A note regarding subject of the locked thread
 

Just a FYI

JHMP is also suing ALL of the members of SevenDust for breach of contract as well.
Perhaps they were all in rehab together :rolleyes:

Or maybe JHMP is just a little upset that people have enough sense to leave them.

Thanks for the information. It explains volumes.

ummm thanks for the info and i didn't realise sevendust had left JHMP. however being sued because you have failed to pay a debt (when you can easily pay that debt) is not a good sign. there seems to be explantations for all of his actions but how can one explain away all of these things and not think that at least some of them are true?

Handmedown...nowhere is there a documented reason for the lawsuit against Scott given. (And if there is I ask again to see the link or the actual document) The document says breach of contract...period. Just as it says for the members of Sevendust.
Maybe both Scott and the members of Sevendust had had enough...and left JHMP before their contracts were up. Could be something as simple as that...and on Scott's part...certainly understandable.

Your argument falls short here though because JHMP isn't suing Stapp. Jeff Cameron is. There's a difference (unless I'm mistaken)

My understanding is that while the case # etc is on file and searchable online through the Orange County Clerk of Courts, you would have to physically go to the courthouse, or have access to the local legal papers that carried the item, in order to read the entire complaint.

If that's your understanding, did you do so, before posting what YOU started in that closed thread? Because if you didn't, and you don't have proof, it's all RUMOR and HERESAY and frankly, NOBODY'S BUSINESS!

The way you just HAD to "tip-toe in, drops this off, then tip-toes out" in your words, and the place you obtained such "information" speaks VOLUMES :rolleyes:

Some people need to really get a life if all they can do with their time is slander people just for the heck of it.

I had a response posted in an attempt to carry on a civil discussion, but why bother?

The suit is public record. You are more than welcome to search it at http://orangeclerk.onetgov.net/. . I believe the original poster read it in a legal paper. She did not have to search it. The paper comes to her office.

this may well be smaller than it is made out to but where does one draw the line? we have fans who say they have had bad experiences, journalists continually launching into him, other bands and his ex-bandmates particulary brian for obvious reaons. when one hears all of this stuff how can one honestly pretend it is all swell?

The reason I have a problem with you posting this is, although this is a Stapp forum and it's Stapp-related, why do you feel the need to post only the negative "news" about Scott, among all the positive things that are happening for him? If you knew you'd get that kind of reaction here, hence the "tip-toes in, drops this off" comment, why feel the need to post it anyway? It just seems that there are some people who get great joy out of dragging Scott's name through the mud, whether things are true or not. There's enough negativity in this world, can't people focus on the positive for once?

That's fine KimVan, I can understand where you are coming from.

But I also am not afraid to post the not so flattering stuff along with the good.

I still don't see where I slandered anyone. And I don't understand the backlash.....


(Also I edited my above post because I have lost interest in continuing the conversation. But seeing as you responded to my original post, I felt I should as least respond to yours)

I don't expect anyone to pretend it is all swell. I just can't stand when people have a need to post ONLY negative stuff. Where are these posters when things are going well and Scott's got positive things going on, which lately, finally, things have been looking up for him, after an extremely difficult period in his life. So of course, certain ones feel the need to break him down again any way they can. Where's the compassion? Or did all the positive things Creed brought into our lives with their great lyrics and music about unity, love and peace die with their demise? That is my point.

quote -But I also am not afraid to post the not so flattering stuff along with the good.

I still don't see where I slandered anyone. And I don't understand the backlash.....-end quote

Because even IF stories are true, some things are just better off left "unsaid", it goes along with the whole negativity thing I posted about earlier.

O.k. - I guess I'll continue. LOL

Kim, I agree with you completely! Creed made an amazing impact on my life. I will always love the music. And I've made amazing friends because of Creed. I however, no longer think Stapp is the greatest thing since sliced bread. I used to! But not anymore.

And I don't respond only to the negative things about him. I have posted in threads where I thought he looked good, looked healthy etc. When I first heard his single I commented on how good it was to hear that voice again. I would be more than happy to be the heralder of good news where Scott is concerned. But it's hard pressed to find anything out there. There have been some conflicting interveiws (in my opinion they were conflicting) and a single. No concerts, no musical guest appearances, no meetings with fans, no charity work, no cd release...... nothing! Some parties in South Beach maybe but that's about it. I will have no problem posting when I think Scott has done something really wonderful.

Sorry but I disagree. I have seen you post slanderous comments on other occasions. Accusations which you cannot prove. And you never once used the term "alleged". That is generally how you prevent getting yourself dragged into court.

We were talking about the lawsuit post Jooji. Stay on topic.

And posting about the existence of a lawsuit hardly constitues "slander" on the part of the poster.

At any rate, the suit is out there. It may not be news some want to hear, and it may not bode well for Stapp. But it's out there. And Steve has chosen to keep the post up. It's his board.

Kim, thank you for discussing this with me in a decent manner.

No prob. Alicia. Perhaps you don't hear more positive news about Stapp because of where you get your "news". I've been hearing many positive things he's been doing lately, including what could be called charity. Representing Lost Keyword Records, who put out the Passion of the Christ cd, Scott presented a donation check for a very large sum to the Malibu Boys and Girls Club in August. :) God Bless

You are right! I did see that. Was he presenting on behalf of the record company?

eta: never mind I reread your post and answered my own question. lol

Charity work the list goes on and on in Miami Stapp attended several charity events over the past year. You need to check all your sources before you make a statement. Personally what is the big deal about getting sued people not just celebrities get sued all the time. So what if he went to rehab he talked about his problems openly in the press and as far as AB anytime there is break up there is going to be two sides to any story because that is how things are going to be seen by each individual party. Stapp has moved on the whole Creed experience and Weather Tour was a bad experience to all he acknowledge that fact in many recent interviews that he made poor decisions and takes the blame. The problems come in when you post the information and make claims that you can't back up and fail to mention that Seven Dust was also getting sued. That speaks volumes in it's self. Like I said before I wish Stapp the best in his life and career.

