CreedFeed Community - A note regarding subject of the locked thread

CreedFeed Community (http://www.creedfeed.com/community/index.php)

- Scott Stapp Talk (http://www.creedfeed.com/community/forumdisplay.php?f=35)

- - A note regarding subject of the locked thread (http://www.creedfeed.com/community/showthread.php?t=7418)

LOL! LOL! LOL!

The thing is:

~Stapp should have paid back. 60K for him is like shit to me...

~If the doctor is wrong, then fine... sue him! it's another issue, another lawsuit.

~Now if he didn't pay Jeff coz he's waiting for another process against the doc for mispractices, he still should've paid Jeff back... or at least commit the ammount for custody until it's settled...

It doesn't matter the reason, it still makes Stapp looks bad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bridge of Clay

Keep in mind he is accused of not paying back a loan doesn't mean he didn't. In America innocent until proven guilty. He may owe the money and he may not. In America anyone can sue for anything at anytime. To me it does not make Stapp look bad until the case goes to trial and Stapp pleas his case and the judge and jury makes a ruling. We all should stop making judgement until the case is heard. Remember the other case that he was sued for a bad concert in Chicago the judge dismiss the case. The same can be said in this case. I wouldn't be surprise if Stapp gets sued all the time it's part of life.

err... that's different... the other process was a joke.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bridge of Clay

err... that's different... the other process was a joke.

I agree the other process was a joke and it could be the same in this case as well. We just don't know I don't think Stapp is losing sleep over it we just don't know all the details we just have to wait until the due process. I have really come to the conclusion in Stapp's case anything he does or anything that goes wrong in his life will be looked at in a negative light by some. It's really sad but that is the truth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TremontiRx

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.

The point of the case is that Mr. Cameron paid some money for "treatment" Stapp received, and now he wants it back Nowhere does it state that Mr. Stapp requested the treatment, however. If I was pressured into accepting treatment that I didn't request, so that the "show might go on" as they would say, I might have a bit of a problem seeing where it is my responsibility to pay for it. Yeah....yeah...its Cameron suing and not Hanson management. I prefer to wait and see what a jury decides. And believe me, my ability to "discern" things is perfectly fine. Your keen interest in this matter and your ability to apparently just "know" what transpired between these two people is uncanny. I'm sure Jeff Cameron is honored to know that there are others out there spending so much of their time defending his honor and working to make sure he gets is bucks back. :D

Check out the court docs. It's all right there. I'm just reading the black and white. Items #6 and #7:

6 At the time Plaintiff made these payments, Defendant promised to reimburse Plaintiff for the full cost of the medical treatments.

7. Thereafter Plaintiff demanded reimbursement of the $60,000.00, but Defendant has refused to make such reimbursement to Plaintiff.

Quote:

Your keen interest in this matter and your ability to apparently just "know" what transpired between these two people is uncanny. I'm sure Jeff Cameron is honored to know that there are others out there spending so much of their time defending his honor and working to make sure he gets is bucks back.

Come back down to earth Jooji. We're just talking about this thing...I couldn't affect this lawsuit even I wanted to. And Mr. Cameron's honor doesn't even need defending. :laugh: Again...I'm just reading the black and white.

just to add something: Mr Cameron was pretty naive as well...

If the goal was to preserve Stapp identity on the bill, JHMP should've paid, the business, and not a person.

Oh my God, how much longer can this topic live?