The reason for his treatment, if even true, was not clarified. This Dr. does do rehab but also prescribes pain-killers. Nowhere is there proof this suit is for rehab...people are just assuming that.

Steve thanks for the information. I was not making any judgement. Just wondering who Jeff Cameron was and his relation to Creed because I was not sure if he is just a friend of Stapp's or was employed by Creed.

The inital post I believe stated that Stapp was being sued for "REHAB" costs...when actually the court papers don't indicate that specifically Neither would the information posted in the public record online.

The fact that the word "REHAB" was added, even though it wasn't indicated, pretty much indicates the malevolence with which is it was intended. :D

Point 5 in the complaint

Also from the article from Smoking Gun


Edited to add...
and Jeff Cameron works for JHMP/Bombtrax. But as Steve pointed out (As did others), It's Jeff as an INDIVIDUAL (which is stated on the documents) who is suing, NOT JHMP.

"There could be alot more to this than any of us know. The Dr. doesn't seem to have a very good rep...maybe his treatment didn't help him, therefore, I wouldn't pay it either."

Regardless, Stapp should have repaid his friend and taken issue with the doctor, if that's what he intended.

**Remembers to not pay doctor bills next time my antibiotic doesn't work.**

IF he owes it. That's the thing. There could be reasons none of us know...that's my point. I don't see why all the drama to this thing to begin with.

"Last November, the Medical Board of California charged Kipper with gross negligence and unprofessional conduct for, among other things, overprescribing habit-forming drugs and running an illegal detox program. Earlier this year, Ozzy Osbourne filed a complaint with the state board alleging that, during 2002 and 2003, Kipper overprescribed him addictive drugs that left him addled and hooked on powerful antipyschotics and tranquilizers. "

And where in there does it state what type of treatment Stapp was receiving from Kipper?

I don't see the word REHAB in either of them.

"And where in there does it state what type of treatment Stapp was receiving from Kipper?

I don't see the word REHAB in either of them."

I don't see the point in this. He's not being sued for going to rehab...he's being sued for not repaying his friend. It has been presumed that he saw a "rehab" doctor for detox (seems logical to me :rolleyes: ) but it is really irrelevant to the lawsuit. He could have borrowed the money to buy $60,000 worth of new shoes. Point still remains...he didn't pay the debt.

Thank you TremontiRx for stating what would seem to be the obvious.

No....but he's being accused of stiffing a friend for charges for REHAB. If he hasn't paid the bill for the treatment, then I'm pretty sure there is a reason he has been advised not to. I'm sure that will be brought up when the case comes to trial. Ever thought that might be exactly what the whole point of this is? A trial. The same doctor insured that Ozzy Osbourne made it to the stage every nite, by whatever means necessary....why is it not presumed that he was hired to do the same in Stapp's situation :rolleyes: ? See that's the difference between us. I will consider every possibility while you only consider the one that you want to believe. You can rehash it every way you want.....but eventually each side will tell their version of the story. If a jury rules Stapp owes the dude the money, I'm sure it will be paid. You act as if you fronted the man the cash yourself.

I see alot of obvious scenarios to explain the above discussion. What you consider obvious and I consider obvious are two very different things. You just don't like the fact that I don't agree with you. Sorry, but that will never happen. :D

Oooookaaaaay :confused: Where did I act like I fronted the cash?

Jooji, if Mr. Stapp wants to take exception with this doc then it is his prerogative to do so. I don't think ANYONE would question his doing just that. But not repaying a friend who loaned him the money to see the doc?? That's what doesn't make sense.

Seems you're losing focus of the point of the case. Mr. Stapp isn't suing the doc here....the lawsuit isn't about the credibility of the doctor or the merits of his therapies. Mr. Cameron is suing to recoup the money he loaned out and was never repaid. You're confusing two separate issues....actually, I think you're assuming there to be an issue with the doctor and allowing that assumption to cloud your ability to discern the points laid out in the lawsuit.

At any rate, I hope Mr. Cameron is able to get his money back quickly, either through settlement outside of court or through a jury awarded payment. What a lousy outcome for someone who was doing a favor for a friend.

How do any of us know this is the case? Just because someone is suing another person for owing them money...does not mean there are circumstances that none of us aware of as to WHY it wasn't paid back. People are innocent until proven guilty in this country...even the ones some of you don't like. Anyone can accuse anyone of anything and it could end up in court with someone having to defend themselves. Maybe this person wasn't a good friend...maybe there was something between the two of them such as a mis-understanding with the terms of the loan...who knows, but the parties involved.

I guess it boils down to not assuming the worse about a situation as some continually do so when it comes to this man, and not judging someone's every move without ALL THE FACTS. Like Jooji said, it will come out in trial.

I'll second that farmgirl!!! I'm not gonna judge, or assume or specualte that Stapp *stiffed* anyone for anything..... :D

Truthfully Jooji, I've never really given it that much consideration.