Author Topic: Sue Schef - PURE Focal Point Academy - Lawsuit Filed  (Read 2648 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
Sue Schef - PURE Focal Point Academy - Lawsuit Filed
« on: August 17, 2007, 01:57:32 PM »
A lawsuit was filed against Sue Scheff/PURE and Focal Point Academy by attorney David Leacock on behalf of the Green family on July 31, 2007.

Sue Scheff/PURE referred most of the students to Whitmore Academy.

The complaint filed by the Greens can be read in full on the following website:  www.sueschefftruth.com
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
Sue Schef - PURE Focal Point Academy - Lawsuit Filed
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2007, 11:54:53 PM »
Quote
Zen Agent
06:02 | August 21st, 2007 The Focal Point lawsuit has
The Focal Point lawsuit has been long in coming...Sue Scheff has made a living by making referrals to abusive facilities like the Whitmore in Juab, Utah.  The Whitmore was owned by a couple named Mark and Cheryl Sudweeks.  Mark has the dubious distinction of being the only person banned for life from owning animals in British Columbia, after being convicted of cruelty to animals. The Sudweeks owned a horse ranch in B.C., and investigators found twenty-nine horses and seven dogs near death from starvation and disease.

A program owned by the Sudweeks in Mexico was shut down for licensing infractions, and the couple was forced to leave the country along with fourteen "students" who were in their care.  Sue Scheff has made referrals to the Whitmore Academy since at least 2003, when Scheff's PURE, inc. came under scrutiny during the WWASP vs. PURE trial.  Scheff lost key supporters when her testimony revealed she received payments from programs she made referrals to, an admission which tarnished the image Scheff attempted  to project of herself as a housewife taking on the powerful and abusive WWASP.

On August 7, 2000, Scheff enrolled her daughter Ashlyn in the WWASP-owned Carolina Springs Academy of South Carolina.  Ashlyn was going through adolescent ills that included alcohol experimentation, depression, suicidal ideation, and poor grades.  Scheff's relationship with her daughter was strained to the breaking point, and Ashlyn has alleged her mother assaulted her, striking her in the face and grabbing her by the throat.  While Ashlyn was enrolled in Carolina Springs, Scheff discovered the referral system.  WWASP would award a month's tuition ($3,000 at Carolina Springs) to a program parent who convinced another family to place their child in a WWASP facility.


 

In spite of the plea bargain and letter of admission Sudweeks wrote, and her ban from ever opening another facility for children in Juab County, Utah again, Sue Scheff and her business associate Isabelle Zehnder started writing blogs defending the Sudweeks and the Whitmore, attacking one parent who removed her daughter from the facility and attempting to scapegoat her for all the Sudweeks troubles.  They attacked this one mother in horrible ways, accusing her of yanking her daughter out of the Whitmore by the arm.  Mark Sudweeks claimed to have a police report.  However, it was the police who accompanied this concerned mother when she went to get her child, and the police report said no force was used on the child. Recently, Sue Scheff has been attacking her critics, attempting to litigate them into silence or simply having their websites removed by contacting the web servers and claiming she's being defamed.  She's running a campaign of censorship, and she's hired an outside firm to sanitize her unsavory image.  She can shut down negative information without ever having to prove it's untrue.  In light of the tactics she used against WWASP while posting anonymously on websites in an effort to ruin WWASP's reputation, one would think her hypocrisy would trouble her, but it's all business to her.  

I understand Scheff's right to protect her business from damaging, malicious accusations that have no basis in fact.  However, there are court transcripts, eye-witness accounts, and sworn statements against her business, PURE.  These are the "lies" Scheff wants to have buried by her hired goon squad, Reputation Defender.  She's attempting to squelch out the damning evidence concerning her vicious physical assault on her daughter, the abusve nature of the facilities she refers to, and the misrepresentation of these facilities to desparate parents.  Sue's decided that freedom of speech is a dangerous thing to her, but let's not forget how she benefited from flaunting freedom of speech when WWASP sued her.

As the WWASP vs. PURE trial proved, Scheff deceived the public by presenting herself as a "housewife" who was taking on the hellspawned pits of abuse that made up WWASP.  As the trial wore on, Scheff's supporters learned their hero was earning a healthy fee from sending kids to programs like the Whitmore, and it became evident that this was no mere "housewife" taking on the montrous WWASP, Scheff and WWASP were competitors in the teen torture industry.

Now with the Focal Point lawsuit, there is a chance to fully reveal the monster Sue Scheff is, and end her campaign of censorship against people who have proof to back their claims.  Keep in mind the 11.3 million judgment awarded to Scheff after suing Carey Bock for defamation.  Bock, a former associate of Scheff's missed her chance to defend herself in Court - Carey had been displaced by Hurricane Katrina, and Scheff's attorney "happened" to send the summons while Ms. Bock was in transit to Texas.

I respectfully disagree, Jordan, Sue Scheff is much more than a relatively small part of this industry.  She's become the figurehead of it, and what better person to expose for her role in callously sending kids to programs like the Whitmore, which Scheff continued to do after the allegations against the Sudweeks had become public?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »