Singsnap Members Sued For Assault, Libel, Slander & Copyright Infringement Trevor McGuire, Shanda Lancaster Maddox, Catherine Loudon & Lawrence Dickerson lawsuit,harassment, singsnap, trevor, mcguire, katie, shanda, lawrence, assault, libel, copyright, slander Ottawa, Ontario

Trevor McGuire CEO of Singsnap stop stalking me on my social sites. Every time you come to one of my sites I know.. I have other sites that have trackers as well. I have no idea why you would tell your members I had a vendetta against you when it is you who can't stop stalking me? In fact on July 31st you came to my LinkedIn page.. I sent you a message asking you if you were interested in a new venture or were you just curious to see what I was up to? Then hours later on Aug 1st you were back on my LinkedIn page again. Then on Aug 1st you placed more comments from your FB page to your singsnapsucks page that you have Bob and I tagged on. You have a total of 78 comments on your FB page regarding that letter that by the way was crossing the lines of good faith. And accusing me of a vendetta which is not true. You did not share with your members your part in all of this.. I can make a word press site and do that but you see I am not the one obsessed here am I? ..So let's just say stay off my sites because it makes you look stalkish. Sick of seeing Nepean, Ottawa, ON, Canada showing up every where and every time I check my visitors. Get over yourself. Screen shots below from just 2 sites which should suffice to get my point across. Have a good one! I know McGuire can't see this as he is blocked but I am certain a singsnap friend or two of mine can get this to him. You are fortunate that this is as far as I am taking it .. Unless of course your obsession doesn't end .. Then we will take it back to Hey and will include your letter. ..This was posted on my facebook page and I am already getting inquires from your members asking me if you are dangerous. Diane and Bob

Singsnap/Eatsleepmusic slam-dunks Diane Patchen and her fiancé Robert Smik right out of court with a win. 

It seems this entire lawsuit was nothing more than elaborate fabrications as told by Diane Patchen and her fiancé Robert Smik to their attorney Francis X.Taney Jr. to bring a frivolous lawsuit with hopes of winning thousands of dollars from the defendants named in the suit found on pacer.gov. 

Much to the dismay of the Plaintiffs the Judge in this case, Judge William H. Yohn Jr. saw right through this scam and threw out any motion the plaintiffs and their attorney tried to execute. The judge denied the motion to sever two of the defendants, as he said it would not serve justice and he stated these claims were "Frivolous" So what we have here is justice being served for the defendants wrongly accused by the plaintiffs. 

It is a sad state of affairs when people such as Diane Patchen and her fiancé Robert Smik waste the court systems time. So we need to ask the question. Does money really talk, or the truth? The plaintiffs would have you believe the first to be true. In this case justice prevailed and this hoax of a lawsuit brought by the plaintiffs should embarrass them, and teach them a lesson. That lesson would be. Don't attempt to lie when you have nothing to back up your fabrications. This was a laughable attempt to win a lawsuit, start to the finish.

To those who watched this lawsuit unfold and wind down to a loss for the plaintiffs, we can only say this. Look before you leap. 

On August 25th, 2011 a lawsuit was filed against SingSnap.com founder and CEO Trevor McGuire as well as three other members of the SingSnap website. This lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania Federal Court by Diane Patchen and her fianc Robert Smik, alleged, among other things, a conspiracy to defame and copyright infringement. Eatsleepmusic Corporation, owner of SingSnap, was later added as a defendant.

Diane Patchen was banned from the SingSnap community in February of 2010 and soon after made numerous inaccurate posts around the web regarding Mr. McGuire and his business. Filing this lawsuit against him was, Mr. McGuire believes, the culmination of her vendetta. As soon as the lawsuit was filed, it was publicized on dozens of Internet complaint boards by anonymous posters.

McGuire and SingSnap immediately retained counsel to fight these ridiculous and baseless allegations.

On September 27th, 2012 the Judge William H. Yohn Jr. of the United States District Court DISMISSED all of the Plaintiffs claims and Denied the motion for severance and transfer of the claims as not in the interests of justice because the claims were frivolous. The parties later resolved the litigation, including motions by McGuire and Eatsleepmusic Corporation seeking sanctions and their attorneys fees, to the satisfaction of all parties.

http://singsnapsucks.com/2013/04/22/judge-finds-lawsuit-against-singsnap-and-ceo-trevor-mcguire-frivolous-2/

I did contact Mr. Zralek.  He declined to represent either of you.  He is a very smart man.

My name is Judy Ann Johnson Wilson-Holland

If anyone wishes for information or answers,  I have a representative in my employ for that.  Please 
contact my attorney Stephen Zralek.  615-238-6305.

Thank you.

What does being an editor have to do with this? You now judge people based on what they do for a living? More slandering in the name of God? 

This is all I have to say on this subject. It is clear you have a very deep hate for this person. Hate is not acceptable by God for you. 

But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you  Luke 6:27 And the Lords servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.  Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth.

 Timothy 2:2426 In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven. Matthew 5:16 The second is this: You must love your neighbor as yourself. No other commandment is greater than these.   Mark 12:31            

First of all who I am is of no consequence. I told you all I need to say about who I am. 

 If you have the blood of Jesus no person named Judy Holland can cast a spell on you. Maybe too close to Halloween for comfort. And God actually spoke to you and said the name of a person? You are again slandering someone in God's name saying he told you to slander. I don't think you are getting it. God told you this person practices black magic? Well that is neither here nor there. God did not give out names to you. On the other hand Satan may have or you just think it is okay to slander someone because you claim to be doing it in God's name. You have no fear or trembling in your walk as a believer do you? Look up fear and trembling. 

As far as your scripture about pride. I am not her with a haughty pride but you are post after post. Do you even know what that scripture means? I did not think so but as one Christian to another I will explain it to you because I am compelled to help my fellow Sister or Brother in the Lord. 

There is a difference between the kind of pride that God hates (Proverbs 8:13) and the kind of pride we feel about a job well done. The kind of pride that stems from self-righteousness is sin, and God hates it because it is a hindrance to seeking Him.Psalm 10:4 explains that the proud are so consumed with themselves that their thoughts are far from God: In his pride the wicked does not seek him; in all his thoughts there is no room for God. This kind of haughty pride is the opposite of the spirit of humility that God seeks: Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:3). The poor in spirit are those who recognize their utter spiritual bankruptcy and their inability to come to God aside from His divine grace. The proud, on the other hand, are so blinded by their pride that they think they have no need of God or, worse, that God should accept them as they are because they deserve His acceptance. 

Throughout Scripture we are told about the consequences of pride. Proverbs 16:18-19 tells us that pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall. Better to be lowly in spirit and among the oppressed than to share plunder with the proud. Satan was cast out of heaven because of pride (Isaiah 14:12-15). He had the selfish audacity to attempt to replace God Himself as the rightful ruler of the universe. But Satan will be cast down to hell in the final judgment of God. For those who rise up in defiance against God, there is nothing ahead but disaster (Isaiah 14:22).

Pride has kept many people from accepting Jesus Christ as Savior. Admitting sin and acknowledging that in our own strength we can do nothing to inherit eternal life is a constant stumbling block for prideful people. We are not to boast about ourselves; if we want to boast, then we are to proclaim the glories of God. What we say about ourselves means nothing in Gods work. It is what God says about us that makes the difference (2 Corinthians 10:13).

Why is pride so sinful? Pride is giving ourselves the credit for something that God has accomplished. Pride is taking the glory that belongs to God alone and keeping it for ourselves. Pride is essentially self-worship. Anything we accomplish in this world would not have been possible were it not for God enabling and sustaining us. What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not? (1 Corinthians 4:7). That is why we give God the glory,He alone deserves it.

When you can truly relinquish all to the Lord that has overwhelmed you. Then your real walk will begin. You may think I come with pride. I come as my duty to our Lord and Saviour as I told you to not allow onlookers to be let astray by non scriptural statements made here or on any reports I see on this site. I am doing a thesis actually and that is how I ended up here. You will find me on many other reports witnessing. I have not just been focusing my energies here. I do appreciate having a subject here for my thesis. Very interesting. But truly do no be mislead by voices you may hear in your head. It is not God speaking to you. God Bless 

One last thing... Judy Holland supposedly edits books for a living... These books:

http://www.witchbloodthenovel.com/

Curiosity killed the cat... sigh...

I want to point some things out to you.  First, I don't really believe you are who you claim to be.  Second, you seem awfully proud of yourself for being able to preach online to someone(s) you don't know at all (supposedly).  Proverbs 16:18 Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall.  Third, I don't disagree with the scripture you have quoted, I disagree with the way you are using it... you continually say I am not a Christian and that is a lie.  Unless YOU are a prophet, YOU don't know.  I've made mistakes but I've more than made up for them and praise God every day for His forgiveness.

As for saying Judy Holland is a black witch, I have already told you, it is not an insult, it is the truth.  She practices dark magic.  If I'm not mistaken, if you believe in The Lord you must believe in Satan/Evil as well.  Is it outside of your realm to believe this woman has cast spells of evil onto me?  I know she has... yes, God told me.  Why did God tell me?  How did God tell me?  I prayed over it, I asked God why I was feeling spiritually attacked and His answer to me was that Judy Holland was a black witch and was casting black spells onto me.  I asked God to protect me and my family and to cast out the evil surrounding me.

If you wish to continue hanging about here and quote more scripture, make more speculations about me, etc., I have no objection whatsoever.  You will, however, be speaking to an empty room as far as I'm concerned.  I will not respond to you again because there is no point; you simply want a debate.  I do not debate.

I've forgiven those who have wronged me.  I am free from anger and resentment.  THAT is MY testimony.

Best wishes and God Bless.

What I do in my spare time is witness to the lost souls that are seeking what it means to be a believer. I am not railing on you.  I am clearly explaining that lip service does not make for a true believer. I don't think I am preaching to the choir as you say, if I were you would be in agreement with my posts and the scripture that backs it up. You clearly are not. 

Holding up a cross in a picture of yourself with the look of being lost tells me you have no biblical foundation. Without knowing God's word and what He expects from His children how can you know what God expects of you.

Again on that day when people cry out Lord Lord. He will say I never knew you.  You are not a testimony by your actions. Like I said talk to your Pastor and let him know you do not understand what the Lord Jesus expects of you or how you should conduct yourself in this secular world you live in to let people know by just my actions I belong to God. 

And again I am sorry but because you say to go away makes me want to stay more. It makes me think Satan is hindering your relationship with God. It makes me believe you are being tricked. You can't forgive or ask for forgiveness unless you go to your Brothers and Sisters in the Lord and ask them. If they say no then at least you have done what Jesus has instructed you to do. 

I will pray that God opens up your heart for your vicious slander you posted here to someone you referred to as an evil black witch. Your eyes and ears are closed to Gods word. Some people think they are believers and are not. Think about that. 

Again I am not only posting here for you. This in itself shows what witnessing the word of God is. I can say this in biblical days one false teaching uttered out of the mouth of a believer an end was put to that.  If and when I decide to stop posting I will. For now I can actually multitask. I can study and witness. It is a gift. 

25 year old Theology student... why in the world are you HERE railing me instead of studying?  Do you have any idea whatsoever the things which have been done to me for the last few years?  I highly doubt it.  You do not know me or the patience I've had.

I have a 25 year old daughter.  She is a good girl and she doesn't try to tell other people what or how to believe.  She is a Christian too.  We both pray for our enemies.  However, we also don't allow other people to get away with evil.  This also applies to my ten year old son and my 45 year old husband.  WE WALK IN FAITH.

Now, you can continue with your... lecture/preaching/theology/ranting if you wish but you are, as they say in the South:  PREACHING TO THE CHOIR.

Let go and let GOD.  Goodbye and have a nice life.  :)

What did Jesus say about hypocrisy and hypocrites?

By far, of all preachers and prophets of the Bible, Jesus had the most to say about
hypocrisy and hypocrites. Since He didn't mince any words on the subject, but
directly confronted the religious hypocrites of His day (the scribes and
Pharisees), they hated Him intensely - eventually having Him arrested on trumped
up charges.

Praying in public to be recognized as "God's man"
Complaining about other's behavior when yours is even worse.
Pretending to honor God through lip service only. 
Testing other people to try to make yourself look superior. 
Deceiving people from knowing God.
Doing everything for show, while really being self-indulgent and unrighteous. 
Being able to analyze the weather, but unable to distinguish between right and wrong.

Jesus indicated that those who practiced hypocrisy would be sent to hell, indicating that they were really non believers.

In other books of the New Testament, the writers associate hypocrisy with such things as evil, lying,perverting the gospel, envy and slander, and jealousy and selfish ambition. James contrasts the evil of hypocrisy with the "wisdom from above," which is characterized as being "pure, peaceable, gentle, reasonable, full of mercy and good fruits, unwavering."

The Old Testament prophet Daniel even predicted that there would be more hypocrites in the end times, as the cost of faith could well be your life. Jesus also predicted that many would fall away although they would claim to be His disciple at the judgement.

"Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.' " (Matthew 7:21-23)

Christianity should not be judged on the basis of those who claim to be its adherents, when, in reality, they practice the opposite of what it teaches. 

Yeah, here we go again, JUDYAUTHOR: Shanda Lancaster - Dickson (USA)SUBMITTED: Monday, October 29, 2012...or is that JOODEE, Judith, Jude, or SHAPESHIFTER?!  You are a vile, evil, and despicable person.  I pray for you though.  God have mercy on you if you don't stop your demented behavior.  How many lives have you attempted to ruin?  How many identities have you stolen?

I know Judy Holland is the one behind the majority of atrocious reports and comments on all these sites... I know it just as I know she is a witch... a black witch.  I rebuke you, JUDY, and your EVIL in the name of THE LORD ALMIGHTY!

"Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account."

What this means is when people call someone evil but pretend it is coming from God on His behalf the person being called evil shall prevail in Gods eyes. Or it can be used when a non believer is spewing evil when God's word is being mentioned and the thought that the name of God is being used would make a person so angry they would think of you as delusional. But to represent the Lord one must use wisdom and patience. Not force. God has mercy on many people. And on some He has none because when some cry out Lord Lord, He will say I never knew you. 

To call a person a witch? Is that the teaching of the Lord? Please show me where in scripture God says for a believer to say outrageous lies and then to have the audacity to claim it is from God!!

A real Christian would not be in this kind of feud to begin with. A real Christian would show compassion and then walk away. A real Christian does not lie to themselves or to anyone else for that matter. 

I do not get your point on being a non denominational? Do you doubt their will be saved people from organized religions? Has God given you some kind of gift that He did not give others. 

If you do attend a church, I would also make sure my Pastor is teaching the true word of God. And I would assume if your Pastor saw you vicious posts here that I have seen he would have to speak with you and if need be bring in other members of the church. 

Churches can and do throw out of their congregation people who do things that bring down their congregation. And although you are not doing it in said building of this congregation you are not a light for them or a good testimony. If you do not fear that you are by all means bring your pastor here to have him see and join in with me on discussing God's word. 

You also seem to have a gift of being able to see who I am. Would it surprise you to know I am a 25 yr. old male who is studying theology at Grand Rapids Theological Seminary? Probably not as you have been given the gift of a prophet down to names it seems. 

I am not here for your personal salvation and guidance so no, I will not flee by your words. People need to know that although you come here in the name of the Lord Jesus it is abundantly clear you do not! 

I will witness here to keep lies of Satan away from anyone seeking the Lord. Sorry this is not about you Ms. Lancaster. 

To call a person a witch? Is that the teaching of the Lord? Please show me where in scripture God says for a believer to say outrageous lies and then to have the audacity to claim it is from God!!

A real Christian would not be in this kind of feud to begin with. A real Christian would show compassion and then walk away. A real Christian does not lie to themselves or to anyone else for that matter. 

I do not get your point on being a non denominational? Do you doubt their will be saved people from organized religions? Has God given you some kind of gift that He did not give others. 

If you do attend a church, I would also make sure my Pastor is teaching the true word of God. And I would assume if your Pastor saw you vicious posts here that I have seen he would have to speak with you and if need be bring in other members of the church. 

Churches can and do throw out of their congregation people who do things that bring down their congregation. And although you are not doing it in said building of this congregation you are not a light for them or a good testimony. If you do not fear that you are by all means bring your pastor here to have him see and join in with me on discussing God's word. 

You also seem to have a gift of being able to see who I am. Would it surprise you to know I am a 25 yr. old male who is studying theology at Grand Rapids Theological Seminary? Probably not as you have been given the gift of a prophet down to names it seems. 

I am not here for your personal salvation and guidance so no, I will not flee by your words. People need to know that although you come here in the name of the Lord Jesus it is abundantly clear you do not! 

I will witness here to keep lies of Satan away from anyone seeking the Lord. Sorry this is not about you Ms. Lancaster. 

A final thought to all who read my previous posts. 

In the parable the sower sows the seed. God prepares the ground that will receive the message by faith. But the ground, the human heart, might be hardened in unbelief, only superficially happy about the message, or too entangled with the cares of this world. There are many reasons that people do not respond by faith to the word. But those who do will produce fruit. The faith that they have will be developed by revelation being given to them. To those who have, more will be given.

We like the Sower (Christ at first) have the responsibility to proclaim the message of the kingdom, the gospel, to the world. It is the Word of God that will produce results.

I can only plant seeds, I can not make them take root. 

I appreciate what you honestly believe is the right thing to do but, once again, you do not know what is in my heart- only God knows.  I have nothing to hide and, in fact, invite the Lord to walk with me everywhere I go... HE DOES.  I am a nondenominational Christian... not Catholic, Baptist, etc. etc.  Christ is my redeemer, not my religion.

Judy Holland IS a witch and has been attacking me spiritually for months.  I've fought the battle; she has lost.  I am not insulting her, I am pointing toward the TRUTH as God told me.  She no longer has any power of me because I cast her evil OUT in the name of the Heavenly Father.

Now, I am finished attempting to justify myself to you... you do not know the truth... perhaps YOU should talk to our Father.

A final thought to all who read my previous posts. 

In the parable the sower sows the seed. God prepares the ground
that will receive the message by faith. But the ground, the human heart, might
be hardened in unbelief, only superficially happy about the message, or too
entangled with the cares of this world. There are many reasons that people do
not respond by faith to the word. But those who do will produce fruit. The
faith that they have will be developed by revelation being given to them. To
those who have, more will be given.

We like the Sower (Christ at first) have the responsibility to
proclaim the message of the kingdom, the gospel, to the world. It is the Word of
God that will produce results.

I can only plant seeds, I can not make them take root. 

When anyone hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand it, then the wicked one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is he who received seed by the wayside. But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles. Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful.  But he who received seed on the good ground is he who hears the word and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and produces some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.

You may have heard the word of God but it has not taken root. I am not preaching to you God is. You are trying to deceive God but you can't. You can only deceive a human who has no foundation in the word of God. You bear false witness to all who reads your words of I forgive and I rebuke you. 

You have hindered your personal relationship with the Lord and your prayers are not noted with your hardened hear like Pharaoh. 

I as a Christian to turn away and allow you to deceive people who read your words of half truths and distort Gods word would be allowing someone to be confused. God is not a God of confusion. 

God does know your heart. And if I as a Christian can see your hardened heart what must God see? 

I did not call you a liar. You are one according to God's word. And God warns people to not stray from His word over that of a person who acting as a heathen. Sorry but you need to seek out other believers and get help. You are here rebuking people and calling people witches. 

if Jesus knocked on your door now could you truly invite him in, or would you have to go hide things from Him? And we know you could not actually do that. It is just a question to see if your walk with Jesus is sound. The fact that you said stop preaching to you indicates your foundation is very shaky. These are not the words of a child of God

Your words.  You are a vile, evil, and despicable person   I know it just as I know she is a witch... a black witch.

Signed, 

A messenger of the word of God through the Holy Spirit 

Unless you ARE God you have no idea what I read, didn't read, believe, don't believe, etc.  You are a human being and are basically calling me a liar. 

I know what's in my heart, I know what I said is true, and God knows it as well.  I am finished with this now so you can stop with the long, drawn out preaching.  I am saved and I don't need those words from you whether your intentions are well meant or not.  Have a nice day.  :)

I was hoping you read what I posted. You are telling people to repent but have you? You are not being honest by saying you are here for public announcement reasons by your previous posts. 

You are harboring some things deep inside of you that you do not want to own up to yourself. If you do not heed Gods words you really can't let any water roll off your back like a duck. You may say you are but you would be deceiving yourself. God can't be deceived because the words you speak as one of his children as you state you are, is a contradiction of how Jesus would expect you to deal with your fellow brethren. You are not in a position to know who is a Christian and who is not. Christians should be a light to the world. Meaning a person should be able to see who you are by your actions. There are heathens that believe they are Christians because they attend church or do good deeds.  It would show simply by your actions. Your actions here do not show that. And please do not say I am here claiming you can't be a Christian but by your actions it is hard to believe you are no matter how many times you use the words rebuke and repent. As a Christian myself I felt compelled to reach out to you and I don't even know you other than from your posts here. As I said I am an onlooker. I can't speak for any other person posting here because they are not claiming to be Christians. I can say to them if you are, then also read what I posted. If not, none of these words would amount to a hill of beans to them. 

So please read this again and think about whether it is more important to make public announcements or for your relationship with the Lord not be hindered. It is up to you ultimately to wrong rights so, do your part and release your soul from blame. 

What to do if you trespass: If you are aware of any trespass you have committed
against your brother, you have a responsibility to go to him and seek his
forgiveness. Should you not attempt reconciliation, this will hinder your
relationship with God. Your worship, your prayers and service to the Lord will
not be acceptable. "Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there
remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there
before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then
come and offer your gift" (Matt. 5:23-24).

Note that the scripture says "if your brother has something against you." In other
words, you might not feel that you have legitimately violated your brother or
sister. But if you are aware that "they" harbor an offense against you, you
still are obligated to go and try to resolve the issue. Be willing to be humble
and submissive to others, even when you don't consider yourself to be at fault.

Don't be so rigid and self-righteous that you stand in the way of a brother or
sister's reconciliation with you or with God (Rom. 15:1-3). Offer your
unpretentious, sincere apology for any unintentional offense and make every
effort to reconcile, so that your relationship with God will not be hindered.

Whether or not they pardon you, you have done your part and released your soul
from blame. And by doing this your heart is also at peace. 

At this point I am attempting to provide a public service and warn people about what can happen to them.

All the insults... I could care less about that anymore; I LET IT GO.  Those people are forgiven as far as I am concerned... it is in God's hands now.

I have said it before, I'll say it again... repent before it is too late.  Stop your harassment of me and others.  Your anger is only hurting you... it rolls off me like water off a duck.  ::shrug::

Please read this. Yes it is a copy and paste. But it comes from the word of God. If you believe you will take the time to read this and hopefully the message from our loving God will reach you. 

Signed and onlooker. 



Matthew 18:15: "Moreover, if your brother should commit an act of sin, be going, show him his sin with a view of convicting him of it and bringing about a confession between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have won your brother over."

 Matthew 18:15-17, Jesus established a procedure to be followed in the event that a brother would commit a sin or offense against another Christian. Many Christian scholars believe that this is one of the most neglected teachings of the entire Bible. It's been said that if all believers would simply obey scripture, to go and confront their offenders in the manner Jesus gave, it would solve over half of all problems which exist in the church. 
It is important to confront those brethren who have trespassed against us for the following five reasons: 
(1) To resolve misunderstandings. Most offenses in the church result from misunderstandings and many could be quickly resolved if offended parties would just go to the source and find out the facts. Unfortunately, some offended people will just absorb the offense silently, while growing bitter and resentful. It is important to God, and a matter of obedience to His Word, that such issues are confronted. 
(2) To maintain peace in the body of Christ (Eph. 4:1-3). Whenever there is friction and turmoil between believers it affects the whole body. It hinders people from entering into worship and receiving from God's Word. It creates an uninviting atmosphere for visitors in the church, it may hinder people from coming to Christ, and can even grieve the Holy Spirit (Eph. 4:30-32). 
(3) So Satan cannot gain advantage over us (2 Cor. 2:10-11). For our own spiritual well-being, we must be quick to resolve our differences with brethren and forgive. Satan can hinder our spiritual life, and even deceive us into apostasy, through harbored bitterness or unforgiveness (Matt. 18:35). 
(4) So that the offender is held accountable  to not repeat his actions to harm the faith of others (Matt. 18:6). Persons who bring offense against you are likely to repeat similar acts against others. Confronting their offensive behavior may cause them to restrain their actions from causing further offenses. 
(5) To restore a fallen brother (Gal. 6:1). Christians must make every attempt to restore brethren who fall into sin. Especially when the transgression has been committed against us, our love for our brother's spiritual well-being demands that we confront the brother so that he might be reconciled to God. 

