Tony Jones wants threads removed from FJ

[MamaJunebug]

Who is this guy, anyway?

A poseur who preys on the hurting, some of whom hurt because of him. Just google his name with the word pastor or controversy and you'll get all kinds of info.

[Et Moi]

Tony is just trying to be a comic book super villain at this point.

[August]

What a nightmare for poor Julie. This is one of her comments on his blog. The link posted earlier has court records and psychologist reports supporting everything she says.

Julie McMahon September 18, 2014 at 3:48 pm

See, they (6 Emergent leaders: Brian McLaren, Mike King, Doug Pagitt, Mark Scandrette, Danielle Shroyer and Brad Cecil) needed the crazy campaign to work. It served two purposes: the suffering spouse narrative and the rationalization for divorce. It failed. In fact, through court ordered psychological evaluations...it actually backfired. The NPD will not be deterred.

Onto the next campaign. The Julie is a criminal campaign came next. A lawyer who charges $450 an hour was hired (but I can't pay support) and on her website she brags she is the best at flipping custody. But how? Julie is a really great mother....hmmm.....a plan was hatched. December 8, 2012 (my birthday) I was served with an Order for Protection. When I glanced at it, I thought what is he up to now? I threw it away thinking...why the hell would I want to talk to you? See, I had no contact with him for about 6 glorious months. It was bliss. The NPD needed to get his target...but how? In a domestic moment, I was grabbed by the neck and pushed up against a wall and told, "You'll NEVER get the kids." So, years later a plan to take yet another run at flipping custody was launched. Numerous failed prior attempts.

Fast forward to June 2013. The children were having visitation with their dad. I had just recovered from a surgery. I asked if they could stay a day or two more, if I needed it, because I was not supposed to drive. I felt better the next day and asked for their return. He refused. I let it go....smelling the gas fumes from the gas lighting a mile away. The next morning, I asked for them to be returned immediately. Your visitation time is over and they have dental appointments. Before I left the house I called his cell phone and said, "I'm on my way. They have dental appointments." When I arrived 3 Edina police cop cars where there waiting. He was waiting with a recording in his hand and said, "Arrest her now she just called my cell." Officer Joy Frogadt, his friend from police chaplain days, and ride-a-longs, and chili fests was the arresting officer. I did not know it but I had violated the OFP from 6 months prior by calling his cell instead of internet communication. A humane cop there said, "Do you really want to do this in front of your kids?" All 3 kids watching in the window. "She broke the law, arrest her NOW. Do your job!" THAT is why he would like you all to google the public records....the arrest has been continued for over a year without conviction, because its bogus. The courts amended the OFP and that could never happen today.

THE KICKER??? He had a pre written an Ex Parte Legal document in his hand asking the family courts to "Immediately change custody because their mother is in jail." This was written BEFORE I arrived to pick up my children. Bone chilling...I know! Sociopath behavior. Luckily, the wise judge saw straight through it immediately and with a red marker x'd it out and wrote DENIED.

So, a person up top said, "What about the children?!" This is the person so concerned with the children?!! My 8 year old asked what happened to mom? The answer? "Your mother is a criminal. You are with me now." Through therapy my 8 year old shared he had planned when school started to ask his teacher if she could please help him see me. I know....that made me want to be sick.

I spent 12 hours in jail. Post op with no pain meds. my gauze was ripped off in a strip search and I was bleeding. It was on a Friday and planned as such so I would have to spend the weekend maybe, and no lawyers would be available. Luckily, there was. So, this story gets more amazing....

Cornerstone a battered women's shelter was called by him and he told them he needed this conviction because he and his wife do not feel safe. Further, the Edina prosecuting attorney told us he wrote her letters touting the "crazy campaign" and please help me I AM THE VICTIM. This very young advocate woman with presumably little experience with diagnosed narcissist, wrote a letter to the prosecuting attorney on his behalf stating you must convict because she is crazy....JUST because he said so.

Then we sent the psych evals and the 15 court proceedings instigated by him and suddenly he wasn't a battered woman after all.

Today in court it was again continued until December 11, 2014 (two years later). The OFP expired and amended. Point is now moot. I am taking it to trial. Abuse of position as a police chaplain. Again, abuse of power.

