First Lawsuit Defending the Amazon Golf Club, Iquitos Peru
First Lawsuit Defending the Amazon Golf Club, Iquitos Peru
I filed my first lawsuit in defense of the 50 dispossessed investors in the Amazon Golf Club on December 19, 2006. That lawsuit was filed against Gerald Mayeaux, George Ryan Richards, and Sergio Gustavo Barja Flores, charging them with conspiracy to commit fraud, and for having taken actions against the public interests. Several other lawsuits (denuncias) have also been filed, but let’s start with the first one.
Specifically it refers to the Extraordinary General Meeting of the Amazon Golf Club that was allegedly held at the Yellow Rose of Texas at 8 p.m., April 7, 2006. According to the minutes of the meeting there were 7 members present. I was not personally notified of the alleged meeting and neither were 50 other investors. There is good reason to believe that meeting did not take place in the way the Public Register shows. There is good reason to believe that the minutes of that meeting were falsified and signatures forged.
The Public Register shows that Gerald Mayeaux, as liquidator of the Amazon Golf Club, declared that when the Amazon Golf Club was dissolved it had zero assets. He produced a notarized form, declaring zero assets, signed by his long time personal and business accountant, Jose Manuel Panduro Flores.
The Amazon Golf Club had a golf course we all paid for to carve out of the jungle, a club house, a tractor mower, a push mower, machinery, an electrical transformer worth $7,000, 12 sets of golf clubs, a jeep, golfing equipment, and a bank balance. To declare zero assets is a fraud.
As liquidator of the assets of the Amazon Golf Club, Gerald Mayeaux donated the assets that he previously swore not to exist to the recently formed Amazon Golf and Country Club, and that club is still using those assets today.
I demanded, as is my right as the plaintiff, that the defendants present all of the pertinent original books, documentation, bank balances, and list of assets from before the dissolution of the Amazon Golf Club. Gerald Mayeaux, Ryan Richards, and Sergio Barja Flores were given 72 hours to present those documents to the Fiscal. They have been in contempt of court for over 6 months for failing to produce the evidence that could prove their innocence or their guilt
As Liquidator, Gerald Mayeaux swore to keep in his possession all of the original books, documentation, bank balances, and records of the assets up to the dissolution of the Amazon Golf Club, for as long as Peruvian law requires. Now he says they are lost.
Those are the books, documents, bank balances, and records that could prove Ryan Richards, Sergio Barja Flores, and Gerald Mayeaux are innocent, if in fact they are. Of course those are the books, documents, bank balances, and records that could prove Ryan Richards, Sergio Barja Flores, and Gerald Mayeaux are guilty, if in fact they are.
Gerald Mayeaux, Ryan Richards, and Sergio Barja Flores hardly bother to defend themselves. Their defense is that they were saving the club from Mike and that it is none of my business. That I was never a member of the Amazon Golf Club. They claim there were never 60 members, only 7. They claim only the 7 officers of the board of directors that are listed in the Public Register are members. One of the books that Gerald Mayeaux swore to keep in his possession, but has “lost”, contains the list of all of the 60 investor/members, how much they paid for their shares, the date they joined and the number of their membership.
I know that some of you have been reluctant to get involved with the Golf War because you are not sure of all the facts. Here is one fact that I think we can all agree on. Bill Grimes is a member of the original Amazon Golf Club. Please make a comment below telling whether you think I am a member or not. As strange as this may sound, it could make a big difference. If I am a member then there are 60 members, as it should be. If I am not a member then there are only 7 members. That would clearly disregard the INTENT of Peruvian law, but we should not leave that to chance.
Scan a copy of your membership certificate and email that copy to either Mike or me, with a sentence stating how much you paid for your membership and please make a statement, either that Bill Grimes is or is not a member.
Thanks and best regards,
Bill
First Lawsuit Defending the Amazon Golf Club, Iquitos Peru
Bill Grimes, Welcome to Iquitos Peru, Dawn on the Amazon Tours and Cruises
[…] Original post by Bill […]
Pingback by NewsWeber Latest Golf News » Blog Archive » First Lawsuit Defending the Amazon Golf Club, Iquitos Peru — July 11, 2007 @ 11:42 pm
Dear Bill
I say that you are a member and will forward my membership certificate to prove that also I paid and is a member of the Amazon Golf Club founded by Michael Collis.
You are doing the right thing, for which I’m thankful, and those who are guilty of destroying our dream and stealing our golf course in Iquitos should be brought to justice and be punished for their actions.
It’s a petty to see how greed among friends turned into this and that is hasn’t been able to solve peacefully.
Always remember - what comes around goes around.
CK
Comment by Carsten Korch — July 12, 2007 @ 12:41 pm
[…] First Lawsuit Defending the Amazon Golf Club, Iquitos PeruI filed my first lawsuit in defense of the 50 dispossessed investors in the Amazon Golf Club on December 19, 2006. That lawsuit was filed against Gerald Mayeaux, George Ryan Richards, and Sergio Gustavo Barja Flores, charging them with … […]
Pingback by My Golf Directory » Blog Archive » Florida Golf Course - Tiger’s Teacher Takes Over Golf Academy (CBS News) — July 12, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
Bill,
I thought you were member #1! If not #1, certainly a member none-the-less. I just sent our certificates and Western Union receipts of that were payments to Mike.
I really hope this works out our way. Too many people have done too much not for this to turn out correctly. Let’s keep our faith in the legal system, however slow it may be!
Brian
Comment by Brian and Natalia — July 12, 2007 @ 1:25 pm
Dear Bill,
Of course you are a member,I talked many times with you, Mike and ossacionally Adam Andrews about thee progress and hopes for the Amazon golf club.I have my membership certificate which was presented to me in the presence of Adam Andrews and Sergio I believe, plus six other witnesses of three nationalities. I have the photos of all those present. All that may only confirm that there was at least something existed and that someone is trying to steal, but it also proves the implicity or involvement one way or another of all those present at the ceremony and all similar ceremonies that took place. All those in the photos will need to explain before the courts what they thought was going on at the ceremonies if there were never more than 7 members.
Comment by steve mcalear — July 12, 2007 @ 2:50 pm
I am Melvin Lawrence from Birmingham, England. I am a Founder Member , in fact I bought 2 shares. I am not a golfer but I have been to Iquitos twice and stayed with my friend Mike. What a great idea he had. I joined up straight away and was so proud to be a founder of the first golf club in the Amazon.
I met Gerald while I was there , in fact me and Mike went fishing with him for 7 days and had a great time. What a pity it is to see the problems there now.
Nobody who bought Founder Memberships should be excluded. I support Mike, I don’t know Bill but he sounds like a really good guy.
I pursuaded my other friend Steve Hudson to buy a share also , he does not use the internet but agrees
with me that the benefits of investors should be restored under the same terms that Mike set them out to be.
