You can read her lies here. You can't comment but definitely feel free to email her and ask her questions.
That's all for now. Have a lovely day!
Showing posts with label Sue Scheff. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sue Scheff. Show all posts
April 27, 2008
Sue Scheff trying to claim she doesn't refer kids to boot camps...
This is disgusting. Here, a lady who has referred many parents to ABUSIVE rehabs, Sue Scheff (P.U.R.E.), is claiming she/they don't refer kids to bootcamps. Just because they don't refer to bootcamps doesn't mean they don't refer to abusive rehabs. The fact that they are taking these current hearings and use it as propaganda to "prove" they are on the up and up when in fact they are just as bad, sickens me. And of course ever single post she's made about it on one of her 1002 blogs that repeat the same B.S. have comments turned off. She knows better, the truth would out her as it has so many times before. Parents Beware of P.U.R.E. and Sue Scheff!
August 13, 2007
More on Green vs. Focal Point Academy & Sue Scheff
http://sueschefftruth.com or http://sueschefftruth.org
which to choose (hint: .com .com .com)
Regarding Focal Point Lawsuit:
Read the full complaint here.
Recently, A lawsuit was filed By the Green family in Broward County Florida against both Sue Scheff and Focal Point Academy. It is alleged that Sue Scheff fradulently misrepresented her relationship with Focal Point Academy on many matters. for example:
“20. In April, 2006, Scheff also represented that she was not a licensed educational therapist, and therefore was not paid for her work, and that she was only making referrals based on the interests of the children.
2I. Scheff in no way disclosed that she was being paid for referring R.G. and others to Defendant Focal Point on a per-child basis. Contrary to Scheff’s misrepresentations, Defendant Horlacher later disclosed that Focal Point Academy pays Scheff money for each student she refers to the school.”
It should be noted that Sue Scheff admitted under oath in the WWASP vs PURE court case that she recieves compensation from schools for referrals. She claims that this is only done on a “donation” basis but on page 401 of the WWASP vs. PURE transcripts, Marie Peart (One of Sue’s employees) testifies that she would threaten schools to cut off referrals if they did not pay.
The above allegations by the Greens are also very similar to those of Joyce Harris and her husband, Richard (whose dautghter was referred to the now defuct Whitmore Academy by Sue Scheff):
“We asked her point-blank if we had to pay her, or if she got paid for her services.
She said NO!
She said that she only did this work to make sure that no child is ever placed in a dangerous
place like the WWASP programs. She said….that her reward is knowing that all children are
placed in a safe, loving, caring place like the Whitmore.She SIMPLY LIED TO US. Sue Scheff refers these children to make money!”
It should be noted that the above statement (full copy available here) was made under penalty of perjury. In response to Joyce’s complaint, Sue Scheff went on the warpath against Joyce Harris, posting what Joyce (and many others who know her) allege to be defamatory statements about her in Sue’s blogs about Whitmore Academy. The Harris family’s sworn statement goes on to say:
“I wrote to Sue Scheff, telling her that we removed our daughter from the Whitmore, and why.
Not only did Sue Scheff write back expressing her continued support of the Sudweeks, she attacked me, the mother. She repeated outright lies about what happened at the Whitmore the night we went with a police escort to pick up our daughter.
We suppose she must support the Sudweeks, because we understand that most, if not all of the placements at Whitmore Academy are referred there by Sue Scheff or P.U.R.E. That speaks for itself as far as we are concerned.”
One could suppose that Sue Scheff’s next move would be to post similar statements about the Green Family and use her contacts at “Reputation Defender” to suppress their voice, as has been done to the past, including, I allege, to this very blog.
These are hardly the only allegations made against Sue Scheff. More will be coming tomorrow.