The court documents are now available for viewing on Smoking Gun. The only thing I ever claimed was that he was being sued. And whaddya know, he is! Go read for yourself.

And with that I'm out.

Again Kim, thanks for the convo.

And just to provide the link for those who do not wish to find it:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...t_stapp_1.html

My two cents on the whole subject.

First - IF it is true Scott was in rehab - good for him for wanting to get help. And good for him for knowing he needed it.

The lawsuit - If the reason is what was posted here (Scott not paying a debt) then Jeff Cameron must have written documentation from Scott saying that Scott used Jeff to cover his ass. Now, doesn't that sound silly. Would Scott actually put any of that in writing? I think not.

Sweet should keep her nose out of other peoples business.


Is this a joke? Steve closed the thread because it was getting out of hand. He did the right thing by closing it. However, I don't think he should have deleted all the posts. But he's the boss. There is no control over on that other board - and you can't tell me that things are "civil" over there. (Oh, wait, you might be right - they are civil because everybody bashes Scott, and worships the Tremonti's :rolleyes: ). This topic was over 13 pages last night at that other place - totally ridiculous.

Thank you Steve for providing that link. Like I said before what is the big deal $60,000 is nothing Stapp and it is understandable that he went to rehab because I'm sure he became dependent on pain killers. It is so sad to me that anything regarding Stapp is taken way out of control and turned so negative. Rock on Stapp.

"Sweet should keep her nose out of other peoples business."

why is reporting news that is public record other people's business but google searching and emailing anyone and everyone for information about an individual that is not public record considered not an invasion of that person's privacy?

Hey Frankie - are you the same "Frankie" as the big poster on PBF? Is so you problably know me as a big problem!! :D

It may all be an invasion of privacy but the difference is in this case...an employee of a lawyer firm has no right to post items that they see at their office on a public message board. It's un-ethical! Can you honestly say your boss would have no problem with it?

Thank you for responding for me. I wouldn't have been as kind as you are. So, let's just leave it at that.

Sweet, Let's find out what the law firm thinks about you posting information on BB's. You never know who you are dealing with. And do you actually think that it's right to show up at the court house just so you can run and put all the news onto a BB? Something is just not right with that picture.

ya'all keep missing the point. I did not see the information because I work for a law firm. It is public record, pubished in the newspaper and in legal advisories that are available to anyone who wishes to read them. A lot of people do who are not involved in the legal community. None of the parties involved have anything to do or in any way represented by my law firm with regard to this action. The lawyers here would get a good laugh out of it to think anyone would think public record should not be accessible to the public . . they use that resource all the time. How much clearer can it be.

I think you have me mixed up with someone, I have never "shown up" at the Courthouse . . my job takes me to the Courthouse.

Just to defend sweetrelief somemore... I think in the original thread that I later closed and locked everyone was getting some information wrong. People made the assumption that sweetrelief obtained the information because it was going through her lawfirm. That, as she has stated, is not the case. The lawsuit was filed in Orange County. Once a lawsuit is filed it is public record. Being public record doesn't necessarily mean that you can obtain it through the Internet. It all depends on how that county handles their legal system. For instance, in my county (Milwaukee, WI) you can view information on any lawsuit by going to the county's court website. You can search for a party's name and all suits will be shown. But back to sweetrelief... she only posted what she read in a legal newspaper. She did nothing that was illegal or unethical. Please do not attack anyone for posting news on the site, whether or not you agree with it. If it's negative and you dislike it, ignore it.

:rolleyes: you totally missed the point


So then, these comments aren't yours from someplace else. :rolleyes:

Respond as you will, but I'm done discussing this. Say what you will about Scott (and I know you've said plenty) - it doesn't change how his diehard fans feel about him.

Have a nice day.

oh my god :D that's a joke . . . thanks for the smile :D

Steve - are you kidding me or what? You believe the fact that she read this in a newspaper. Now I have heard it all.

I'm sorry Shadow but it's the truth.

Steve, I know things are public information. Probably too much is and shouldn't be. That was not my point. You are obviously not familiar with who she is. And I'm sorry to disagree with you of all people.

who am I . . I'm even interested to hear this one. And Thanks Steve for being so understanding.

I'm beginning to think all of this is becoming funny... it's not like Stapp couldn't afford it... and it's not like he couldn't settle it before it went to court... I'm not saying he's innocent nor that he's guilty... I just think it's odd.

And I second Steve's post on sweetrelief. Once it's public record, it's public! lol

If her decision to post it was right or not... it depends on her intentions were good or not. I dunno if I would post it if I were in the same situation, but I'd probably comment it with my close friends... And maybe it was better this way, with she posting it for us first... Imagine if we had seen it on Court TV to learn it. It would be worse, imo.

hey Thanks . . it's really not that big a deal but I still wonder who I am!

I have to say in my opinion if her intentions were good she would have posted like you did Steve with a link so that we could read the information her first post and what was stated was slander in relation to the smoking gun link. I agree Bridge of Clay Stapp has $60,000 grand we don't know the facts I'm sure if he wanted to hide the matter he would have paid the money before it hit the press. The timing makes you really think because he just release "Relearn Love" and promoting his single and then Sept. 2nd he gets hit with a lawsuit.