How to deal with the trespasser: The following scripture is how Jesus taught for Christians to confront those brethren who have wronged them.
Matthew 18:15 "Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. 
18:16 But if he will not hear you, take with you one or two more, that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 
18:17 And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector."First, Go to your brother privately (Matt. 18:15). If a fellow Christian has sinned or brought an offense against you, Jesus said for you to first go to the offending party, confront him with the offense, and keep the matter private between yourselves. Remember, the objective is to not merely to seek justice for a violation against us, but to seek "reconciliation" with our brother, and his restoration to a right relationship with God. 
Why is the matter to be first kept private between you two? Because our love for our brother requires it. If we are sincerely committed to love for our brethren as Jesus commands (John 13:34), then even if a brother has sinned against us or has done us wrong, we will not want to maliciously injure that brother's credibility within the body that might hinder his restoration. If this person's transgression against you is circulated within the body, but later he repents, many in the body will have already judged this brother and the accusations will have damaged their opinion of him. By spreading our accusation against an offending party, it builds a consensus against them and makes it difficult, if not nearly impossible, to restore that person to the body should they repent and desire to make things right. 
Also, many alleged trespasses between brethren are a result of "misunderstandings." We need to first investigate the facts and find out for sure whether a trespass has really occurred. This is another reason why you are to first go privately to the brother or sister in question to confront them with the alleged offense and hear their side of the story. If we disclose the offense to friends in the body, we may later discover that the matter was only a misunderstanding. But by then, their reputation will have been damaged by our allegations. 
Many people foolishly allow themselves to become offended by misinterpreting other's intentions, or listening to rumors and secondhand information which always contain distortions or exaggerations. Many offenses could be immediately resolved by confronting the offending party and hearing their explanation. You'd be surprised how many people are so immature that they don't even bother to investigate the facts or hear the other side of the story. Don't ever forget, "There are always two sides to a story," and never assume you know the truth of a matter until you've heard both sides.
I can guarantee that there would be far fewer misunderstandings in the body of Christ if people would be firmly devoted to love for their brethren. Love for the brethren gives us a desire to believe the best in our brother, giving him the "benefit of the doubt," instead of jumping to conclusions and always expecting the worst. The Bible says "If you love someone... you will always believe in him, always expect the best of him" (1 Cor. 13:7 TLB). 
If the trespass is proven valid, and he or she repent's for their misdeed, you are to express your forgiveness (Luke 17:3-4). Let the matter be forever ended, and carry no resentment toward them. Remember, if they repent, but you continue to harbor bitterness, you too become a perpetrator of sin (Matt. 6:14-15, Acts 8:23, Eph. 4:31-32). 
Second, take another brother (Matt. 18:16). If your private attempt fails to resolve the issue, you are then to take one other Christian and again confront the offending party. The presence of another Christian is as a witness to strengthen the serious effect of confrontation, to collaborate the exhortation of scripture, to amplify the Lord's presence in the meeting, and to verify the exchange of testimony. 
Third, tell Church leadership (Matt. 18:17). If the first and second attempts fail, Jesus said then to "tell it to the church." This doesn't mean the "entire" church body, as this could cause unrest or damage the faith of young believers. The meaning is that the church pastors or elders are then to bear responsibility in dealing with the offending party. 
Finally, if these three prescribed attempts fail, we are no longer required to entreat them with the courtesies shown to brethren. They may be dealt with in the same fashion as we would a heathen or publican (Matt. 18:17). 
What to do if you trespass: If you are aware of any trespass you have committed against your brother, you have a responsibility to go to him and seek his forgiveness. Should you not attempt reconciliation, this will hinder your relationship with God. Your worship, your prayers and service to the Lord will not be acceptable. "Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift" (Matt. 5:23-24).
Note that the scripture says "if your brother has something against you." In other words, you might not feel that you have legitimately violated your brother or sister. But if you are aware that "they" harbor an offense against you, you still are obligated to go and try to resolve the issue. Be willing to be humble and submissive to others, even when you don't consider yourself to be at fault. Don't be so rigid and self-righteous that you stand in the way of a brother or sister's reconciliation with you or with God (Rom. 15:1-3). Offer your unpretentious, sincere apology for any unintentional offense and make every effort to reconcile, so that your relationship with God will not be hindered. Whether or not they pardon you, you have done your part and released your soul from blame.

Your story, though compelling, is not at all like this one. This woman, Judy Holland, posted I gave them herpes and that my children are inbred monsters. No, your story and mine are nothing alike whatsoever... I know Judy is behind those (and numerous other) posts so my accusations and opinions are true.

I got sued in 2009 by posting about my ex girlfriend on sites like this ohe.I didn not know much about computer or pcs at the time and used my own name.  I got super pissed and for 7 month posted all kinds of things.  later other people wanted to reply and several people told me i could be in really bad troublew by doing what I was doing.  I though my ex was comin on and pretending to be differnet people and that her friends were all saying things about me.  whenever I talked back to them I said it was her in my posts and on may of 2009 i got a summons that she was suing me for damagaes.  I had to drive back and forth between my town and court because my town is very small.  gas cost and I lost as lot of time at work to. I could no way get a lawyer and she showed the court that I posted all tthis stuff and yes I used my own real name. i have to pay her now over 100 per month for will be about 25 years.  I cant afford it but if I mis a payment I will be in trouble with the court.  I would never post in myown name and never say things about people by guessing.  I got in bad trouble anb you should be careful that this person doesnt take you to court the same way as me

I have stated facts.  Judy Holland is behind numerous attacks toward me, both online and spiritually.  I am a Christian which is why I continue to pray for my enemies, including Judy.  She has been vile and despicable in her behavior toward me and others... downright EVIL, in fact.

Of course, someone who does not have a relationship with God would not understand that is just what I am supposed to do.  It is also known as witnessing for God when you let a person know, publicly, you are praying for them.

Since I am an American citizen, it is my right to freedom of speech to witness for God.  Christianity is illegal in 51 countries but The United States is not one of them.

You, Judy, are not the boss of me... NO-ONE but God directs me.  When HE is done with me... I am done with YOU.

Anyone ill enough, evil enough and stupid enough to spout accusations and comments and name calling and other horrid things when they absolutely have zero idea what they're talking about is no Christian.

Shanda?  Or Ms. Lancaster, whichever you'd prefer are no Christian.  The best thing to say to you would be

Matthew 16:23

But they turned and said to Shanda, "Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God's interests, but your own."

Go away

I know it's you now.  There is no guessing whatsoever.  I'm not the one looking bad, Judy... YOU are.

I don't think in terms of 'poor me'.  I've withstood more than most throughout my life and, particularly, this year.  I do NOT care what you think or say about me at all.

If anyone is jealous, Judy, it is YOU.  I have every blessing a woman could possibly have... can you say the same?

Oh, and, yes, I do oppose sites like this when they are not monitored properly and innocent people's reputations are put on the line.  People like YOU abuse sites like this for your own vile means.

I feel sorry for you, Judy.

You are banned from Pissed consumer from ironically enough...pissing them off.  Pun intended.

Then, you start a petition to what?  Remove pissedconsumer from the internet?  Force them to remove everything about poor you?

Moronic much?  How can you possibly start a petition against pissed consumer when YOU posted thousands of defamation and slanderous statements yourself?  You are a regular riot lady.

This last post is a doozy and you couldn't (once again) be more wrong.  First, jealousy is an awful shade of green on you.  Secondly, you're so sure it's Michael.  Then, not so sure.  Then, so sure it's this person or that person, or Jane, or Tom, or d**k or Harry.
Next week, the dog will probably have done it.  Wait.  No.  Obama is busy with minor election things-n-all,  couldn't possibly be him.  Or could it?


I highly recommend camomile tea.  It may calm you down.  Your nerves are shot.

...or is that JOODEE, Judith, Jude, or SHAPESHIFTER?!  You are a vile, evil, and despicable person.  I pray for you though.  God have mercy on you if you don't stop your demented behavior.  How many lives have you attempted to ruin?  How many identities have you stolen?

I know Judy Holland is the one behind the majority of atrocious reports and comments on all these sites... I know it just as I know she is a witch... a black witch.  I rebuke you, JUDY, and your EVIL in the name of THE LORD ALMIGHTY!