Comment by Melvin Lawrence — July 12, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
Even in a conversation I had with Gerald before all the crap hit the fan we (Gerald and I) talked about Mike’s idea and Bill being the first member. But what the hell. That was before greed or whatever took over. Anyone who denies that Bill was member number one doesn’t know the history of the club or has obvious motives.
Comment by dave sheridan — July 13, 2007 @ 7:57 am
I am with that opinion as well. NO ONE should be excluded. We’ve had arguments… my children have them all the time, knock down and drag out but they get over it. That’s what they are, just arguments. Everyone needs to stop taking things so personally.
Everyone that paid should be a member, regardless. The end. Period.
Then let by gones be by gones.
Comment by Alan Shoemaker — July 13, 2007 @ 9:26 am
Am I correct that the ownership of the “golf course” not the real estate is owned now by 3 or 4 people? The constitution that I read on the blog says 15 people own a golf club which assets consist of a lawnmower. No golf course is mentioned. A year and a half ago the golf course and golf club was owned by all the investers. Correct? Maybe Alan can answer this best.
Comment by David Volkmann — July 13, 2007 @ 11:35 am
Who is asking the stupid question if Bill Grimes is a member of the Amazon Golf Club? Of course he is a member. He not only is a member but the first member. You can ask both his friends and enemies that question and they would all say a positive YES. He built one of the greens I believe with his own money and I think he made contributions to the club and there tournaments. Photos, ect.
Comment by David Volkmann — July 13, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
Bill, You are member #1. I will send a copy of my membership certificate (#36) down to you when I retiurn to NYC.
J
Comment by Jason Robards III — July 14, 2007 @ 7:58 am
Hi Bill,
You were the first member of the Amazon Golf Club, forking out your boodle within seconds of Mike´s sudden inspired announcement that there should be a golf course in the Amazon.
I have my framed membership certificate (No.14) but I can´t produce it at this time.As soon as I locate it You will have it.
Thank you, Bill.
Cheers,
John Zeller.
Comment by John Zeller — July 14, 2007 @ 10:22 am
Hello,
I am Mike Collis the person who some would say was stupid enough to want to construct a golf course here in the Peruvian Amazon.
History cannot be changed no matter what. IT WAS BILL GRIMES WHO WAS THE FIRST FOUNDING MEMBER OF THE AMAZON GOLF CLUB: were it not for him there would not be a golf course here, its a fact, its history.
For those not familiar with the history of the Amazon Golf Club please click on this and read “The History of the Amazon Golf Club” written in part by Leo Jones.
http://www.iquitostimes.com/agc-history.htm
Mike Collis
Comment by Mike Collis — July 14, 2007 @ 10:30 am
When my friend Mike Collis first approached me sometime in 2003 to join the Amazon Golf Club I thought it was a great idea and that someday it would help the people of Iquitos. Needless to say, I am saddened to hear what has happened to the club. I would like to go on record and say that Bill Grimes is a member. Also, I paid $500 for my membership and as soon as I locate it, I will scan it and email it to Mike.
God Bless,
Bill Tolia
Comment by Bill Tolia — July 14, 2007 @ 11:56 am
I have given my money to become a member of the golf club, I am told that I am a member of the golf club and I expect to be a member of the golf club, because I paid for a membership however I have no certification given to me as of the time I am writing this. This much I can say, “I am more sure of Bill Grimes being a member than I am of me being one!” I know that Bill was one of the first, if not the first person to become a member and it was months later that I decided to become one.
Harry Kelley
Comment by Harry Kelley — July 16, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
Bill G. was number 1. Fact. No question about it. History. Period.
Comment by alan shoemaker — July 25, 2007 @ 7:16 pm
oops… Bill G. IS member number 1. Not WAS member no. 1.
Comment by alan shoemaker — July 25, 2007 @ 7:18 pm
You guys really need another hobby…
Comment by Anthony Giardenelli — July 29, 2007 @ 10:30 am
I’m afraid it’s too late for this tactic.
Comment by alan shoemaker — September 22, 2007 @ 8:32 pm
On Sept. 28th, I think the case of Grimes vs. Mayeaux comes up. this is the case where Grimes declares that he sues Mayeaux because he can’t make 50 thousand (or whatever) from his investment, buying into the club that MMike assured him of.
And, if I’m not mistaken, on the 29th the case of the acutal club, i.e. Ryan’s land, comes up. I think I should video this for everyone.
Because, as you know from what Grimes said: He never sued anyone.
And as you know, Ryan has lived on this property for almost 25 years. Proofs in the pudding.
Now…in just a few days… we can all get back to playing golf. But, can you get back to where you were to begin with? My children have tremendous fights and 5 minutes later they are laughing and playing. That’s natural. Can you too be this way?
And I know the answer to this already.
Such a shame, all of you.
Comment by alan shoemaker — September 22, 2007 @ 8:44 pm
I think you should video the trial also. You are going to look sooooo stupid when you learn the truth.
Comment by Bill — September 22, 2007 @ 9:14 pm
I’ll be there. Put it on YouTube too. LOL Let the cards fall where they may senor.
Comment by alan shoemaker — September 23, 2007 @ 11:23 pm
I’ll be there. Put it on YouTube too. LOL Let the cards fall where they may senor and really, I don’t have a problem looking stupid, do you?
Comment by alan shoemaker — September 23, 2007 @ 11:23 pm
Hmm. its obvious you dont mind looking stupid!!!!
senor is spelled like this señor. It all makes sense, because mongoloids dont mind looking stupid
Comment by anon — September 27, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
Today gerald mayeaux committed perjury again. He declared to the judge that I was never a member of the Amazon Golf Club. Why would he do that? Everyone knows I am a member except possibly the judge. Do you think the judge will take his word for it?
Comment by Bill — September 27, 2007 @ 9:31 pm
Hi Alan,
Here is what you said in #429 of Highlights from 150 Comments, “And let’s clear up another matter, maybe:
Is it true that Bill Grimes sued Gerald for 50,000 Soles, claiming that because of Gerald’s actions he then would not be able to sell shares, which were worth 50,000 Soles? What’s that all about? Bill?”
I replied in #430, “No Alan that is not true. I am amazed that you can be mistaken so often and still feel confident to continue making proclamations as if you are the one that knows everything. Why do you continue to listen to mayeaux? He is making you look like a fool.”
Ever since then you have been implying it was me that did not tell the truth. I have been waiting until the trial to set the record straight. First, the amount is wrong. Second, my denuncia has nothing to do with being able to sell shares for any amount. It has everything to do with whether I am a member or not, and ultimately whether there are 60 investors or only 7 as mayeaux has claimed.
What? mayeaux did not tell you my denuncia was about whether or not I am a member of the Amazon Golf Club? I don’t blame him. Even you would not agree with that. In fact, the first 17 comments on this post were translated and added to the evidence of the trial, including your comments # 16 and # 17 agreeing that I am member.
Even in the unlikely event the judge rules against me, we all know that I told the truth and mayeaux lied.
Comment by Bill — September 27, 2007 @ 10:19 pm
A few days ago I testified in the first law suit defending the Amazon Golf Club described in the post these comments are attached to. It went very well. I have respect for the way the Peruvian legal system has handled this case, and confidence that justice will be served. I would like to share all of the details here but I think it is better to wait until the defense testifies to give them their fair chance to hang themselves.
I have learned of other related developments that I plan to address here on this blog the first of next week. I am sure those of you that have followed these proceedings will find them very interesting.
Comment by Bill — October 19, 2007 @ 9:41 pm
This morning I went with the judge, two of her assistance, a fiscal, two police, my lawyer, Mike Collis, and his lawyer to the golf club. The judge was very meticulous about having her assistant write down every detail, and I do believe she was impressed with the physical club and course. She knew nothing about golf, or golf courses. She had no idea what to expect, or how much work had been done, or the potential value. Now she knows.
She was completely professional. My lawyer and I met her at her office at 8:30 AM, and we did not leave the club until around 12:30 PM. She knows I am a member, and therefore that there were 60 members. I believe the Amazon Golf Club will be even more of a topic of discussion among the legal profession of Iquitos, than it already has been, if that is possible.
James Bruner, the president of the club when it was dissolved, Sergio, the golf pro, mayeaux and Richards were supposed to be there to tell their side to the judge. They did not show up. It is hard for me to see how that was smart, but I assume they must have been following the advise of a lawyer.
Richards apparently thought the inspection would only last an hour or two. He arrived at the Amazon Golf Club while we were still there. The judge sent a policeman to ask him to tour the grounds with us or to make a statement. He said no, and left immediately.
I was very sad to see the golf course and think how wonderful it might have been if we had all pulled together and those “lying, cheating, defrauding, stealing, pricks” had not been greedy.
It still has potential to be wonderful. The shame is it already could be wonderful. I want to give Shawn a lot of credit, the part of the course that he personally supervised and paid for are the best part of the course, and he should be very proud.
Just a little closing note to all of the golf playing members. This is just me talking and others may disagree. You all went right along with this fraud and allowed it to happen. Most of you had to know it was morally wrong, and if you did not know right away that it was immoral, you must have suspected it eventually. Personally, I am willing to grant amnesty to most of you that did not directly participate in the crime. You know who you are and I know who you are. I am asking you to return all of our stolen property. You know who has it and where it is. Keep the stolen property and don’t play golf. Return the stolen property and play golf. That seems like a simple choice.
Comment by Bill — October 24, 2007 @ 7:28 pm
This comment is to Alan Shoemaker; I want you to know that I am finished being Mr. Nice Guy. Anything you say that is not true, I will attack you.
Comment by Bill — November 15, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
Bill, all I do is report what is told to me. If there is not a lawsuit as I wrote, then you tell us there is not and so I believe that.
Seems there’s so many lawsuits flying around right now and looks like more are coming from Auckoo too. That IP address is being traced, the provider will give up the name and they will be at it too. Why would anyone do this to him?
Comment by alan shoemaker — November 15, 2007 @ 10:00 pm
Why Me Lord?
What have I ever done to deserve even one,
Of the pleasures I’ve known.
Tell Me Lord,
What did I ever do that was worth loving you
For the kindness you’ve shown?
Lord help me Jesus I’ve wasted it so,
Help me Jesus, I know what I am.
But now that I know that I’ve needed you so
Help me Jesus, my soul’s in your hands.
Try me Lord,
If you think there’s a way I can try to repay
All I’ve taken from you.
Maybe Lord
I can show someone else
What I’ve been through myself
On my way back to you.
Lord help me Jesus I’ve wasted it so,
Help me Jesus, I know what I am.
But now that I know that I’ve needed you so
Help me Jesus, my soul’s in your hands.
Help me Jesus, my soul’s in your hands.
Comment by alan shoemaker — November 15, 2007 @ 10:02 pm
Sleigh bells ring
Are you listening
In the lane
Snow is glistening
A beautiful sight
We’re happy tonight
Walking in a winter wonderland
Gone away is the bluebird
Here to stay is a new bird
He sings a love song
As we go along
Walking in a winter wonderland
In the meadow we can build a snowman
Then pretend he is Parson Brown
He’ll say: Are you married?
We’ll say: No man
But you can do the job
When you’re in town
Later on
We’ll conspire
As we dream by the fire
To face unafraid
The plans that we’ve made
Walking in a winter wonderland
Winter wonderland
In the meadow we can build a snowman
And pretend that he’s a circus clown
We’ll have lots of fun with mister snowman
Until the other kiddies knock him down
When it snows
Ain’t it thrilling
Though your nose gets a chilling
We’ll frolic and play
The Eskimo way
Walking in a winter wonderland
Yeah we’re walking in a winter
Yeah we’re walking in a winter
We’re walking in a winter wonderland
Wonderland
Winter wonderland
Comment by alan shoemaker — November 15, 2007 @ 10:50 pm
Alan, back away from the drugs….back away from the ayahuasca.. you are consuming way too much.
Comment by Mark — November 16, 2007 @ 5:29 am
Our children have been begging us to put the Xmas tree up and so I’m doing so.
Peace to Everyone and hopefully we can all have a happy Holy season. And now, just one more
tune which is perfect for all of us right now. Go ahead and sing along if you will:
Should auld acquaintance be forgot,
and never brought to mind ?
Should auld acquaintance be forgot,
and auld lang syne ?
CHORUS:
For auld lang syne, my dear,
for auld lang syne,
we’ll take a cup o’ kindness yet,
for auld lang syne.
And surely ye’ll be your pint-stoup !
And surely I’ll be mine !
And we’ll take a cup o’ kindness yet,
for auld lang syne.
CHORUS
We twa hae run about the braes,
and pou’d the gowans fine ;
But we’ve wander’d mony a weary fit,
sin’ auld lang syne.
CHORUS
We twa hae paidl’d in the burn,
frae morning sun till dine ;
But seas between us braid hae roar’d
sin’ auld lang syne.
CHORUS
And there’s a hand, my trusty fiere !
And gies a hand o’ thine !
And we’ll tak a right gude-willie-waught,
for auld lang syne.
CHORUS
Comment by alan shoemaker — November 16, 2007 @ 10:25 am
Alan, you are sick. I live it. Mabey in a differnt life we might have been good freinds…. But than again…. I dont like hanging out with people who are more crazy than me….
silent night
holy night
all is calm,
all is bright!!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by anon — November 16, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
Hi Alan,
There is nothing to attack in your latest comments so that is an improvement. At first glance I thought you posted some spam, but I guess you are just getting in the Christmas spirit, so that is nice.
Yes there are lots of lawsuits flying around. The one I am most interested in right now is the one mentioned in the post these comments are attached to. Do you think it is suspicious that neither mayeaux, andrews, sergio nor anyone else knows the location of the documents and books about the Amazon Golf Club in the days before it was disolved. Those are the very documents and records that could prove no one is guilty and this is all an innocent misunderstanding, like you claim.
Comment by Bill — November 16, 2007 @ 6:45 pm
Bill, I don’t know about those books, wasn’t privy to this at all. If those books could make everyone innocent, then they should be found. Where are they? I really don’t know, wish I did. What I speak on here is what I believe to be the truth, sometimes wrong as no doubt I sometimes get confused information, but I pass that on as well.
There was to be a decision issued today but apparently it didn’t happen. So, what is actually happening is anyone’s best guess.
Anon, I am very sorry for your affliction, being sick is a real pain in the ass. Been there, done that. BUT, got over it. So why don’t you too? If you need help, consultations with me are cheap, but effective.
What an incredibly beautiful golf course, so many man hours of labor… I really can not belive that this will come to nothing. No doubt the judges will decide the same. As I still see it? Everyone that paid dues to be a member should be a member. Period.
Comment by alan shoemaker — November 16, 2007 @ 7:46 pm
The answers are in those books. If they are innocent they would produce those documents, books, bank statements, and records to the court, and this would all be over. Go right up to them and demand to see them for your self. Then let us know what they say.
Comment by Bill — November 16, 2007 @ 8:21 pm
Alan,
we do appreciate your help here. even though at times we are getting on you it is for info. We know that this info is coming from the “the towns liar” because he or ryan has no huevos to talk here themselves. I believe Bil and Mike over frick and frack anyday. sorry , but I have listened to many lies from frick in the past. Did you ever get the cups back or the hole cutter for them? I doubt that they were returned but I have to ask again. I am trying to get some cups befroe I come down there soon.
Comment by Mark — November 17, 2007 @ 8:15 am
I assume most of you know my denuncia/process/lawsuit against Gerald and the gang in behalf of all dienfranchised original members is proceeding. I just returned from Iquitos where I gave my testimony. Next week Gerald and his crew along with a few others are due to also testify. If anyone one of you cares to interject let me know.
Comment by dave sheridan — November 21, 2007 @ 5:54 pm
Anyone care to make a wager regarding any perjury next week???? AHEM
Comment by dave sheridan — November 21, 2007 @ 5:57 pm
Dave, On Tuesday (20th) Ryan Richards and Sergio Bargas were due in court to testify in your case.
Yesterday (21st) Pamela , Llens Brunner,Leo Jones and Adam Andrews were due to testify also.
None of them turned up, and this was the 3rd time they have been called and were “no shows”.
I call this “Contempt of Court”.
But there again, they don’t want to testify because if they tell the truth they are in trouble and if they tell a lie they will be in even deeper shit, because they all have different stories.
They are all stuck between a rock and a hard thing.
Comment by mike collis — November 22, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
We must be the change we wish to see.
I don’t know who wrote that, but it is. Pay attention.
Comment by alan shoemaker — November 27, 2007 @ 11:12 pm
Alan,
What are you talking about?
Comment by David Volkmann — November 28, 2007 @ 8:32 pm
Did you give mayeaux the same advise this morning?
Comment by Bill — November 28, 2007 @ 9:45 pm
I don’t advise anyone.
I really just want to play golf with everybody, real simpleton I am.
Comment by alan shoemaker — November 30, 2007 @ 10:19 pm
Hey Alan
I will play golf with you, oh by the way do you think gerald will let me use his clubs because he will not need them where he is going
Comment by Mark — December 1, 2007 @ 6:22 am
In case you are getting sleepy, thought everyone might like to read this:
PsyBlog Home | About | Contact | Advertise
Max: 1 email per day
10 Weirdest Psychology Studies Guide to Psychology Blogs Nonverbal Behaviour Psychology of Relationships Top Ten Psychology Studies Psychology of Emotions
Advertising
Autism
Book Reviews
Depression
Development
Email
Emotion
Evolutionary Psychology
Internet Dating Media
Memory
Mindfulness
Music
Neuroscience
Nonverbal Behaviour Personality
Persuasion
Positive Psychology
Relationships
Social Psychology
Featured Sites
Radiology
Rehab Centers
Mesothelioma
UK Counselling Services
Healthy Diets
AJ Novick Group- Anger Management
Anger Class Online- Online Anger Management
» Sponsor PsyBlog «
Popular articles
Why We do Dumb or Irrational Things: 10 Brilliant Social Psychology Studies
How and Why We Lie to Ourselves: Cognitive Dissonance
10 Practical Uses For Psychological Research in Everyday Life
Empathy Causes Facial Similarity Between Couples to Increase Over Time
Personality Secrets in Your Mp3 Player
Why Career Planning is Time Wasted
Communicating Persuasively: Email or Face-to-Face?
Loudest Voice = Majority Opinion Can Cognitive Neuroscience Tell Us Anything About the Mind?
Will Solving The ‘Hard Problem’ of Consciousness Unweave the Rainbow?
Search PsyBlog
archives
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
How and Why We Lie to Ourselves: Cognitive Dissonance
[Photo by Darwin Bell]
A classic 1959 social psychology experiment demonstrates how and why we lie to ourselves. Understanding this experiment sheds a brilliant light on the dark world of our inner motivations.
The ground-breaking social psychological experiment of Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) provides a central insight into the stories we tell ourselves about why we think and behave the way we do. The experiment is filled with ingenious deception so the best way to understand it is to imagine you are taking part. So sit back, relax and travel back. The time is 1959 and you are an undergraduate student at Stanford University…
As part of your course you agree to take part in an experiment on ‘measures of performance’. You are told the experiment will take two hours. As you are required to act as an experimental subject for a certain number of hours in a year - this will be two more of them out of the way.
Little do you know, the experiment will actually become a classic in social psychology. And what will seem to you like accidents by the experimenters are all part of a carefully controlled deception. For now though, you are innocent.
The set-up
Once in the lab you are told the experiment is about how your expectations affect the actual experience of a task. Apparently there are two groups and in the other group they have been given a particular expectation about the study. To instil the expectation subtly, the participants in the other groups are informally briefed by a student who has apparently just completed the task. In your group, though, you’ll do the task with no expectations.
Perhaps you wonder why you’re being told all this, but nevertheless it makes it seem a bit more exciting now that you know some of the mechanics behind the experiment.
