.
A verdict of $11.3 million is far from empty or hollow. Whether is it collectible or not, the message is worth $11.3 million. Not all positive gains are weighed financially.
The press release dated October 6, 2006, was filled with inaccuracies and was obviously written to further discredit Sue Scheff and PURE.
After the trial was over, the jurors waited in the hall to meet with Ms. Scheff. They embraced her and told her that they wanted to send a message that people can?t use the Internet to invade a person?s privacy or to destroy lives. They encouraged Sue Scheff to continue her good work with children and families.
Related Links
CAICA Website
www.caica.org (http://www.caica.org)
PURE Website
www.helpyourteens.com (http://www.helpyourteens.com)
Inaccurate Press Release
www.caica.org (http://www.caica.org)
Contact Information
Isabelle Zehnder
President and Founder
Coalition Against Institutionalized Child Abuse (CAICA)
360-903-3951
info@caica.org
-
? They claim Philip Elberg defeated Sue Scheff and PURE on behalf of his client, Ginger Warbis/Fornits.
The case was dismissed without prejudice - meaning it can be brought back to court on the same claim. It was the decision of Sue Scheff and her Attorney, David Pollack, to focus on one defendant. Philip Elberg won nothing in this case.
We're still posting the same things. Nothing has changed. We'll continue to post what we have learned about Sue over the years.
? They claim Sue Scheff filed a counter-suit against WWASPS that was dismissed.
They fail to say the case was dismissed on a jurisdictional issue, not on the merits of the case.
Then I"m sure she'll be refiling, right?
? They claim Sue Scheff refers children to abusive programs due to her referrals of children to the Whitmore Academy.
For over 30 years The Whitmore had a successful program with no allegations of abuse.
When exactly did she stop? When they finally shut down due to the case? She sure was continuing to refer there even after the allegations arose and charges were filed, correct?
? They claim Cheryl Sudweeks, owner of the Whitmore Academy, pled guilty to specified charges in a Utah criminal court.
Cheryl did not admit any guilt. There was NO substantiated evidence against the Whitmore. The state admittedly had no case and agreed to a plea in abeyance. An article misstated facts and later corrected their mistakes, claiming Cheryl could never run a youth program in the county for the rest of her life. This is not true and they corrected their error.
They also corrected the error of the charges she pled to. It wasn't 'attempted hazing' it was 'hazing'. Much more serious. She pled no contest. Technically no, it's no an admission of guilt but even with the admitted problems with the prosecution she still chose not to fight. Hmmm, wonder why?
? They assert Ms. Scheff makes money from the plight of frightened parents.
Ms. Scheff does not charge the parents for her services. To the contrary, Ms. Scheff is a parent and child advocate.
Maybe we can finally get this question answered then. Sue gets paid by the 'schools', right? Well, in the interest of the well being of the kids, what schools does she refer to?
? They claim a Federal Judge told Ms. Scheff to remove misrepresentations from her website showing she had a college degree.
Ms. Scheff?s bio was written by a third-party. Within 24-hours she found the error and had it immediately corrected and removed; the Judge had nothing to do with it.
:rofl: :rofl:
? They claim Sue Scheff won by default.
A jury of her peers reviewed evidence, deliberated for hours, and concluded her damages equaled $11.3 million dollars, $5 million of which were punitive.
Was Carey able to be there to defend herself?
? They claim the case had no merit.
This case had merit - it was defended for over 2 years - the facts spoke for themselves. The trial with a jury verdict of damages over $11.3 million sends a loud message. You can?t post lies and false statements about people simply because you don?t like them or what they do.
Sue spoke for herself. Carey couldn't afford to.
? They claim this was an empty and hollow victory.
A verdict of $11.3 million is far from empty or hollow. Whether is it collectible or not, the message is worth $11.3 million. Not all positive gains are weighed financially.
What message is that? That you can Sue the shit out of everyone, claim to be the savior of children, start your own competing referral service, Sue anyone who dares speak the truth about what you're doing and make a fortune?? Yep, that came across loud and clear.