You busted someone? for what? drugs? prostitution? theft? speeding? being you? Give it up already, you look so silly now. So what it appears to anyone who reads this is you Shanda Lancaster assumed that this person Michael Steward was posting here. Then he posts he did not ever post here therefore making you look like an idiot.  It seems like another one of your mistaken identity guesses and nothing more. So the best you can come up with to try and undo your blunder is to say busted! Okay that seems fair. If you live inside your head maybe. 

You are busted.  I know who you are.

I believe you and apologize.  Best wishes to you in your future endeavors.  I will not bring your name into this conflict again.

Shanda, I did not intend to add you to my LinkedIn account, it simply populated all the email addresses which I migrated from my other accounts, and once I received your response stating that you did not wish to be any part of any account connected with me I immediately deleted your name, which is probably why you appear to be blocked. It was not a malicious act. 
I believe that you know that I have an adequate command of the english language to the point that I would not misspell the word buffoon, but I leave it to you to believe what you will. No person posing as me or accepting the opinion of others that posts written by him were composed by me is, in fact, me. I suppose that sounds convoluted, but basically I am saying that I did not write any of the posts above, and I would appreciate your not speculating that I did so without actual proof. The author's name may actually be Michael as well, or he may be hiding behind my prior reputation, I honestly have no idea. Suffice it to say that I do not support either you or Diane. If I wanted to remain embroiled in this fray I would be honest and straightforward about it. I am heavily involved in pursuing an advanced degree at the moment and I really would not have the time to engage in this infantilism even had I the interest in doing so. 
I sincerely ask all parties who wish to remain enemies of Trevor McGuire and his enterprise, and its agents, staff and site members to not include my name in your feud. I am not part of it, I do not wish to be a part of it, and it is craven for anyone to assume that I am a part of it. Continue in your quixotic flailing if you wish, but PLEASE leave me out of it. 

This article/complaint/diatribe was pointed out to me yesterday when I tried to sign on to my restored singsnap account only to discover that I had once again been banned. For the record, I fully resigned from this conflict several months ago and gave my word to Trevor and others that I would not reengage the conflict. I have been true to my word since that time and remain so. Shanda has speculated that the person posting from Hollywood, FL is me when in point of fact I do not live in Hollywood, I live in West Palm Beach. If anyone has an issue with men in nursing due to homophobia or sexist bias, that is not an issue that I can help anymore than I have power over those who have racist, ageist or antisemitic attitudes. I have never been any party to this legal wrangling and still am not. I have no quarrel with singsnap or Trevor McGuire or any of the staff, agents or members of the site in any way. I do not support the conflict which Diane and her fellow travelers have against Singsnap, Shanda, Trevor or Larry and I never have. I do not foresee anything that would compel me to harbor any resentment or to resume what, for me, is a long dead conflict. To any person or persons who by action or failure of action encourage the impression that they are me or speak on my behalf, please have the honor to own your own words and not attribute them falsely to me. I moved on from this dead horse long ago and I suggest to all parties that continue to embroil themselves in it to leave it be and move on. Until it was pointed out to me that my name has been dragged into it again I fully thought that I had.

are amusing. i think you clearly have a severe memory loss. it is the yr 2012 going into 2013. you were doing the slandering all over the internet in 2010 or do you deny that shanda? people who read your continuous s**t maybe realized what a nut you were and decided they were tired of you. hell you are still posting about people and making accusations of who is who and posting in your words libel about them. you are posting peoples names who have had nothing to do with you for over a yr or better but are so convinced you know who everyone is who is posting against you. you can not sue a person unless you actually know who you are suing buffoon. and the way you are so freely using your own name because you claim you don't lie and have nothing to hide makes it all the more amusing and entertainment for anyone who bothers to read your half a**ed ramblings. no one cares shanda. i for one don't give a rat's a**. but knock your brains out, what is left of your brain.  

You mean the behavior of someone who has be slandered all over the Internet because a group of people, including you, don't like me?  Because I defended and continue to defend myself?
I never belittled your profession... not my style.
As for adding you as a connection on any site?  Unless you tell me what you want, forget it.  I sent you an email saying the same but you apparently have me blocked.
Personally, I think you are as mad as a hatter.

shanda your ridiculous behavior is an amusement to every person that reads your batsh*t crazy ramblings buffoon. you find male nurses a demeaning job a**hat.? i find your attention whoring behavior to be out of control even for you. maybe mcguire can find you a volunteer position proof reading karaoke tracks. trying to judge anyones personality profile is funny coming from a hermaphrodite.  

who cannot spell buffoon... lol.  Maybe you should have looked that word up on Google, Michael.

nuff said

are bat sh* crazy. you must be to keep repeating the same crap over and over. first i have no idea who the queen is other than the queen of england. i am speaking on behalf of no one, no need to do that, you two if it is you two do it enough for everyone. split personalty maybe.? not like you have not been down that road. do you read what you post? you are hatemongers for anyone who opposes you. only a person who cares about what you think would be insulted by your   infantile recommendations.  you are barking up the wrong tree. you post to hear yourself talk. i post for amusement as it clearly pisses you off. if it didn't piss you off you would walk away. but with your history that is an impossibility. don't know what as asshat is? look it up. so what we have here is a conflict of who the more intelligent person or persons would be. let's call in a team of experts and let them decide. i will get on that immediately. one prayers the other is a coward name caller. quite a twosome you make. hey shanda why isn't your alter ego praying? or better yet why are you not praying for "your" alter ego. entertainment at its best. anger management is something you would have benefited from. i am sure they have group rates for asshats .not sure they can cure people who have their head up their asses. but worth a try just the same. i am not sure how you group me into your favorite word? hater. but if we are stereotyping people hatemongers fit you both. 

Why are you such an angry little man Michael? You seem very angry towards women in particular. Interesting considering you are in a traditionally female dominated profession. I think you must have multiple problems. Female boss dominating you? Mommy issues? Other gender type issues? You should consider therapy as it may be very helpful. 
I find it very strange your sudden love for the queen, considering what you have said about her in the past. Hate makes strange bedfellows I suppose. What exactly is an asshat? Is that what you put on your patients after you wipe their arse? 
Michael, you are not a very smart man. You try hard to make people think you are, but you are not.
By the way, have you ever heard of capitalization? 
It is also nice that you have now openly confirmed that you are part of the little group of haters who have been wreaking havoc. I pity you.

shanda you contradict yourself with every post you have made for years. that is why anything you say is not only laughable but is idiotic as well. the only people you find interesting are the people that buy your crap. if someone doesn't buy into your crap they are not intelligent. last time i looked the reason this world goes around is because people have the ability to think on their own. people like you can't do that. that is why your need for the rallying of singsnap hierarchy is your only solace. i think your comment saying diane got as good as she gave is a bunch of horse s**t. by your own admission you patted yourself on the back for being the person who tried to convince people she did something unethical. unethical to who's standards? yours? singsnaps? it is a f**king karaoke site not the army. on sss you would never admit her so called crime and you still won't. like i said still an asshat and always will be. the holy roller thing is not cutting it. an eye for an eye is it? that is how you come off. what you are is pathetic, is your god in favor of that? no wonder people leave god behind. there are people in this world with morals they live by. no god needed for that. you don't even have morals so how can you claim to have god.? until you stop acting like a two faced bat s**t crazy woman you will never get anyone's attention or respect. drop the act, no one cared or cares. your stories are getting old and tiresome. attention w***e is what you are. don't you tire of the negative attention or do you actually enjoy any attention positive or negative? 

In knowing you either, Michael.  I was at one time, yes, because I thought you were interesting.  As for Diane, she got as good as she gave.  All I've ever done is tell the truth from my perspective... it does not matter to me if you agree or disagree.  Aren't you one who cries 'freedom of speech'?  Well, guess what?  I am too.  My opinion is that you are a very insecure person with a lot of major issues... this is one reason why I feel it very important to include you in my prayers.  I don't regret anything whatsoever.  Take care, Michael... I wish you well.

for christ sakes shanda, who are you trying to convince here? what ethical thing did you do shanda? i don't recall anything ethical about you on sss. unless you call ethical uses aliases to distract from the sites purpose to turn it into a diane sucks site? if you barely knew the man you had no problem posting all kind of absurd accusations from her throwing people under buses to her breaching trevors secrets to black mail.  i mean really like i said save your batshit crazy for someone who cares. i could also give a rats a*s about your ocd behavior on trying to convince anyone that this case is over, diane is some kind of spy or anything else on your feeble mind. i think it is you trying to convince yourself.  again i did not misuse sss you did. i said my piece there, i was entitled to my opinions and the site was created for the sole purpose of people airing their feelings about singsnap.  the n**i volunteers removing comments and banning people was the reason sss came to be. you respect a man who allows it's members to be raked over the coals if they are not yes men, good for you. live long and prosper. again save your proselytizing for yourself, you need to convert yourself before you can try to convert anyone else. let me know how it all works out for you in the end. not really, just pulling your leg. who are you talking to meh? not interested in knowing you. as far as katie or you commenting on who is not intelligent that is the best joke i have heard in months.   