So you settle down to the first task you are given, and quickly realise it is extremely boring. You are asked to move some spools around in a box for half an hour, then for the next half an hour you move pegs around a board. Frankly, watching paint dry would have been preferable.
At the end of the tasks the experimenter thanks you for taking part, then tells you that many other people find the task pretty interesting. This is a little confusing - the task was very boring. Whatever. You let it pass.
Experimental slip-up
Then the experimenter looks a little embarrassed and starts to explain haltingly that there’s been a cock-up. He says they need your help. The participant coming in after you is in the other condition they mentioned before you did the task - the condition in which they have an expectation before carrying out the task. This expectation is that the task is actually really interesting. Unfortunately the person who usually sets up their expectation hasn’t turned up.
So, they ask if you wouldn’t mind doing it. Not only that but they offer to pay you $1. Because it’s 1959 and you’re a student this is not completely insignificant for only a few minutes work. And, they tell you that they can use you again in the future. It sounds like easy money so you agree to take part. This is great - what started out as a simple fulfilment of a course component has unearthed a little ready cash for you.
You are quickly introduced to the next participant who is about to do the same task you just completed. As instructed you tell her that the task she’s about to do is really interesting. She smiles, thanks you and disappears off into the test room. You feel a pang of regret for getting her hopes up. Then the experimenter returns, thanks you again, and once again tells you that many people enjoy the task and hopes you found it interesting.
Then you are ushered through to another room where you are interviewed about the experiment you’ve just done. One of the questions asks you about how interesting the task was that you were given to do. This makes you pause for a minute and think.
Now it seems to you that the task wasn’t as boring as you first thought. You start to see how even the repetitive movements of the spools and pegs had a certain symmetrical beauty. And it was all in the name of science after all. This was a worthwhile endeavour and you hope the experimenters get some interesting results out of it.
The task still couldn’t be classified as great fun, but perhaps it wasn’t that bad. You figure that, on reflection, it wasn’t as bad as you first thought. You rate it moderately interesting.
After the experiment you go and talk to your friend who was also doing the experiment. Comparing notes you found that your experiences were almost identical except for one vital difference. She was offered way more than you to brief the next student: $20! This is when it first occurs to you that there’s been some trickery at work here.
You ask her about the task with the spools and pegs:
“Oh,” she replies. “That was sooooo boring, I gave it the lowest rating possible.”
“No,” you insist. “It wasn’t that bad. Actually when you think about it, it was pretty interesting.”
She looks at you incredulously.
What the hell is going on?
Cognitive dissonance
What you’ve just experienced is the power of cognitive dissonance. Social psychologists studying cognitive dissonance are interested in the way we deal with two thoughts that contradict each other - and how we deal with this contradiction.
In this case: you thought the task was boring to start off with then you were paid to tell someone else the task was interesting. But, you’re not the kind of person to casually go around lying to people. So how can you resolve your view of yourself as an honest person with lying to the next participant? The amount of money you were paid hardly salves your conscience - it was nice but not that nice.
Your mind resolves this conundrum by deciding that actually the study was pretty interesting after all. You are helped to this conclusion by the experimenter who tells you other people also thought the study was pretty interesting.
Your friend, meanwhile, has no need of these mental machinations. She merely thinks to herself: I’ve been paid $20 to lie, that’s a small fortune for a student like me, and more than justifies my fibbing. The task was boring and still is boring whatever the experimenter tells me.
A beautiful theory
Since this experiment numerous studies of cognitive dissonance have been carried out and the effect is well-established. Its beauty is that it explains so many of our everyday behaviours. Here are some examples provided by Morton Hunt in his classic work ‘The Story of Psychology’:
When trying to join a group, the harder they make the barriers to entry, the more you value your membership. To resolve the dissonance between the hoops you were forced to jump through, and the reality of what turns out to be a pretty average club, we convince ourselves the club is, in fact, fantastic.
People will interpret the same information in radically different ways to support their own views of the world. When deciding our view on a contentious point, we conveniently forget what jars with our own theory and remember everything that fits.
People quickly adjust their values to fit their behaviour, even when it is clearly immoral. Those stealing from their employer will claim that “Everyone does it” so they would be losing out if they didn’t, or alternatively that “I’m underpaid so I deserve a little extra on the side.”
Once you start to think about it, the list of situations in which people resolve cognitive dissonance through rationalisations becomes ever longer and longer. If you’re honest with yourself, I’m sure you can think of many times when you’ve done it yourself. I know I can.
Being aware of this can help us avoid falling foul of the most dangerous consequences of cognitive dissonance: believing our own lies.
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 13, 2007 @ 7:55 pm
What are down to copying things from a book or article now to explain what it is that you , gerald, ryan and the other thieves. who knows maybe this is the story of Allibaba and the 40 thieves here in person now. tell us that story will you
Comment by Mark — December 14, 2007 @ 5:35 am
I just sent Alan’s last comment to spam where it belongs. It felt good to take that action. I should have done that many times before.
Comment by Bill — December 14, 2007 @ 4:03 pm
oh… so you only let items you approve of on this blog? Shame on you Captain Bill, or would it be more likely to call you Captain
Kangaroo? I thought that censorship was a bit below you CK. Obviously not. so tell us, why was my post sent to spam? Did it bother you?
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 16, 2007 @ 8:59 pm
I just moved Alan’s comment, # 48 out of the spam folder, and into this discussion. Let’s take a vote. Is it spam? If it reads like spam, sounds like spam, smells like spam, what should we do with it? Alan, I think even you would vote spam on your own comment. Is that the best you got?
Comment by Bill — December 16, 2007 @ 9:54 pm
I thought it was an entertaining comment. I was entertained. But it was wordy and it was spam. I assume it loops around a long road to lead the reader to the point that one group (the other group) is using cognitive dissonance to support their position in the golf war, but it doesn’t actually say that and that doesn’t mean it isn’t spam. And, it’s Bill’s blog, who else would have approval rights? Because he’s trying to be open about comments doesn’t mean he wants to see War and Peace taking up his bandwidth.
Comment by jim — December 17, 2007 @ 9:17 am
SPAM, SPAM and more SPAM……He is just trying to convince peoplethat even though he is teaming with allibaba, that he can read and copy from books to make it seem like he has intelligance living in his head. But we know differant because of who he always repeats. “allibaba”
Comment by Mark — December 17, 2007 @ 10:00 am
Why did alan waste his time on that. It is spam. I read about 8 lines and the skipped down to the next comment.
Leave it on Bill, no one will read it.
Comment by Mike Collis — December 17, 2007 @ 11:01 am
Alan I just read your comment 48. I hope they leave you out of the hospital to be with your family on Christmas. They won’t make you wear a strait jacket or such, will they? I didn’t realize the condition had gotten that serious.