Why this story? To illustrate how NPDs never tire. They never stop until their narcissistic target is destroyed. There is no depth to which they will go to be perceived perfect and spotless. I MUST be perceived as crazy or a criminal. I am neither, but I did marry a mentally ill person who has abused his position as a chaplain and as a Pastor just as Danielle Shroyer, Brad Cecil, Doug Pagitt, Brian McLaren, Mike King and Mark Scandrette did by aiding in this spiritual abuse and diabolical behavior.

Likes(58)Dislikes(1)

(posting here because the creep has made it clear he wants to shut her up and stop people from listening to her. I am not only listening to her, I'm repeating her words so more people can listen.

[Buzzard]

I had never heard of this guy prior to this thread. A quick google search reveals a wikipedia page dedicated to him, I wonder if he wants that taken down as well...

Anywhoo... here's a site with a police report and other documents that seem to substantiate her allegations.

rlstollar.wordpress.com/2015/02/11/the-evidence-against-tony-jones/

[VodouDoll]

My god, that poor woman. That story is awful.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I read the letter from the lawyer on the other thread.

It starts off normally. Then, it talks about the court order against posting on social media. Slightly unusual, but I suppose it's not that different from clauses we often have about now badmouthing parents within earshot of parents. I do feel badly for the kids, who will inevitably see all this online.

Then, it starts to get weird. The order has a second part, requiring them to remove past posts if possible.

The lawyer takes that and runs with it. There's the list of websites, and then it seems to morph into some sort of demand that Julie control her "proxies". Sorry, but the fact that someone may be a Facebook friend does not make them a "proxy". See the Stupid Shit of Facebook thread here for evidence that there are many, many people who actually can't stand stuff that their Facebook friends write. The mere fact that someone supports you doesn't mean that they are not independent. Everything on that list with a # isn't in Julie's control, and it therefore IMHO not subject to the court order. Free Jinger is one of the # sites - there was discussion of the allegations, but AFAIK Julie herself was not posting.

Normally, I'd say that people should keep their private lives private, deal with authorities or professionals as needed but otherwise keep in mind that badmouthing is destructive, esp. where there are kids. In this case, though, it is not merely a private matter. As a result of his spiritual position and influence, he was able to draw others in as allies, and others also feel that there is a public interest in knowing the full story about someone they may have trusted for spiritual guidance. That public interest means that the case will continue to be the subject of discussion, whether or not Tony or Julie want it to stop.

ETA: I just read through the whole evidence against Tony post.

Those kids are the innocent victims, and the whole situation sounds highly toxic for them. With a high conflict divorce, they have been put in an impossible situation - how will it be possible for them to love and respect each parent?

These people should never have gotten together in the first place. The personalities were designed to clash.

I've said before that there are some situations where divorce may be warranted, but it doesn't solve anything because the same problems that caused the divorce will just make the divorce process and parenting after separation hell. This is one of those situations. He was clearly not a great husband - not at all available for his wife and kids, too focused on outside admiration.

If they had been able at that stage to say, "you know what? We aren't on the same page. You need a husband who is available, and I'm not that guy. I need a wife who is excited about my career, and you are not that woman. Let's amicably go our separate ways peacefully and focus on what is good for the kids.", there may have been disappointment, but a possibly happier ending.

But no. He became more and more focused on life away from the family. She became more desperate to save the marriage and upset. He couldn't deal with her and got angry about her emotional outbursts, concluding that she was crazy. She got more upset at being called crazy. He finds a girlfriend. She is furious that he cheated, lied about it and tried to make her think she was crazy. He uses her fury as evidence that she's crazy. Through it all, the kids are subjected to an absentee father, a mother who is clearly overwhelmed by her emotions, police coming to the house, disputes between the parents that turn physical, way too much information from the mother and a total lack of understanding by the father of why the kids may be pissed off at him, and any army of toxic cheerleaders who seemed to enable the worst behaviors.

BTW - "adjustment disorder" (her diagnosis, his was Narcissistic Personality Disorder) basically involves poor ability to cope with a particular stressor/life event. So, it's different from being delusional or suffering from a mood disorder caused by out-of-whack brain chemicals, it's often triggered by things like marital breakdown/divorce, but it's also a deviation from normal functioning and often counter-productive. I've had a number of client struggle with this, and there's an overwhelming sense of being stuck.

