Comments on: Looks Like Thomas Weeks III Will Need Another Press Conference. Being Suied for $88,500 by Former Employee! http://www.independentconservative.com/2007/12/04/weeks_sued_88k/ The Independent Conservative saying what needs to be said! Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:27:23 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: HicktownPress » Blog Archive » GOOD & BAD News for Thomas Weeks, Jr. and Juanita Bynum http://www.independentconservative.com/2007/12/04/weeks_sued_88k/comment-page-1/#comment-7397 HicktownPress » Blog Archive » GOOD & BAD News for Thomas Weeks, Jr. and Juanita Bynum Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:06:56 +0000 http://www.independentconservative.com/2007/12/04/weeks_sued_88k/#comment-7397 [...] To read the latest mess on Thomas Weeks, Jr. GO HERE [...] [...] To read the latest mess on Thomas Weeks, Jr. GO HERE [...]

]]> By: IndependentConservative http://www.independentconservative.com/2007/12/04/weeks_sued_88k/comment-page-1/#comment-7355 IndependentConservative Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:50:20 +0000 http://www.independentconservative.com/2007/12/04/weeks_sued_88k/#comment-7355 Not that I disbelieve Suzanne Ellis, but here's a hole that warrants explanation: <em>(from the article)</em> <blockquote>Ellis’ attorney, Louis Levenson of Atlanta, says his client left her job after she was not paid back. Levenson did not know what items were purchased for weeks. </blockquote>Did the newspaper mis-word that or does her attorney not know what his client's lawsuit involves?  I'm not thinking Louis Levenson <em>(who is a pretty high powered attorney in Atlanta)</em> would initiate a lawsuit without seeing the evidence, to prevent him being party to a totally frivolous lawsuit.  So did the newspaper use bad wording?  Is Levenson playing like he does not know, to keep the details out of the media?  Did he just forget the details given the lawsuit was filed in November and possibly the news media just found it and hit him with questions when he was not prepared?  It makes no sense that an attorney would not know the details. Not that I disbelieve Suzanne Ellis, but here’s a hole that warrants explanation:
(from the article)

Ellis’ attorney, Louis Levenson of Atlanta, says his client left her job after she was not paid back. Levenson did not know what items were purchased for weeks.

Did the newspaper mis-word that or does her attorney not know what his client’s lawsuit involves?  I’m not thinking Louis Levenson (who is a pretty high powered attorney in Atlanta) would initiate a lawsuit without seeing the evidence, to prevent him being party to a totally frivolous lawsuit.  So did the newspaper use bad wording?  Is Levenson playing like he does not know, to keep the details out of the media?  Did he just forget the details given the lawsuit was filed in November and possibly the news media just found it and hit him with questions when he was not prepared?  It makes no sense that an attorney would not know the details.

]]> By: Lennie http://www.independentconservative.com/2007/12/04/weeks_sued_88k/comment-page-1/#comment-7354 Lennie Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:28:24 +0000 http://www.independentconservative.com/2007/12/04/weeks_sued_88k/#comment-7354 It never ceases to amaze me the lengths that people will go to for these so called ministers. She probably cleaned out her entire savings to get the money for that creep. This really disturbs me! It never ceases to amaze me the lengths that people will go to for these so called ministers.

She probably cleaned out her entire savings to get the money for that creep.

This really disturbs me!

]]> By: fourpointer http://www.independentconservative.com/2007/12/04/weeks_sued_88k/comment-page-1/#comment-7353 fourpointer Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:24:03 +0000 http://www.independentconservative.com/2007/12/04/weeks_sued_88k/#comment-7353 Boy, that's gotta be a kick in the pride, to be referred to in the opening sentence as "The estranged husband of televangelist Juanita Bynum..." Basically, they're calling him "Mr. Juanita Bynum." Wow, what a blow to the ego. Boy, that’s gotta be a kick in the pride, to be referred to in the opening sentence as "The estranged husband of televangelist Juanita Bynum…" Basically, they’re calling him "Mr. Juanita Bynum." Wow, what a blow to the ego.

]]>