Anonymous Commenter about Sue Scheff
Sue Scheff is trying to suppress any and all negative info about her. She has sold kids off into programs for fees. She makes her living off of this. She continued to ship kids off to the Whitmore Academy even AFTER it was being investigated for abuse. Charges which were later found to be
true.
http://www.isaccorp.org/documentsnz.asp#whitmore
Sue Scheff doesn't like the fact that her true motives have been revealed. She claims to have a PURE heart but it's all about the money with her
true.
http://www.isaccorp.org/documentsnz.asp#whitmore
Sue Scheff doesn't like the fact that her true motives have been revealed. She claims to have a PURE heart but it's all about the money with her
What Sue Scheff Wants to Censor
Sue Scheff often refers to herself as an “advocate”, claiming that she just wants to help children. Sue Scheff uses the slogan “parents helping parents”, publicly stating that the purpose of her organization is simply to avoid the dangers of abusive programs. Critics, however, question her commitment to the welfare of children, her honesty, and the ethics with which she conducts her business.
Many of these critics congregate at Fornits.com, a largely unmoderated discussion board mostly dealing with the various issues relating to the so-called “troubled teen industry”. With a large percentage of her critics in one location, as well as much information Sue Scheff would most likely rather not exist, it’s no small wonder she hired Reputation Defender. While Sue Scheff (with her 38 and counting, cross-linked splogs) has been relatively successful keeping positive (but not necessarily accurate) information on top, attacking Fornits directly ended badly for her, resulting in both a further infuriated forum populace and an embarrassing analysis of the letter she sent to GoDaddy in an attempt to take down Fornits.
What are some of the specifics regarding what these Fornits people are upset with Sue Scheff about? Aren’t they just a bunch of crazies or WWASP supporters defaming Sue Scheff? To explain some of that requires some understanding of how the “troubled teen industry” works in the United States. Individuals known as “educational consultants” often take money (so-called “finder’s fees”) to refer “troubled teens” to programs (also known as “Emotional Growth Boarding Schools” among many other names). Some might think this an unethical conflict of interest; however at the moment this practice of “kids for cash” is completely legal. Although some educational consultants do investigate where they send kids, many do not, and with little risk and the offer of large sums of money, there is not exactly a huge motivation to do too much investigation. In any case, there is no sure way to know whether or not a consultant is taking money for referrals. Some, educational consultants continue to refer to abusive programs even after finding out about their history. Some educational consultants even defend programs well after they are shut down for abuse or sued. It is alleged by many that Sue Scheff falls into the last category. Although she recently has distanced herself from the term “educational consultant” Sue Scheff has been known to refer to herself as such in the past, even exaggerating her qualifications. Sue Scheff is a woman who gives advice on parenting to others, and claims to be able to judge if a child needs placement — and yet sent her own daughter to WWASP’s Carolina Springs Academy for her involvement in Wicca.
While recently, Sue Scheff has admitted at taking “donations” from programs and private entities, multiple parents allege they were told that she did not receive any sort of compensation at all from programs for referrals. This directly contradicts her own sworn testimony in the WWASP vs. PURE trial, where it is revealed she recieved compensation for referrals from Red Rock, Cedar Mountain Academy, Sorenson’s Ranch, Hilltop Ranch, among a host of others. Although Sue Scheff claims that these were merely donations if the school wanted to pay, an email sent on Sue Scheff’s behalf to a program by Marie Peart, an employee of PURE, states, “Sue is starting to make some noise about not referring to you if we don’t get paid”. Clearly there were consequences if a school did not pay up, even if there was no official “contract” as Sue Scheff claimed in her defense.
What she often neglects to mention is that she rarely if ever visits or investigates programs herself. She claims she has other parents help her out in this endeavor. Even if that is partially true, it would be bad enough (considering many programs make a mint off fooling parents for a living); however to investigate at least one program, Sue Scheff asked her “friend”, Gayle Palmer/Degraff, the admissions director at Red Rock at the time, to investigate another School. While this might seem fine to people not familiar to this industry, many on sites such as Fornits know her name well, along with the name of the girl, Michelle Sutton, whose death she allegedly covered up.
Scheff often claims that she started her organization, PURE after discovering her child was abused at a WWASP facility. What she doesn’t often mention is that she once referred to WWASP schools, even after starting PURE, which originally stood for “Parents Universal Referral Experts” and later renamed to “Parents Universal Resource Experts”.
Even worse, Randall Hinton, who admitted on video tape to pepper-spraying kids over three times a day and used to work at WWASP’s notorious “Tranquility Bay“, used to be one of PURE’s references on Sue Scheff’s website. This reference was available on archive.org’s version of PURE’s site until she recently blocked archiving. Thankfully, a copy exists on Fornits.com. Sue claims in her defense that at the time she started PURE, she wasn’t aware of the abuse her daughter endured in Carolina Springs (she claims she became aware around march of 2001). While this may be true, she continued to receive moneys from WWASP well into 2003, and many critics claim the sole reason she stopped referring to WWASP was becuase she allegedly got caught scamming the referral system and decided to go into competition by starting PURE.
Apparently, what goes around comes around, and complaints about Sue Scheff and the programs she refers to have been steadily flowing in since. Red Rock Canyon (now defunct), a wilderness program she referred to, for example was shut down by the state
after the death of Katie Lank. At Whitmore Academy, a school that Sue Scheff referred to and still defends, a girl was allegedly tied down and raped by Mark Sudweeks (co-owner), according to the parent of the victim who does not wish to be identified publicly. There have been many allegations of abuse against Whitmore Academy since. Although Whitmore Academy was shut down by the state based on licensing issues, criminal charges against it’s owners were pressed, to which the owners copped a plea bargain. Keep in mind the owners had already been thrown out of Mexico and had been accused (now convicted) of animal cruelty in Canada. There is also an ongoing civil lawsuit against the owners, Mark and Cheryl Sudweeks. Despite all this, Sue Scheff continues to defend Whitmore Academy, blaming it all on one bad parent with a grudge and a secret.
Now there is a Lawsuit filed against Sue Scheff by the Green family, accusing Sue Scheff of unethical business practices in her association with Focal Point Academy, and the school itself of neglect and abuse. Among other things, the complaint alleges:
“20. In April, 2006, Scheff also represented that she was not a licensed educational therapist, and therefore was not paid for her work, and that she was only making referrals based on the interests of the children.
2I. Scheff in no way disclosed that she was being paid for referring R.G. and others to Defendant Focal Point on a per-child basis. Contrary to Scheff’s misrepresentations, Defendant Horlacher later disclosed that Focal Point Academy pays Scheff money for each student she refers to the school.”
A cynical mind wonders: Given her history, who or what will she blame this on? Who will believe her this time? Perhaps the Washington Post will write another piece on Reputation Defender and Sue Scheff — this time from a slightly different perspective.
Many of these critics congregate at Fornits.com, a largely unmoderated discussion board mostly dealing with the various issues relating to the so-called “troubled teen industry”. With a large percentage of her critics in one location, as well as much information Sue Scheff would most likely rather not exist, it’s no small wonder she hired Reputation Defender. While Sue Scheff (with her 38 and counting, cross-linked splogs) has been relatively successful keeping positive (but not necessarily accurate) information on top, attacking Fornits directly ended badly for her, resulting in both a further infuriated forum populace and an embarrassing analysis of the letter she sent to GoDaddy in an attempt to take down Fornits.
What are some of the specifics regarding what these Fornits people are upset with Sue Scheff about? Aren’t they just a bunch of crazies or WWASP supporters defaming Sue Scheff? To explain some of that requires some understanding of how the “troubled teen industry” works in the United States. Individuals known as “educational consultants” often take money (so-called “finder’s fees”) to refer “troubled teens” to programs (also known as “Emotional Growth Boarding Schools” among many other names). Some might think this an unethical conflict of interest; however at the moment this practice of “kids for cash” is completely legal. Although some educational consultants do investigate where they send kids, many do not, and with little risk and the offer of large sums of money, there is not exactly a huge motivation to do too much investigation. In any case, there is no sure way to know whether or not a consultant is taking money for referrals. Some, educational consultants continue to refer to abusive programs even after finding out about their history. Some educational consultants even defend programs well after they are shut down for abuse or sued. It is alleged by many that Sue Scheff falls into the last category. Although she recently has distanced herself from the term “educational consultant” Sue Scheff has been known to refer to herself as such in the past, even exaggerating her qualifications. Sue Scheff is a woman who gives advice on parenting to others, and claims to be able to judge if a child needs placement — and yet sent her own daughter to WWASP’s Carolina Springs Academy for her involvement in Wicca.