The press release dated October 6, 2006, was filled with inaccuracies and was obviously written to further discredit Sue Scheff and PURE.
After the trial was over, the jurors waited in the hall to meet with Ms. Scheff. They embraced her and told her that they wanted to send a message that people can?t use the Internet to invade a person?s privacy or to destroy lives. They encouraged Sue Scheff to continue her good work with children and families.
Wait til they start Googling her name and PURE's and find out what scumbag, greedy motherfuckers you are.
-
Isabella you are twisting the facts.
But I guess now that your friend has managed to silence Carey, you and she (Scheff) can manipulate and control the internet waves.
You have helped no one except yourselves and those who are in the industry.
Money talks and the only side of the story the jury heard was Scheffs.
-
Yeah, keep posting away. It's Ginger who has to defend the cases- with doesn't happen for free. This is good incentive for some of the other people you defame on this site to file suits. You can hide behind your little screen names and let Ginger take the heat for allowing your insulting and defamatory posts.
-
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Ginger came out just fine with what Sue tried to do to her. With Phil, she ain't got a thing to worry about. What'sa matter? Did you really think we'd all just roll over and play dead now that you've stomped all over Carey and shown what a fucking bully you are?
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
For as much as you seem to hate Ginger and Fornits you sure do use her and it a lot to promote your shit.
-
Yeah, keep posting away. It's Ginger who has to defend the cases- with doesn't happen for free. This is good incentive for some of the other people you defame on this site to file suits. You can hide behind your little screen names and let Ginger take the heat for allowing your insulting and defamatory posts.
Sudden concern for Ginger? Yeah, right. :roll:
-
Sue Scheff (PURE) has been chosen as CAICA's advocate of the month, nominated by Isabelle Zehnder, her colleague and friend.
October 2006
CHILD ADVOCATE OF THE MONTH
SUE SCHEFF (click here)
ADVOCATE WHO HAS MADE A DIFFERENCE IN THE LIVES OF THOUSANDS OF FAMILIES, FLORIDA
CAICA would like to recognize the hard work of Sue Scheff, an
advocate for parents and children. Sue helps distraught parents
who are seeking help for their troubled teens.
Sue has worked tirelessly for the past seven years in an effort
to help bring families back together when they have fallen apart.
She provides parents the tools and resources to find help for their troubled teens. Her goals are to help families stay together when possible, and to help locate safe and effective treatment if and when it is necessary.
Her organization, Parents Universal Resources Experts, Inc. (PURE), and the Coalition Against Institutionalized Child Abuse (CAICA), have learned that together we are very effective in helping families - our organizations complement each other. It is our goal to make a difference in the lives of families and to help them recognize the dangers of this unregulated industry.
Sue's daughter was abused at a World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools (WWASPS) facility, Carolina Springs Academy. Upon learning of the abuse not only her
daughter had suffered, but many others as well, she set out to make a difference. In her attempt to warn parents of the dangers of WWASPS, she was sued by this corporate giant.
She fought a legal battle that cost nearly a million dollars in legal fees, won in a jury trial, then was taken back to court on an appeal. She won the appeal. Many people would have given up but she was dedicated to helping families and continued in her quest to make a difference.
If that wasn't enough, she was defamed and her privacy was invaded by a group of people who had a vendetta against her and her organization. They worked tirelessly to bash her on Internet forums. She fought back and just won an $11.3 million dollar jury verdict for Slander, Defamation, and Invasion of Privacy.
$5 million of that was punitive damages meant to punish the defendant. This verdict sends a strong message that free speech can only be taken so far.
Sue is a colleague and she is a friend. I thank her for the tireless work she has done and continues to do.
You can find her website at www.helpyourteens.com (http://www.helpyourteens.com)
I'd just like to congratulate Sue on her victory. It's a truly wonderful thing to see people in the industry fighting back! I'd also like to thank her again for the many referrals sent our way over the past few years; She's helped us put a lot of miles on the ol' StraightMobile?. Sue has done a lot to help us help those rotten little druggie bastards.. er, I mean, kids.
Kudos to you, Sue Scheff! :tup:
Sincerely,
Dr. Fucktard