[Buzzard]

You cannot hold yourself out as a public figure, stand on a pulpit and preach, write books/articles, and expect that no one will discuss you. He made no attempt to keep his identity a secret or made any attempt to live in anonymity.

When you are a public figure you lose your ability to stop people from criticizing you.

[Walking Cat Bed]

If anyone is interested, this situation is discussed pretty frequently on the Stuff Christian Culture Likes Facebook page. That's how I first heard about it. :)

Same!

And, guess what, Tony:

No.

Unless there is legal paperwork from an actual lawyer, no.

[clueliss]

I want to see this guy go after every internet search engine out there that has taken the search-bot equivalent of a snapshot of every conversation he wants removed. That could be fun.

[Buzzard]

I want to see this guy go after every internet search engine out there that has taken the search-bot equivalent of a snapshot of every conversation he wants removed. That could be fun.

And the wayback machine...

[Firiel]

I read the letter from the lawyer on the other thread.

It starts off normally. Then, it talks about the court order against posting on social media. Slightly unusual, but I suppose it's not that different from clauses we often have about now badmouthing parents within earshot of parents. I do feel badly for the kids, who will inevitably see all this online.

Then, it starts to get weird. The order has a second part, requiring them to remove past posts if possible.

The lawyer takes that and runs with it. There's the list of websites, and then it seems to morph into some sort of demand that Julie control her "proxies". Sorry, but the fact that someone may be a Facebook friend does not make them a "proxy". See the Stupid Shit of Facebook thread here for evidence that there are many, many people who actually can't stand stuff that their Facebook friends write. The mere fact that someone supports you doesn't mean that they are not independent. Everything on that list with a # isn't in Julie's control, and it therefore IMHO not subject to the court order. Free Jinger is one of the # sites - there was discussion of the allegations, but AFAIK Julie herself was not posting.

Normally, I'd say that people should keep their private lives private, deal with authorities or professionals as needed but otherwise keep in mind that badmouthing is destructive, esp. where there are kids. In this case, though, it is not merely a private matter. As a result of his spiritual position and influence, he was able to draw others in as allies, and others also feel that there is a public interest in knowing the full story about someone they may have trusted for spiritual guidance. That public interest means that the case will continue to be the subject of discussion, whether or not Tony or Julie want it to stop.

ETA: I just read through the whole evidence against Tony post.

Those kids are the innocent victims, and the whole situation sounds highly toxic for them. With a high conflict divorce, they have been put in an impossible situation - how will it be possible for them to love and respect each parent?

These people should never have gotten together in the first place. The personalities were designed to clash.

I've said before that there are some situations where divorce may be warranted, but it doesn't solve anything because the same problems that caused the divorce will just make the divorce process and parenting after separation hell. This is one of those situations. He was clearly not a great husband - not at all available for his wife and kids, too focused on outside admiration.

If they had been able at that stage to say, "you know what? We aren't on the same page. You need a husband who is available, and I'm not that guy. I need a wife who is excited about my career, and you are not that woman. Let's amicably go our separate ways peacefully and focus on what is good for the kids.", there may have been disappointment, but a possibly happier ending.

But no. He became more and more focused on life away from the family. She became more desperate to save the marriage and upset. He couldn't deal with her and got angry about her emotional outbursts, concluding that she was crazy. She got more upset at being called crazy. He finds a girlfriend. She is furious that he cheated, lied about it and tried to make her think she was crazy. He uses her fury as evidence that she's crazy. Through it all, the kids are subjected to an absentee father, a mother who is clearly overwhelmed by her emotions, police coming to the house, disputes between the parents that turn physical, way too much information from the mother and a total lack of understanding by the father of why the kids may be pissed off at him, and any army of toxic cheerleaders who seemed to enable the worst behaviors.

BTW - "adjustment disorder" (her diagnosis, his was Narcissistic Personality Disorder) basically involves poor ability to cope with a particular stressor/life event. So, it's different from being delusional or suffering from a mood disorder caused by out-of-whack brain chemicals, it's often triggered by things like marital breakdown/divorce, but it's also a deviation from normal functioning and often counter-productive. I've had a number of client struggle with this, and there's an overwhelming sense of being stuck.