Comment by David Volkmann — December 17, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
Happy to see the group is still alive actually… it’s been so damned quiet here lately.. I posted that just to wake everyone up.
Volkmann has been out for the count for too long. Mark, where the hell have you been? Nice to see you back and slapping me again. Bill, this apparently woke you up too.. so I did good.
Now, scuttlebutt has it that the decison has already been issued or made but because of the case load the judges have not had time to write it up. What is that decision? hahahahahahhahah I told you already, remember?
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 18, 2007 @ 8:02 pm
Not again Alan? This makes the third or fourth time you have made a comment like this and been completely wrong. Why don’t you just sit back like the rest of us, to wait and see what happens? Your sources have been consistently wrong,… about everything.
Comment by Bill — December 19, 2007 @ 9:33 am
“MERRY CHRISTMAS TO EVERYONE OUT THERE EVEN THE ALLIBABA (GERALD) AND THE THIEVES
Comment by Mark — December 25, 2007 @ 7:53 am
People tend to take sides, that’s just what they do. There is/was no real reason to do so, it just happens. I tried not to, tried to just lay it out as it was, as I saw it. But by doing so, people then put me on a side too. I didn’t like that, still don’t. All I have ever told you here on this blog is the truth as I know it. And now, the truth appears to be this:
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall;
All the King’s horses and all the King’s men,
Couldn’t put Humpty together again.
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 25, 2007 @ 9:53 pm
Alan ,
you put yourself on a side by agreeing with allibaba…..
Comment by Mark — December 27, 2007 @ 5:27 am
It’s done now. I saw the paperwork. The land goes back to Ryan.
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 28, 2007 @ 4:24 pm
It’s not done now. I haven’t seen any document. Even if there is some document it won’t be legal. Happy Holidays!
Comment by Bill — December 28, 2007 @ 8:28 pm
Oh yes Bill, it is finished now.
Talk to your attorney and everyone else, stop sending money here for this lost cause. As I always told you, Ryan has been living there for almost 30 years. To believe anything else? Wake up.
It’s done, over, finished. Three superior court judges signed it already. Forget it. Somebody sold you. You bought it. Over.
Here is how this works:
Dunning-Kruger effect · Psychology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Dunning-Kruger effect is the phenomenon wherein people who have little knowledge think that they know more than others who have much more knowledge.
The phenomenon was demonstrated in a series of experiments performed by Justin Kruger and David Dunning, then both of Cornell University. Their results were published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in December 1999.[1]
Kruger and Dunning noted a number of previous studies which tend to suggest that in skills as diverse as reading comprehension, operating a motor vehicle, and playing chess or tennis, “ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge” (as Charles Darwin put it). They hypothesized that with a typical skill which humans may possess in greater or lesser degree,
Incompetent individuals tend to overestimate their own level of skill.
Incompetent individuals fail to recognize genuine skill in others.
Incompetent individuals fail to recognize the extremity of their inadequacy.
If they can be trained to substantially improve their own skill level, these individuals can recognize and acknowledge their own previous lack of skill.
They set out to test these hypotheses on human subjects consisting of Cornell undergraduates who were registered in various psychology courses.
In a series of studies, Kruger and Dunning examined self-assessment of logical reasoning skills, grammatical skills, and humor. After being shown their test scores, the subjects were again asked to estimate their own rank, whereupon the competent group accurately estimated their rank, while the incompetent group still overestimated their own rank. As Dunning and Kruger noted,
“ Across 4 studies, the authors found that participants scoring in the bottom quartile on tests of humor, grammar, and logic grossly overestimated their test performance and ability. Although test scores put them in the 12th percentile, they estimated themselves to be in the 62nd. ”
Meanwhile, people with true knowledge tended to underestimate their competence.
A followup study suggests that grossly incompetent students improve both their skill level and their ability to estimate their class rank only after extensive tutoring in the skills they had previously lacked.
Daniel Ames and Lara Kammrath extended this work to sensitivity to others, and the subjects’ perception of how sensitive they were.[2]
Some more work by Burson Larrick and Joshua Klayman[3] has suggested that the effect is not so obvious and may be due to noise and bias levels.
Dunning and Kruger won the 2000 Ig Nobel prize for their work.[4]
Shortly we will get back to playing golf. Unfortunately, the course is a mess and Mike will have to get it in order so that he and his cronies can give it back to Ryan in the condition in which it was taken. That’s going to be costly as the course has not been maintained. Mike will be held responsible for this. I don’t know what this will cost, but it won’t be cheap.
The grass has grown so high that the mower won’t be able to cut it, so the first thing to do is have several men hacking away with machetes, then with the riding mower. The greens are another problem but will be dealt with as well. Should take between two and three weeks.
Bill, I believe your attorney was issued the document this afternoon, perhaps for some reason he did not want to show it to you or perhaps you are not ready to discuss this now, I don’t know.
Most importantly is to get back to the golf; Golf is what this course was built for, and it was built for golfers, not people that say they don’t play golf and don’t like golfers. Join the Tennis Club, they’ll accept you… maybe, maybe not after this embarassing fiasco..
And in the end, I am always amazed that this blog began. No one was ever stealing the golf course. How can you do that? Where are you doing to put it? Ryan has been living there for almost 30 years. The only conspiracy that I see are people trying to convince others that some group was trying to do this. And those people don’t even play golf. That never happened to my knowledge, and if it was going to happen I would have told everyone about it immediately. It just was not so. So… how much money did you send to finance this idea? I guess that’s the real point isn’t it? Many have already stated that they did so and others no doubt sent funds too because you were convinced that if you did not, there would be no golf course for you. And now, where are those funds? Just keeps getting more interesting, right?
I want to thank all those that held to my statements from months ago. You have been vindicated. For those others that slammed ryan and others? I wish you had listened to me.
And Bill Grimes? Yes, the document is legal. It is over senor.
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 28, 2007 @ 11:27 pm
Well Alan If it is true then they had paid some judges off so it probably cost allibaba and some of the thieves plenty from loosing this deal and going to jail.
and how many times have you and shawn said this befroe “it is nit over it is just starting
now I suppose the thieves will bring the items back that were stolen ..
you 10 or 12 thieves enjoy the golf cource that you swindled other investors out of so you could gloat over it
Comment by Mark — December 29, 2007 @ 10:10 am
No gloating from me, just facts.
Frankly I am more into this type of idea:
“We are all full of weakness and errors; let us all mutually pardon each other our follies, it is the first law of Nature.”
