Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > PURE Bullshit and CAICA

How Free is Free Speech?

<< < (3/10) > >>

Anonymous:
Rude Intrustion, there seems to be a big difference between Sue Scheff, who was collecting monetary referral fees, and parents who were simply getting money (some say $1000 per kid referred) knocked off their tuition costs for each child/parent they referred to a WWASP program.

Just because Isabelle Zehnder writes her blogs, bragging that she and Sue Scheff helped put together this Turley lawsuit, should not give Scheff any "special treatment."  If Sue Scheff referred any of these Turley plaintiffs to WWASP programs, then she should be named a defendant, right along with the other referring companies.

Anonymous:
Turley was considering Scheff as a possible defendant because of the number of referrals she did.  They are onto Scheff and Zehnder and they are trying to distance themselves from these 2 blowhards and they know all about Richard Hendricksen and his covering for his rich Mz. Scheff.

Right Cruella Scheff?  The real Cruella BITCH.   ::whip::

Keep it up Sue-Sue cause there's more to come and special made for idiots like you.

Rude Intrusion:
Well sure, Scheff's PURE is something above and beyond the average program parents referring. Even so, I'm thinking that the basic argument is, during those months when PURE was referring to WWASPS, she was a referring parent; a very driven and successful referring parent. The referral queen, of referring parents. So successful, she made a business out of it. But still, a referring parent. I can see how the argument could be made that if you go after her for those referrals, then you'd have to look at every parent who ever referred. That is where I'm guessing no one wants to go. Besides, the question remains: IF she referred any of the families. That is a big IF. I wonder why you are so concerned with the question? Your not one such plaintiff are you? If so, then shouldn't you be discussing this with the law firm, instead of posting on fornits? And if not, its really none of your concern, is it?  If your in that group angry with her about some other program she referred you to, maybe you should sue her?

Anonymous:
IF Sue Scheff referred any of these Turley plaintiffs to WWASP programs AFTER SCHEFF started PURE.....she most definitely could not be considered a "WWWASP referring parent."
At that point, Sue Scheff was the OWNER OF A REFERRAL COMPANY, PURE....not the parent of a child attending a WWASP program.

Important question.  Why would anyone be defending, or covering up such activity by Sue Scheff; if Sue Scheff was referring these Turley plaintiff parents and their children to WWASP programs, after she started her referral company, PURE?

This question has nothing to do with any other abusive programs Sue Scheff may or may not have referred parents to.

Anonymous:

--- Quote from: ""Rude Intrusion"" ---Well sure, Scheff's PURE is something above and beyond the average program parents referring. Even so, I'm thinking that the basic argument is, during those months when PURE was referring to WWASPS, she was a referring parent; a very driven and successful referring parent. The referral queen, of referring parents. So successful, she made a business out of it. But still, a referring parent. I can see how the argument could be made that if you go after her for those referrals, then you'd have to look at every parent who ever referred. That is where I'm guessing no one wants to go. Besides, the question remains: IF she referred any of the families. That is a big IF. I wonder why you are so concerned with the question? Your not one such plaintiff are you? If so, then shouldn't you be discussing this with the law firm, instead of posting on fornits? And if not, its really none of your concern, is it?  If your in that group angry with her about some other program she referred you to, maybe you should sue her?
--- End quote ---


Your argument makes no sense, Rude.  Scheff referred families to WWASPS first as a parent, then as a commercial for-profit business.

It stands to reason if a parent/child was a member of the Turley lawsuit and referred by PURE, they may very well feel the same way toward PURE as the other plaintiffs may feel toward Lifelines or any of the WWASPS referral agencies that are named as plaintiffs.

Is there a difference?  Perhaps in your mind there is.  Are you a member of the Turley lawsuit?  A former WWASPS parent or student?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page