While recently, Sue Scheff has admitted at taking “donations” from programs and private entities, multiple parents allege they were told that she did not receive any sort of compensation at all from programs for referrals. This directly contradicts her own sworn testimony in the WWASP vs. PURE trial, where it is revealed she recieved compensation for referrals from Red Rock, Cedar Mountain Academy, Sorenson’s Ranch, Hilltop Ranch, among a host of others. Although Sue Scheff claims that these were merely donations if the school wanted to pay, an email sent on Sue Scheff’s behalf to a program by Marie Peart, an employee of PURE, states, “Sue is starting to make some noise about not referring to you if we don’t get paid”. Clearly there were consequences if a school did not pay up, even if there was no official “contract” as Sue Scheff claimed in her defense.
What she often neglects to mention is that she rarely if ever visits or investigates programs herself. She claims she has other parents help her out in this endeavor. Even if that is partially true, it would be bad enough (considering many programs make a mint off fooling parents for a living); however to investigate at least one program, Sue Scheff asked her “friend”, Gayle Palmer/Degraff, the admissions director at Red Rock at the time, to investigate another School. While this might seem fine to people not familiar to this industry, many on sites such as Fornits know her name well, along with the name of the girl, Michelle Sutton, whose death she allegedly covered up.
Scheff often claims that she started her organization, PURE after discovering her child was abused at a WWASP facility. What she doesn’t often mention is that she once referred to WWASP schools, even after starting PURE, which originally stood for “Parents Universal Referral Experts” and later renamed to “Parents Universal Resource Experts”.
Even worse, Randall Hinton, who admitted on video tape to pepper-spraying kids over three times a day and used to work at WWASP’s notorious “Tranquility Bay“, used to be one of PURE’s references on Sue Scheff’s website. This reference was available on archive.org’s version of PURE’s site until she recently blocked archiving. Thankfully, a copy exists on Fornits.com. Sue claims in her defense that at the time she started PURE, she wasn’t aware of the abuse her daughter endured in Carolina Springs (she claims she became aware around march of 2001). While this may be true, she continued to receive moneys from WWASP well into 2003, and many critics claim the sole reason she stopped referring to WWASP was becuase she allegedly got caught scamming the referral system and decided to go into competition by starting PURE.
Apparently, what goes around comes around, and complaints about Sue Scheff and the programs she refers to have been steadily flowing in since. Red Rock Canyon (now defunct), a wilderness program she referred to, for example was shut down by the state
after the death of Katie Lank. At Whitmore Academy, a school that Sue Scheff referred to and still defends, a girl was allegedly tied down and raped by Mark Sudweeks (co-owner), according to the parent of the victim who does not wish to be identified publicly. There have been many allegations of abuse against Whitmore Academy since. Although Whitmore Academy was shut down by the state based on licensing issues, criminal charges against it’s owners were pressed, to which the owners copped a plea bargain. Keep in mind the owners had already been thrown out of Mexico and had been accused (now convicted) of animal cruelty in Canada. There is also an ongoing civil lawsuit against the owners, Mark and Cheryl Sudweeks. Despite all this, Sue Scheff continues to defend Whitmore Academy, blaming it all on one bad parent with a grudge and a secret.