Voltaire
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 29, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
THE FAB FOUR,
YOU GUYS KNOW EXACTLY WHO I AM TALKING ABOUT, YOU COLLIS, AND BOBBY KNIGHT OR SHOULD I SAY MR,FRIVOLOUS, WITH YOUR BASELESS LAWSUITS, AND YES, DAVE ( LETS TURN THE COURSE INTO A PARK) VOLKMAN, AND YOU TOO SHERIDAN, YOU BEEN FLAPPING YOUR BIG FUCKEN MOUTH OFF STEADY ON THE BLOG, YOU ARE VERY FUCKEN COCKY FOR SOMEONE WHO ONLY INVESTED A FEW HUNDRED BUCKS, IN THIS VENTURE, AND NEVER SPENT 5 MINUTES AT THE COURSE. YOU GUYS ARE THE FUCKEN JOKE, THE MONEY YOU SPENT ON YOUR FRIVOLOUS SUITS, THE THOUSANDS YOU GUYS WASTED BECAUSE OF YOUR PERSONAL HATRED FOR GERALD WE COULD HAVE DEVELOPED 9 MORE HOLES AND HAD A 18 HOLE COURSE. EVERYONE WHO READS THIS BLOG MUST KNOW THE TRUTH, TELL ME SOMETHING BOB KNIGHT, YOU SAY ITS NOT PERSONAL, I SAY YOU ARE A FUCKEN LIER, YOU SIT IN FRONT OF GERALDS SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS, SCREAM AND CURSE GERALD, AND TELL PAM TO FUCKOFF, THE MANS WIFE, EXPLAIN THAT ROOKIE, THATS FUCKEN DIRTY WHERE I COME FROM. IF YOU DONT LIKE SOMEONE, WALK ON, WALK ON, DONT SUPPORT HIS RESTAURANT. BUT THATS NOT YOUR STYLE IS IT BOB,
LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING FAB FOUR,AND TO THE OTHERS WHO GOT SUCKED IN BY THE FAB FOUR, LISTEN CAREFULLY, RYAN RICHARDS BOUGHT THE PROPERTY IN 1984, DURING THE TIME OF HYPER INFALTION, HE HAS THE ORIGINAL DOC, HE HAS LIVED AND MADE A BUSINESS OFF HIS LAND, FOR 24 YEARS, AND WHEN SAN JUAN BECAME A DISTRICT IN 2000, THE MAN HAS PAID TAXES ON HIS LAND EVERY YEAR FOR THE PAST 7 YEARS, AND YOU FUCKEN COWBOYS WANT TO THROW THE MAN OFF HIS PROPERTY, DONT FUCKEN TELL ME I AM WRONG,I HAVE SEEN WITH MY OWN EYES, AT THE SAN JUAN OFFICES NEAR THE AIRPORT, TAXES HAVE BEEN PAIDED ON THE PROPERTY FOR 7 YEARS IN RYANS NAME, NOT THE FAB FOURS NAME. SHERIDAN, IN YOUR SICK WORLD, TELL ME SOMETHING BOY, IF YOU GOT THE GUTS, I CHALLENGE YOU RIGHT NOW, DO I, OR ANYONE FOR THAT MATTER, HAVE THE RIGHT, LEGALLY , TO KICK RYAN OFF HIS LAND AFTER THE MAN HAS PAID TAXES FOR 7 YEARS, AND DONT PLAY THATS WHAT THE COURTS DECIDED CARD, GO TELL THAT TO SOME CRACK HEAD IN THE SEEDY PART OF YOUR CITY OR TOWN, I FUCKEN DARE ALL OF YOU GUYS, TELL ME,
ALL THE EX-JOCKS, WHERE I LIVE, EVERY SAT-SUN. COME OVER TO MY COTTAGE, WATCH AND BET ON SPORTS, THE GUYS HAVE BEEN ENTERTAINED BY READING THE BLOG, A COUPLE OF MY BUDDIES, JAMES HOOD AND GEORGE WILSON, BUSINESSMEN AND LIFE LONG JOCKS. HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE FAB FOUR, THEY WANT TO KNOW, IF RYAN GETS KICKED OFF HIS LAND, WITHOUT INSULTING THEIR INTELLIGENCE, WHAT IS THE REASON YOU WILL GIVE MY BUDDIES FOR THROWING RYAN OFF HIS LAND, OR SCREWING HIM OUT OF MONEY ,FOR,RENT OR LEASE, TELL ME, YOU AINT GOT THE BALLS, NONE OF YOU, YOU RATHER RIP HIM OFF, YOU FUCKEN GUYS JUST COULD NOT WAIT TILL WE FINISHED THE COURSE, OR SET UP A LEGAL CONSTITUTION, YOU GOT TOO FUCKEN GREEDY, ONCE THE CLUB WAS OPEN, AND ORGANIZED, EVERYONE WOULD HAVE BEEN IN, NO PROPLEM, I MEAN EVERYONE, ONE MORE POINT FOR THE ROAD, THE FAB FOUR, EVERY FUCKEN ONE OF YOU GUYS KNEW THE DEAL. AS SOON AS THE COURSE WAS FINISHED, RYAN WAS GOING TO SIGH A LONG TERM LEASE AGREEMENT, WITH ALL OF US, AND HE WAS GOING TO LIVE AND WORK AT THE FRONT CORNER SECTION OF THE PROPERTY. ALL THE MAN WANTS IS SOMEONE TO STEP UP AND SHOW SOME FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, THATS ALL THE MAN WANTED, AND NOW, ALL YOU GUYS ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS ISSUE ARE LOOKING FOR SCRAPS. PEOPLE LOST JOBS (WORKERS) WITH FAMILIES, AND INNOCENT KIDS SUFFER, BECAUSE OF YOUR INVASION OF RYANS LAND, SWEET DREAMS FAB FOUR, YOU MUST FEEL PROUD, TO AFFECT POOR PEOPLES FAMILIES, BECAUSE YOU CANT SELL SHARES ANY TIME YOU WANT, THATS THE BOTTOM LINE, THATS THE PROBLEM I HAVE, AND TO KICK RYAN OR ANYONE FOR THAT MATTER OFF THEIR LAND AFTER THEY PAID PROPERTY TAXES FOR 7 FUCKEN YEARS. THAT LEAVES A BAD FUCKEN TASTE IN MY MOUTH,
MIKE COLLIS, I MUST SAY, FOR THE RECORD, ITS A FINE FUCKEN LINE BETWEEN GENIUS AND ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT, AND YOU, MIKE COLLIS, YOU WALK THE TIGHTROPE LIKE A FUCKEN MASTER, YOU GOT TALENT, YOU CANT FIGHT THE WORLD MIKE, SOME DAY YOU WILL REALIZE THAT. ALSO BILL AND MIKE, I MIGHT HAVE THE NAME WRONG, MY GRANDFATHER TOLD ME ABOUT HITLERS PROPAGANDA MINISTER WHAT WAS HIS NAME JOE GOBBLES, THERE IS NO QUESTION IN MY MIND THE FAB FOUR TOOK A PAGE RIGHT OUT OF HIS BOOK.I NEVER HEARD SO MUCH BULLSHIT AND LIES IN MY LIFE
Comment by Canadian Shawn — December 29, 2007 @ 7:00 pm
Shawn, it is over now. We tried to tell them but… But now it is finished. I have personally seen the three signatures from the Superior court judges. It is over.