:clap:

Our ACUTAL degreed law professional, ha ha.

The biggest continuing issue is that, after the divorce, Tony has continued to litigate Julie into poverty and abuse her in other ways. Co-parenting with a narcissist is supposedly one of the most difficult things you can do, especially when that narcissist has a crew of enablers and money/fame on his side.

Honestly, I think that after years of dealing with constant litigation and narcissistic crap, Julie got sick of it. So the moment someone was willing to tell her story, she was more than willing to.

And if what he's said to others is any indication of the shit she was still dealing with years after the divorce, I don't blame her. A woman who attended a conference with Tony reports that he stated he wanted to murder Julie: thewartburgwatch.com/2015/04/30/a-statement-of-a-conversation-between-tony-jones-and-rev-monica-meyers/

[MamaJunebug]

thewartburgwatch.com/2015/04/30/a-statement-of-a-conversation-between-tony-jones-and-rev-monica-meyers/

Required reading. JMHO.

[2xx1xy1JD]

thewartburgwatch.com/2015/04/30/a-statement-of-a-conversation-between-tony-jones-and-rev-monica-meyers/

Required reading. JMHO.

Situations in which there may be additional victims or witnesses, or where there may be a legitimate concern that somebody poses a risk, supersede the general "keep it private" rule. Sounds like that may have been the case here.

I'm not optimistic that loving friends will guide this couple to the table and help them resolve everything. That time has passed, and I think that there were toxic cheerleaders who made things worse. [On a personal level, I worry about enabling bad behavior all the time. Sometimes, you have to say no to clients, and keep some objectivity.]

[polecat]

Well, Tony Jones, I'd have never heard about your drama if it hadn't been for your hysterical hissy fit.

Sounds like you and your wife were horribly suited to each other. Both of you had unresolved issues, but while she was ultimately able to let you go, you seem to be unable to let her go. Maybe you should give that a try.

As nasty as this is, it's still better than the Chris Coleman (of Joyce Meyer's ministry) affair. ETA: for now, anyway. After reading that statement, I'm not so sure what I think about your potential for violence.

[Firiel]

2xx, I was randomly worrying that my reply to you appeared snarky. I totally didn't mean it to. It was really interesting to hear from someone who actually deals with this stuff for a living. And if it didn't come of snarky and I'm just worrying over nothing, oops. Better safe than sorry, I guess. :embarrassed:

[Want More Babies]

What a total ass. Hopefully as his children get older, they will realize what a total abomination to the male species he is, and will have nothing to do with him. My ex did this, and it ended up biting him in the ass when the children became adults. They hardly have anything to do with him. I never had to utter one bad word about him to them, his actions did enough damage.

[snarkopolis]

So I googled Pastor Tony Jones divorce. :pink-shock: Dear Tony, The internet is forever and I had never heard of you before this thread popped up on FJ. Good luck with that removal idea on the internet :popcorn2: :lol: . Do you also believe in the Easter Bunny and Santa? :cracking-up:

[ILoveJellybeans]

I am another person who had completely forgotten that Tony Jones existed or that I had read threads on him until this came up.

Thanks Tony for reminding me :P

[2xx1xy1JD]

2xx, I was randomly worrying that my reply to you appeared snarky. I totally didn't mean it to. It was really interesting to hear from someone who actually deals with this stuff for a living. And if it didn't come of snarky and I'm just worrying over nothing, oops. Better safe than sorry, I guess. :embarrassed:

No worries. I know you well enough and had lots of fun with the Degreed Law Professional thing.

[Palimpsest]

No worries. I know you well enough and had lots of fun with the Degreed Law Professional thing.

I knew 2xx would be fine with it because she was involved in the thread that coined the post count title. I hope our other genuine attorneys also know about the joke because I've used Degreed Law Professional^TM in other threads already. It is irresistible.

Back to topic, two questions:

At what point can a Judge call a halt on Tony's shenanigans and identify them as nuisance suits unworthy of the Court's time?