Now there is a Lawsuit filed against Sue Scheff by the Green family, accusing Sue Scheff of unethical business practices in her association with Focal Point Academy, and the school itself of neglect and abuse. Among other things, the complaint alleges:
“20. In April, 2006, Scheff also represented that she was not a licensed educational therapist, and therefore was not paid for her work, and that she was only making referrals based on the interests of the children.
2I. Scheff in no way disclosed that she was being paid for referring R.G. and others to Defendant Focal Point on a per-child basis. Contrary to Scheff’s misrepresentations, Defendant Horlacher later disclosed that Focal Point Academy pays Scheff money for each student she refers to the school.”
A cynical mind wonders: Given her history, who or what will she blame this on? Who will believe her this time? Perhaps the Washington Post will write another piece on Reputation Defender and Sue Scheff — this time from a slightly different perspective.
Godaddy letter from Sue Scheff
(kelly/webdiva)
-------- Original Message --------
Dear Kelly Matthews,(*Death threats*, defamation,
They are also attacking my colleague, Isabelle Zehnder. She has also contacted GoDaddy - and actually removed her websites since she recently read her death threats and harm to her family. *This is serious *- and I do hope GoDaddy takes this seriously. I have filed a police report with Broward Sherriff's office (File#W505031987) in Florida, I have filed a report with Internet Crimes Bureau as well as my local FBI office. I am hoping criminal charges will be brought against these people. My lawyer is David Pollack, Miami, FL - 305-372-5900 if you need to substantiate anything I have written or need more legal
Date: August 2, 2007 11:45:54 AM CEDT
Subject: [Fwd: GoDaddy.com Abuse issue "attachment of threats and my Final Judgment"]
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: GoDaddy.com Abuse issue "attachment of threats and my Final Judgment"
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:25:04 -0700
From: Go Daddy Spam and Abuse Dept.
To: kelly
Dear Kelly Matthews,
We have been notified of the following situation, please remove the content on _fornits.com_ hosted on your dedicated server 208.109.219.117. Please be aware Go Daddy reserves the right to terminate Services if Your usage of the Services results in, or is the subject of, legal action or threatened legal action, against Go Daddy or any of its affiliates or partners, without consideration for whether such legal action or threatened legal action is eventually determined to be with or without merit. To avoid any further action please have this completed with in 48 hours. Please email abuse@godaddy.com when this has been completed.
Thank You,
Spam and Abuse Department
GoDaddy.com
Abuse Department Hotline: 480-624-2505
ARID1205
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Internet Terrorism - Death threats and more - my 2nd account
From: "-removed-"
Date: Sun, July 29, 2007 6:49 pm
To: abuse@godaddy.com
To: GoDaddy Abuse Dept.
From: -name removed-
** Re: Abuse on the forum at www.fornits.com
invasion of privacy and more)
My name is -name removed-. If you go to the above listed website and do a search on my name or my business - PURE (Parent's Universal Resource Experts, Inc) - you will be apalled at the* threats*, defamation, and more. Last fall, I won in a *jury trial* a judgment of _$11.3M - $5M of it was for punitive damages_ for *Internet Defamation and Invasion of Privacy*. The defendants, Ginger Warbis (Fornits) and Carey Bock were working in conjunction to literally destroy and ruin me and my business - as well as my children. At one
point, someone had posted my daughter was *dead*. Since the law is gray on the responsibility of the Host - (Warbis-Fornits), I decided to dismiss her from the lawsuit early on and only sue Bock. It was due to financial reasons, the legal cost me over $150K with just the one defendant. I had to second mortgage my home and go through my savings to protect my children. At the end - I was fully vindicated - however it only escalated
the abuse as they now post as anonymous - and want to prove my verdict means nothing to them. I retained Reputation Defender to help me keep their horrors off the top of Google - however I have now learned there are *death threats* on the website fornits.com (in the forums). Emotionally, I can't go on that website, it nearly destroyed to the point I closed my office and never left my house. If you go to the website on the forum and do a search on my name (-removed-) and PURE (they actually have PURE Bullshit as a forum) - I am confident you will have no problem seeing this horrific abuse.