I expected your reaction to be just as it is.  It doesn't bother me.  Moving on is exactly what I'm doing by praying for you and speaking to you in a civil manner.

My father was a diehard atheist most of his life... he died April 4, 2012.  In the days before his death he was asking people for prayers.  He was a good man but he just couldn't believe in something he could not see... I know he saw in the end.  I also know I will be with him and my mother who died September 30, 2012 someday.  That day will be of God's choosing, not mine.

You seem to think people cannot change... they do, Michael.

I never 'tattled' on Diane.  I stood up and did the ethical thing.  I barely knew Trevor so it wasn't a matter of doing him a favor at that time.

However, I've come to respect Trevor McGuire very much.  A kind man doesn't brag; he doesn't need to.  Trevor is kind and very generous.

Unless you change, you'll never be a quarter of the man that Trevor is.

Go ahead and blow a gasket on me again... I will just pray harder for you to have peace and contentment... to let go of your anger...

The lawsuit is OVER... accept it.

who the hell are you talking to? i was not born yesterday. talk about moving on, you are still hung up on something that happened that you caused by your leader almost 3 yrs ago? throw yourself under a bus but please take your batsh*t crazy some place else . this is so like you it is amazing. don't worry about proselytizing to people when you do the things you do. you give your god a bad name. 

Guess what?  I'm still praying for you.  I don't know what happened to you in your life to turn you away from GOD but it doesn't matter.  You may not believe in GOD but GOD still believes in you... like it or not.

The lawsuit is over.  Diane DID throw you under the bus... I know for a fact!  She used you, Michael, and you let your anger override your judgement.  I am not your enemy even if I am your enemy.  I tried to help you and your refused to believe just as you refuse to believe in GOD.

I wish you well and I hope, sincerely, that you will take some time to think things over and search your soul.

shanda and katie i can see that you two are still the same singsnap sycophants. the same singsnap acolytes.  who gives a f*k what either of you think about anyone. i think you two need to get a life and stop drinking the kool-aid it is totally messed with the brain cells you had left and you didn't have many between the both of you to begin with. you two are a waste of time. i won't even indulge you to discuss my personal life you think you know so well. save your prayers for the almighty leader of your cult. no one threw me under a bus and no one i know is referred to as the queen of hate other than you two.  

The haters have run wild for over a year with crazy predictions of what was going to happen in this frivolous lawsuit. They were wrong on every prediction. They LOST. 

As to future lawsuits, it is a free country so go to it!

Thank you for sharing that link to pacer. As I said you are incorrect about a win or a loss 

Civil procedure 12(b)(2) is hereby GRANTED and all claims against these defendants are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE 

Now did you bother to look up what 12(b)(2) is? Well I will inform you.

Under 12(b)(2), the complaint may be dismissed because the defendant is not subject to the personal jurisdiction of the court.  For example, if the defendant does not live in the same state or does not have sufficient ties to the area. 

So the reason from the judge for dismissal was jurisdiction under the civil law  12(b)(2)

And we already went over what dismissed without prejudice means correct? Or should I post that again for the other spectators here?

In a civil case, dismissal without prejudice is a dismissal that allows for re-filing of the case in the future. The present action is dismissed but the possibility remains open that the plaintiff may file another suit on the same claim. The inverse phrase is dismissal with prejudice, in which the plaintiff is barred from filing another case on the same claim. Dismissal with prejudice is a
final judgment and the case becomes res judicata on the claims that were or could have been brought in it, dismissal without prejudice is not.

So to recap again. The plaintiff can re file new suits now in the defendants own jurisdictions.

Refer to page 36 on pacer I do believe that is where the judge begins dismissing each defendant with the reasons I just explained. 

And no my name is not Billy Bob. I happen to take interest in legal cases for a reason. Just like you take interest
in misinterpreting the law. 

You certainly are an odd little fellow. A male nurse (chuckle) who lives in his Mothers basement. Seems like you are the one who empties bedpans for a living my dear. Hollywood FL, how illuminating!
What has got your panties in such a bunch Nancy? You do understand that your queen tossed you under the bus every chance she got? It is not too late to apologize and ask God for forgiveness.
From what I read you have little man complex. Very fitting, in every sense wouldn't you say? lol
I know you try hard to make people think you are smart but no one does. You are viewed as a foolish, yet somewhat peculiarly entertaining little man. 
Yes, Michael your queen lost her frivolous lawsuit. SHE LOST. LMAO. 
Why does that bother you so much? Were you paying her legal bills?
 

Long time no trash mouth from you... You cannot stop me from praying for you and I do everyday.  I feel sorry for you and that is the truth.  Go back to your terminally ill patients... you have such a wonderful bedside manner... Gee, who wouldn't want someone like you to care for them in the last days of their life?!

*So SAD*

this is what you both are. haters. 

haters are often uneducated selfish pr*cks who only argue for the sake of feeling better about themselves because their parents beat them abusively.

their intentions are no other reason except to make other people feel like s**t because usually they talk crap over the internet, knowing all too well that they would get their a*s handed to them in a fight in real life. the few exceptions who do hate in real life end up getting their a**es handed to them anyways. moral, if you don't like something, shut your god d**n mouth and move along.
 

i did not see any post that said the plaintiff won. what you are saying is she lost. now you are saying does this look like she won. another pea brain. what the posts here are saying no one won. seems your head is filled with crap you've been told. no wins for either side. case dismissed. never happened. start again. pretty simple for people to understand. you and the other asshat seem to be the only two who don't quite get it. so keep posting the same crap. just a repeat of you posting on the hate site named by jim how he was so smart in his business and how you just wanted to give your perspective on a site who could give a s**t what you thought. talk about horse faces look in the mirror lately? time for you to be put out to pasture. 

#16 Consumer CommentSorry Haters, You LOST!AUTHOR: Interesting - Helmut (United States of America)SUBMITTED: Monday, October 15, 2012"Hello people, my name is Billy-Bob and I have been watching this case with great interest and feel the need to spew my neutral legal opinion. But I will say the former defendants sure are stubborn and dumb. I am not a hater and I do not even know what it means." Really? Nice try.

You lost haters. You backed the wrong horse (face). Delusional much girls? Maybe you should try some HRT? LMAO
Have a read for yourselves. Still think she won?

shanda you are still on the sss crap? and i know why this suit began and so do you so why are you still lying you ballistic cuckoo? look at you, you went and prevented a serious crime did you get a badge or a blue ribbon from jim? no what you got is a huge headache. sticks and stones asshat. no wonder people don't believe in god? you claim to represent him. if you were representing satan at least it would explain you sadistic mental dribble day in and day out. shanda how long will you go on telling the story of how you saved the world? oh it was a karaoke site not the world. look at the little tattle tale. shanda on sss all you did was run your diarrhea mouth accusing people of being this one and that one when you were outed as being meh the judge and jury for ss, shut your a hole for once in your life. go sue the world for people who find you appalling. get over it shanda. no one thinks you matter that is obvious. only to you it is not. you are one disgusting excuse for a woman. don't pray for me. don't pray for anyone. people have a better chance of getting to the holy land of milk and honey and promises of your pretend god by killing someone. your word is worthless. you look like a 5 yr old ratting out someone when you peed your pants and blamed the kid sitting next to you.  like old times with the gang on sss. katie is no better. who kisses more a*s you or her? don't answer. never enough a*s kissing. and no one would want to get near your smelly a*s shanda so save all our gag reflexes. 

Someone actually asked what a hater is?  Hmm... Google may be able to tell you in detail.  lol  When you do look up the definition of 'hater' you will likely see photos of Diane Patchen, Judy Holland (whichever photo she decides to represent herself with; she tends to steal identities), and Michael Steward.  Unfortunately (or is that fortunately?) you will not see Sally Matzke... she dare not show her face for some reason.