At what point will Tony run out of lawyers willing to represent him? Attorneys can find reasons to dump a client, and it looks as though Tony has gone through quite a few.

[VVV]

I had also never heard of Tony Jones until this thread, but I quickly made up for lost time by googling. :pink-shock:

It would be interesting to do some sort of poll to see how many people had previously not heard of Tony Jones but are now up to speed thanks to this thread and his stupidity.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I knew 2xx would be fine with it because she was involved in the thread that coined the post count title. I hope our other genuine attorneys also know about the joke because I've used Degreed Law Professional^TM in other threads already. It is irresistible.

Back to topic, two questions:

At what point can a Judge call a halt on Tony's shenanigans and identify them as nuisance suits unworthy of the Court's time?

At what point will Tony run out of lawyers willing to represent him? Attorneys can find reasons to dump a client, and it looks as though Tony has gone through quite a few.

Precise procedures vary from place to place. A vindictive party can drag stuff on for a surprisingly long time. It's harder if the other party can't afford much legal help (I don't know the details of Julie's situation), and it's also hard if the other party isn't 100% perfect when it comes to the case and following any court orders made.

As for the second question - the willingness tends to run out with the money.

The fact that a client was a bad spouse or is nasty isn't a reason to dump a client. Once you are on a case, you can't simply get off. Your client can get a new lawyer, but you can't just tell your client to get lost. If they don't agree to fire you, you need a court order (here, at least) to get off the record, and you need to show that they are not paying their fees, putting you in a situation where you are risking professional misconduct, totally refusing to listen to you, etc. Now, it's possible for a good lawyer to sit a client down and say, "no, I'm not doing that." if the client asks for something that is completely outrageous. I had a client try to demand a similar sort of letter from me, of the "make sure my ex never even mentions general domestic abuse awareness online and never speaks to any of my family or friends again" variety. I refused, because it was an unreasonable demand, and I am no longer his lawyer. Ethically, I could justify asking for an order to use initials only and to prevent any direct posting by the parties - which would have to be mutual - because I don't think that it is helping them move on and I don't think it's good for the kids. Preventing anybody anywhere from discussing a case online is NOT reasonable, it's not what the court order said, and expecting Julie to somehow try to remove all discussion by 3rd parties is ridiculous.

[Buzzard]

This reminds me a lot of the Nikki Castouras case from about 10 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikki_Cats ... ontroversy

You cant remove things from the internet once its out there. Even in this case, where the pictures were posted without permission and should never have been released, they couldnt be pulled back. No court can order sites to remove something and no service exists that can mandate removal.

I feel badly for the Castouras children, just as I feel badly for Tony Jones' kids. In this age of google, this stuff will float forever and there is no hiding. Its only a matter of time before they start looking.

I'm putting this link here with a warning that the pictures are graphic. The ONLY reason I'm posting a link is because I know people will google it, and the majority of the sites that host these types of pictures have other things in the sidebar that are horrific as well as NSFW. These pictures are disturbing, even to me, and I've seen just about everything. Enter at your own risk.

maniacnanny.com/tag/nikki-catsouras-car-crash/

[ILoveJellybeans]

This reminds me a lot of the Nikki Castouras case from about 10 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikki_Cats ... ontroversy

You cant remove things from the internet once its out there. Even in this case, where the pictures were posted without permission and should never have been released, they couldnt be pulled back. No court can order sites to remove something and no service exists that can mandate removal.

I feel badly for the Castouras children, just as I feel badly for Tony Jones' kids. In this age of google, this stuff will float forever and there is no hiding. Its only a matter of time before they start looking.

I'm putting this link here with a warning that the pictures are graphic. The ONLY reason I'm posting a link is because I know people will google it, and the majority of the sites that host these types of pictures have other things in the sidebar that are horrific as well as NSFW. These pictures are disturbing, even to me, and I've seen just about everything. Enter at your own risk.

maniacnanny.com/tag/nikki-catsouras-car-crash/

Holy shit OMG noooooooooo it looks like her head exploded

[Ex 2x2]

I had never heard of Nikki but oh my gosh people were emailing those pics to her parents with deceptive subject lines so they'd open them. Who would do such a thing?!