They are also attacking my colleague, Isabelle Zehnder. She has also contacted GoDaddy - and actually removed her websites since she recently read her death threats and harm to her family. *This is serious *- and I do hope GoDaddy takes this seriously. I have filed a police report with Broward Sherriff's office (File#W505031987) in Florida, I have filed a report with Internet Crimes Bureau as well as my local FBI office. I am hoping criminal charges will be brought against these people. My lawyer is David Pollack, Miami, FL - 305-372-5900 if you need to substantiate anything I have written or need more legal
information. You should also know they created a YouTube video with a threat to hurt me bad - which YouTube removed swiftly after receiving notice from me. Again, this is serious. If you need to learn who I am, you can visit my websites - I also have other URL's under another account number - Reputation
Defender have been buying them for me - all kinds of ugly ones to protect me if others attempt to purchase them. This is truly one of the worst forms of *Internet Terrorism* I have experienced.
I will be on 20/20 i-Caught in August - talking about this incident - I would love to be able to share with people that GoDaddy doesn't tolerate this type of terrorism on the Internet. I look forward to your response and swift attention. I only hope you will remove this site from your Host Server. If you
have any further questions or comments, please call me or email me. *Please keep my name and email confidential.* Thank you in advance for time and prompt attention.
-name removed-
Sue Scheff Smells Like Butt
Several days ago, GoDaddy received a threatening email sent by Sue Scheff requesting that certain content she found offensive (attached to the email) be removed from fornits.com. Whether or not the content linked to constitutes "death threats” or “internet terrorism” is largely irrelevant (judge for yourself). Nobody I have talked to sees it as such. What is relevant is the fact that she lied several times in her email to increase the perceived gravity of the alleged offenses.
In the email, Sue Scheff claimed to have filed a police report with the Broward’s county sherriff's department in Florida. She included a case number. Since several of my posts were listed in her complaint, and others were worried about the matter, I decided to contact the Broward’s county sherriff’s department to explain the other side of the story.
On the first mention of “internet death threats” I was transferred to the civil division (which did not answer). Clearly they didn’t take the matter very seriously. Since Sue Scheff implied the matter was not civil, but criminal, I called back, explained a little bit more of the situation, and was transferred to the records department. I explained what had happened, briefly, and gave over the case number (W505031987). The woman who I talked to seemed surprised, and explained that it did not fit the format for any case number. She also explained that the digits “05? would mean that the case would have to been filed in 2005. We tried several different combinations of common letters or numbers that could have been mistaken. Nothing made sense to her. Upon further research on the Browards county sherriff's department’s website, I came to the conclusion that Sue Scheff had never, in fact, filed a police report.
This leads me to believe that her other claims, such as contacting the FBI, were also false. (although I am not concerned enough to check, given Sue Scheff’s history of not telling the truth).
20/20 was also contacted, and although the matter was not followed up on, the person who was talked to seemed to have no knowledge of any appearance of Sue Scheff on any upcoming episode of the show.
This whole matter has caused a great deal of trouble for the technical staff of Fornits (who work on a volunteer basis), requiring many to take time out of their personal lives and cancel important plans in order to move Fornits to a less litigious country (Canada).
Given that these claims were relatively easy for me to verify as false, I find Godaddy’s response more than a little upsetting: “Please be aware Go Daddy reserves the right to terminate Services if Your usage of the Services results in, or is the subject of, legal action or threatened legal action, against Go Daddy or any of its affiliates or partners, without consideration for whether such legal action or threatened legal action is eventually determined to be with or without merit.”
What this essentially means is that Sue Scheff is willing to spread known falsehoods about other people to willfully damage their reputations, personal lives, and suppress their ability to tell their side of the story. Sadly, it also means that the United States has apparently become so litigious that providers of internet services are willing to participate in this censorship at the mere mention of legal action, regardless of merit. Effectively, this means that although the government itself may not participate in censorship, private entities through litigation and companies such as Reputation Defender can and do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)