Now, after you do all that, Google my name.  You will see what haters do to people... what they did to ME (and are still attempting to do to me).

The entire lawsuit was born of vengeance because Diane was banned for life from SingSnap.  Why?  Because she planned to betray Trevor McGuire.  How do I know?  Because I was ONE of the people who let Trevor know about her unethical intentions.  Believe it or not, Sally Matzke did as well!  I wonder if Diane knows THAT?!  lol  I guess she does now.  :D

"Hello people, my name is Billy-Bob and I have been watching this case with great interest and feel the need to spew my neutral legal opinion. But I will say the former defendants sure are stubborn and dumb. I am not a hater and I do not even know what it means." Really? Nice try.

You lost haters. You backed the wrong horse (face). Delusional much girls? Maybe you should try some HRT? LMAO
Have a read for yourselves. Still think she won? Judges do not casually use the words "frivolous" and "meritless"
http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/12d0941p.pdf

The judge dismissed this case and also denied the transfer cause "it was not in the interest of justice" In doing so he had to examine the merits of the case. He said it was FRIVOLOUS. He said the claims had LACK OF MERIT. 

Quotes from the judges ruling:
I conclude that the IIED, copyright, and defamation claims against Dickerson and the other defendants are frivolous under Washington law.

Since I have found that Patchens underlying claims should not be transferred for lack of merit, neither should the civil-conspiracy claim.

"As explained above, transfer of the copyright claim would not be in the interest of justicefrom the evidence presented, Singsnap owns the copyrights in the video and Patchen is not entitled to bring suit.

I also conclude that transfer is not warranted for Patchens defamation claim. Patchen is unlikely to be able to make out a claim for defamation under Tennessee law.

Patchens IIED claim against the defendants is similarly meritless.

Not so funny now, is it?

I have no idea who you are referring to as a hater?  But it is clear from your tone you are one of the defendants. I would like to ask you a legal question since you seem to have so much knowledge on the law. What exactly are these damages you claim the plaintiff will be possibly paying and to who? If you are talking about a sanction 11 you are also misinformed. If you think a sanction 11 is also a win it is not. A sanction 11 is a motion the defendant would try to bring to be reimbursed for some or all of their attorney fees.  That is unlikely in a case dismissed without prejudice. That would mean you are saying the judge is contradicting him or herself

I am sorry to inform you of this but as I said. A case dismissed without prejudice is a case that can be re filed. In fact as I said, it no longer exists. No wins no losses. You should have your counsel advise you on the law before posting something in public that is not a true statement.  

Please re read the what you refer to as wiki post. It is fact wiki or not. Look it up on one hundred legal sites if wiki is not your thing. You will still come up with the same answer I posted. I only uses a reference after my initial post to not be accused of not knowing what I am talking about. 

A judge can make a play by play how he may foresee this case moving to another jurisdiction. He can advise etc. It doesn't mean it can't happen differently with another judge. 

So once again this case was dismissed without prejudice which means it can begin for you all again. In fact new evidence can be brought in or different tactics by the attorney. Even in a murder case appeals have happened and a ruling is over turned.

If this case was dismissed with prejudice I would be posting here that the plaintiff can not re file this suit as the judge has barred the plaintiff from doing so. I am not taking sides here I am stating fact. If you were the plaintiff posting here I won because a case was not dismissed but is moving on to trial, I would have to say to them not a win until the jury decides or you move to settle with the defendant. 

I can say this much, I do see that the plaintiff here is dealing with some real stubborn people. If they can't even except the fact this is not over nor did they win they will never own up to anything. Again good luck to all involved. 

What may I ask is a hater? 

I have no idea who you are referring to as a hater?  But it is clear from your tone you are one of the defendants. I would like to ask you a legal question since you seem to have so much knowledge on the law. What exactly are these damages you claim the plaintiff will be possibly paying and to who? If you are talking about a sanction 11 you are also misinformed. If you think a sanction 11 is also a win it is not. A sanction 11 is a motion the defendant would try to bring to be reimbursed for some or all of their attorney fees.  That is unlikely in a case dismissed without prejudice. That would mean you are saying the judge is contradicting him or herself

I am sorry to inform you of this but as I said. A case dismissed without prejudice is a case that can be re filed. In fact as I said, it no longer exists. No wins no losses. You should have your counsel advise you on the law before posting something in public that is not a true statement.  

Please re read the what you refer to as wiki post. It is fact wiki or not. Look it up on one hundred legal sites if wiki is not your thing. You will still come up with the same answer I posted. I only uses a reference after my initial post to not be accused of not knowing what I am talking about. 

A judge can make a play by play how he may foresee this case moving to another jurisdiction. He can advise etc. It doesn't mean it can't happen differently with another judge. 

So once again this case was dismissed without prejudice which means it can begin for you all again. In fact new evidence can be brought in or different tactics by the attorney. Even in a murder case appeals have happened and a ruling is over turned.

If this case was dismissed with prejudice I would be posting here that the plaintiff can not re file this suit as the judge has barred the plaintiff from doing so. I am not taking sides here I am stating fact. If you were the plaintiff posting here I won because a case was not dismissed but is moving on to trial, I would have to say to them not a win until the jury decides or you move to settle with the defendant. 

I can say this much, I do see that the plaintiff here is dealing with some real stubborn people. If they can't even except the fact this is not over nor did they win they will never own up to anything. Again good luck to all involved. 

What may I ask is a hater? 

Thanks for the wiki like quotes but you are wrong. In a situation like this where the former defendants have committed no crime a dismissal is a victory. Motion granted for the former defendants (win) and motion denied for the former plaintiff (loss).

In dealing with the motion to sever certain former defendants, the judge had to deal with the various claims. He deemed them "frivolous" and "without merit".  Furthermore, he stated that transferring the claims is "not in the interest of justice", meaning the whole claim was not worthy of taking up the courts time and would also get tossed in a new jurisdiction.

So, the former plaintiff lost and now is facing some very likely stiff financial penalties for her actions. There are currently two separate punitive motions before the court against the former plaintiff and one against her attorney. Now does that sound like a win? I think not!

But anyone who reads Pacer already knows this. You haters just have selective recall.

After reading this over and over again it seems to me some people do not understand one thing. 

When there is no trial you can't have a winner or a loser. If there was a settlement then that information would be blocked from public view. Meaning if the defendant lost and had to pay for pain and suffering etc. The public would not be privy to that information. Speculations of course when a suit is settled is always going to appear that the plaintiff won. What it actually means is both the plaintiff, and the defendant were able to come to some kind of agreement to lay the case going to trial to rest. And to avoid the possibility of losing that trial and having to pay even more money.  That is why in most cases asking for a jury trial the plaintiff and defendant will try to resolve the case out of the courtroom. 

Now on to when a case is dismissed without prejudice. If a judge dismisses without prejudice that judge is saying the plaintiff is free to refile the same suit again. There is a statue of limitation. But I must advise you that this does not mean a win or loss for either party. The case dismissed is over with no trial ever happening or no settlements. You can only state one has won a case if there is a trial and the jury makes the decision not the presiding judge. Also no judge would ever dismiss without prejudice if he or she thought the attorney for the plaintiff brought a case which was frivolous, mislead the court, or has shown bad faith. If the presiding judge felt the attorney had done any of the above mentioned the case would have been dismissed with prejudice and that plaintiff would be barred from filing another suit against the defendant. That means in simple language the judge made his final decision. Not to say a plaintiff even under these terms set by the presiding judge could not be appealed.  Really you are all playing attorney without any legal background.    

So take this all with a grain of salt or have a conversation with your attorneys to have them explain if need be.  It seems you are speaking without the advise of an attorney. It is clear to see. 

When a lawsuit is dismissed, the court may enter a judgment against the plaintiff with or without prejudice. When a lawsuit is dismissed without prejudice, it signifies that none of the rights or privileges of the individual involved are considered to be lost or waived. The same holds true when an admission is made or when a motion is denied without prejudice. The inclusion of the term without prejudice in a judgment of dismissal ordinarily indicates the absence of a decision on the merits and leaves the parties free to litigate the matter in a subsequent action, as though the dismissed action had not been started. Therefore, a dismissal without prejudice makes it unnecessary for the court in which the subsequent action is brought to determine whether that action is based on the same cause as the original action, or whether the identical parties are involved in the two actions.The purpose and effect of the words without prejudice in a judgment, order, or decree dismissing a suit are to prohibit the defendant from using the doctrine of Res Judicata in any later action by the same plaintiff on the subject matter. The doctrine of res judicata (from the Latin, "a thing decided") is based on the importance of finality in the law. If a court decides a case, the subject of that case is firmly and finally decided between the persons involved in the suit, so no new lawsuit on the same subject may be brought by the persons involved. Therefore, the words without prejudice protect the plaintiff from a defendant's res judicata defense. A court may also enter judgment with prejudice, however. This signifies that the court has made an adjudication on the merits of the case and a final disposition, barring the plaintiff from bringing a new lawsuit based on the same subject.  Often a court will enter a judgment with prejudice if the plaintiff has shown bad faith, misled the court, or persisted in filing frivolous lawsuits.

So to recap. This case you are talking about has now never existed. It was not dismissed with prejudice. It had no winner or loser. The case can be refiled.  It is back to the drawing board for all involved.  Good luck both sides.  For the record. I am neither a friend of the plaintiff nor the defendant. Just a neutral observer. I have no he said , she said to go on here. I am only going by the law. 

Diane Patchen lost this frivolous lawsuit.

Therefore Shanda won.

Those are the facts.

Hi Shanda! My name is Rick and I've sort of been a casual observer of sorts since I started reading bits and pieces of this on the Amazon forum. Lawrence Dickerson is a member there like myself and for a few months, I've been clicking around now and again for amusement I suppose you could say.

Recently, you have said a couple of times on report sites that you have screen shots.  Are you hiring an attorney for yourself? I didn't necessarily mean to pry, but was curious as to any course of action you may have been considering. Also, I don't usually force my opinion on others but when a case has been dismissed based on jurisdiction, the plaintiffs can certainly sue in an individuals home state/country.

It may seem like a victory, but the case never went to trial and therefore no one "won."  Please consider watching what you put on the internet because it's all new evidence should a case be filed against you where you live. Whenever a case has been dismissed for jurisdiction or whatever reason, more times then not, it is refiled with new strategies put in place.  While you certainly can address posts made, I wouldn't use the plaintiffs name whatsoever or make derogatory remarks.

Of course, it is up to you, but in reality, you don't know what's going to happen and this elation you may be feeling now could very well be short-lived. If you want to share your plans for screen shots or any action on your part, I'd be happy to share your story on the Amazon forum.  I believe in hearing all sides as long as it's not based on assumptions only. It is only fair to listen to what each person has to say.  Since this sounds like a continuing thing, it would be great to stay caught up on it all if that's cool.

to mention a**hats. i never used any aliases to be named in a lawsuit nor did i act in anyway to be sued. it was you two brainless trevor lovers who openly admitted to it all on sss. no law on any site against not using your real name. on the other hand cowards are the ones who hide behind aliases to abuse that right and turn a cat fight into a legal matter. so who is looks stupid now? 

katie, shanda who knows with you two so many nics i lost count. but meh and interesting were dear to my heart you never shut your a holes.  were u in a court room at any time? did a jury say we fine for the a**hats? what exactly did you win? the way i read it the plaintiff is free to file again as if this suit never existed. no one set me off anything shanda says about anyone should be taken with a grain of salt. it could be her missed med day who the f*ck knows? someone set you off into your world of trevor said it so it must be so. you did it sss too. until people became weary of you being a banned member but still routing for the man who is a bad business man.

 you jumped through hoops for that man. hope he is willing to do the same for you one day. don't count on it. trevor has always been out for himself. you are just too dumb to see it. loved the emails by the way of you and trevor trying to hack down sss. a**hats always to the very end.  here is to justice even if drags you back to court and jim jones has to dig in to his pockets. maybe in a way it is, if you believe in god his penance for all the members he screwed on singsnap. would have thought you were done drinking the kool-aid by now. katie and shanda how will you ever survive without trevor? you won't. hey how the hell is annie doing and how is it she was left out? i know she may have f*cked with some people on singsnap but has more brains than to f*ck with them off the site.  I underestimated her.

I am not sure what set you off Michael but you are a fine one to talk about hiding behind aliases.
There will be no former "Plaintiff kicking butt" Michael. Diane suffered a devastating defeat.
She filed a frivolous case and the judge dismissed it. In law that means the people she sued are the prevailing party. They won. The end.
I am sure you could get the Legal Beagle or Judy the stunned paralegal to offer their so called "expert" opinion if you need further clarification. They had so much to say when this farce was started. But now, the loser stands alone!
So funny, so just and so d**n satisfying!
LMAO.

Shanda, Katie and even Trevor.

PLEASE dont stop.  Keep posting! 

seems katie and shanda are still the a**hats they were on sss. it is not hard to believe considering they're 2  dummy's that still sit on the lap of mcguire. he does the talking, they just open their mouths wide. quite the ventriloquist act. katie still singing the praises of herself and mcguire. not sure where you were more amusing to read? on these sites using your own names or on sss using your multiple names. either way you both haven't gained anymore intelligence. shanda u f**king mental horror, who are you to talk about a man who is a care giver who doesn't believe in god when your only god is mcguire. do you really think anyone gives a f**k what you think,or what you believe? and katie you are no better. you claim you won a case where there was no trial. i hope plaintiff does kick both of your a**es from here to kingdom come. both you and shanda are probably the most  mentally ill people i have ever seen in my life and i have done a lot of living. both of you go f**k yourselves. no one else will. your dribble is still as insane as ever. you both are a waste of space on this planet. imagine how proud your kids will be one day of the both of you. shanda don't you have some dog sh*t to go clean up?

The judge dismissed this case and also denied the transfer cause "it was not in the interest of justice" In doing so he had to examine the merits of the case. He said it was FRIVOLOUS. He said the claims had LACK OF MERIT.

Quotes from the judges ruling:

I conclude that the IIED, copyright, and defamation claims against Dickerson and the other defendants are frivolous under Washington law.

Since I have found that Patchens underlying claims should not be transferred for lack of merit, neither should the civil-conspiracy claim.

"As explained above, transfer of the copyright claim would not be in the interest of justicefrom the evidence presented, Singsnap owns the copyrights in the video and Patchen is not entitled to bring suit.

I also conclude that transfer is not warranted for Patchens defamation claim. Patchen is unlikely to be able to make out a claim for defamation under Tennessee law.

Patchens IIED claim against the defendants is similarly meritless.

Those are the facts. You can threaten Shanda all you want but you can't change the truth. You tried and you lost. Shanda won. Your lies are catching up with you!

As for more litigation? Yawn. Not notwithstanding the fact that there has been no crime, there is no lawyer on the planet who would take this case on given the current ruling and the pending hearing for sanctions against you and your attorney.

You must be in an absolute rage having suffered such a damning defeat. A complete loss. It must hurt all the more given your bravado at the outset, how you rallied the haters around you to spread the word when you filed this frivolous lawsuit. Now everyone is laughing at you. You have no idea how much joy your lunatic ramblings are giving people. Very fitting and unbelievably satisfying.

Not so funny now, is it?

I feel sorry for you and I pray for you everyday.  It is not too late to turn back to GOD and enjoy the rest of your life.  Sue me if you wish but it is pointless;  the truth is on my side.  Your insults do not bother me whatsoever.  You have no power over me at all.

an ignorant hick as everyone claims. the judge did not say dismissed because it was FRIVOLOUS!!!!! he dismissed it without prejudice twit and until that sinks into your dim wit of a brain you will be lying. your only saving grace in this was where you live. and the basically said in simple language refile. and when they come after you in your jurisdiction or not as you are not as bright as you appear there are more ways to utilize you without actually the plaintiff filing a claim in your state. oh you have no faith do you? u should .your game is not over for you. go find yourself a good attorney lady for the next round. you really had an attorney for at least a little while and he didn't tell u what could happen next ? good thing u didn't pay him and he did not do his best because you are a charity case. he is glad the judge dismissed it on jurisdiction. now he is free from a lying client. go say some prayers and repent before it is too late for you. oh and knock it off with your sanction s**t too. there will be no sanctions for anyone. and least of not u . u expect to sue an attorney for money when you paid with mental moonshine lol 

Case 2:2011cv05388 DISMISSED and deemed FRIVOLOUS by the judge.