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 29, 2007 @ 7:34 pm
Happy New Year Shawn, Alan, the Fab Four, everyone! Relax Alan, wait and see what happens.
Comment by Bill — December 29, 2007 @ 9:06 pm
Bill… put your money where your mouth is senor or shut the fuck up.
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 29, 2007 @ 10:32 pm
So… wanna bet? LOL
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 29, 2007 @ 10:35 pm
You are reading too much in my comment. I wished you and everyone a Happy New Year. Is that what you want to bet on. Whether you relax? Whether we wait to see what happens? Is this one of the same personalities that was quoting Voltaire in comment # 66 after “gloating” about my “gross incompetence” in # 64. That’s alright, I have called you some names, and I will call you some more names, but I thought I would wait till after the holiday seasons.
Comment by Bill — December 30, 2007 @ 6:53 am
Shawn the fab four, as you call them, are the only ones who have went to extreme measures and expenes to make sure Ryan did not lose his home. Mike has documents to prove this if there be reason to prove it to anyone. They also have all invested 4 and 5 digit amounts into the golf course. There would be no golf course if it wasn’t for them. If there is rent due then those who rented the property should pay it promptly. This is fact not opinion.
That it is the biggest fault they have. Big mistake building the golf course and then bringing other investers in. Never should have done it.
I know how much time I spent actually on that golf course before you ever invested one dime. The same goes for the other 3. We are team players. We are thinking of all the investers money. Not greedy about whether we get to play golf or not. If we lose our investment because of bad management, marketing, ect. so be it. If a criminal steals our investment that is another story.
As far as hatred for Gerald goes, probably the one thing the fab four have the most in common is we considered Gerald our best friend in Iquitos before the golf course was taken from us and investers from around the world. I would give anything to have those good old days back. I wil also repeat what I have said before I am sorry for any slanderous statements I have made to anyone. That includes you to Alan.
In the states the land and the golf course would be seperate entities. One person or group own the land and another would own the improvements. Sometimes the same own both. In Peru maybe the law is different. That makes us investers that much more stupid to build something on someone else land.
I have said this before and needs to be repeated “Thank God stupidity is not a crime in Peru or me and others would be in prison for a long time”.
Comment by David Volkmann — December 30, 2007 @ 11:39 am
And you have a Happy New Year too Bill. Thanks.
And everyone else too.
For the golfers out there, you’ve got a small window of time now to clean up those clubs, shine your shoes, and very importantly - write your name or make some personal logo to put on your golf balls as once found and identified as yours, you can buy them back at 50 cents each. Great deal! I would hope that the first section they cut would be the driving range so at least we can begin to hit some balls.
The others that don’t play but appreciate golf should look into buying a comfortable folding chair. I haven’t seen any here in Iquitos so bring one down with you or buy one in Lima. As a matter of fact, buy me two of them!
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 30, 2007 @ 12:03 pm
You apology is accepted Dave.
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 30, 2007 @ 5:20 pm
Well Mike,
I guess those 200 golf balls I have to bring down might just stay here.
Comment by Mark — December 31, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
Yes Mark, keep your balls to yourself…
Comment by alan shoemaker — December 31, 2007 @ 10:42 pm
Alan, New Years Eve was so great for me to think the golf war is finally over. Then today we had to call a goverment official at home about something else and he told us what you said was not true. I can’t get ahold of any of the “Fab four” to confirm what is going on so you want to elaborate on what is going on with the golf course? I am getting a little confused and don’t want to start calling people liars until I get all the facts.
Comment by David Volkmann — January 1, 2008 @ 10:01 am
The original lower court judge initially ruled that Mike had control of the land. This was appealed to the Superior Court. there, the three top judges ruled that there was absolutely no evidence presented in the lower court that would have given the lower court judge reason to have make his declaration. So the three superior court judges said that the case is handed back down to the lower court judge so he would correctly issue his declaration, i.e. The propery is Ryan Richards. Following this, the property will be officially handed to Ryan. Unfortunately the agreement was/is that when the land is returned to Ryan, it must be returned to him in the condition it was in. The grass has grown high, the greens have not been maintained. So the property will have to be first hand cut with machetes and then cut with power mowers. This will take some time, probably about 2-3 weeks and will be expensive. This is my understanding from what I have heard. The only thing I actually KNOW is what I have seen with my own eyes, and that is the ruling by the three Superior Court judges. Perhaps I can get a copy and post it here.
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 1, 2008 @ 5:54 pm
That would be nice if you could get a copy and post it. To much bulshit on the blog. Facts would be nice.
Comment by David Volkmann — January 2, 2008 @ 7:45 pm
Shawn you do not have a clue. When I sat at the table in Jim Kings office with you I wished I had the time to enlighten you. I have a feeling you probably would listen. If for a freaking heart-beat you think we (the so-called fab four) tried/are trying to screw anybody you need to spend some time with Bill and I and try to listen instead of blathering about jocks. Check out my denuncia!! It is written in the benefit of all share holders. I couldn’t care less if I ever got a cent from the course or ever played golf. I was personally told by Gerald the “others” weren’t invited in the so-called new club (the one that was capitalized with the old clubs assets). Please explain why so many people that supposedly signed the minutes of the meeting to dissolve the first club deny any knowledge of such a meeting? By the way. My lawyer says it ain’t over. And if in Iquitos the word comes down against me, I appeal in Lima. I already have the lawyer. If they want to buy their way through Lima they will need deeper pockets.
Comment by dave sheridan — January 4, 2008 @ 8:23 pm
Dave, good to hear you are out of the hospital… I guess you are. Hope you are doing okay and Happy New Year senor.
the golf course case is over, Ryan gets it back. That’s finished already.
No appeals can be heard unless there’s some drastic new evidence that has come afoot.
Zeller walked by the Yellow Rose two days ago and Gerald asked him to please cut the grass. He responded: YOU will NEVER play golf on that course again…
So this was taken as some kind of threat that he would so damage the course that it would be lost.
That’s unfortunate. I would hope that it would not come to this, but I heard him say it.
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 4, 2008 @ 9:30 pm
Alan, I do not have a tape of the so called Zeller comment, however, I can interpret the quote you give many ways other than yours. Thanks for the Happy New year wish. I was out of hospital a while back. In Lima ten days ago seeing my lawyer there. And to repeat a famous quote, “it ain’t over til the Fat Lady sings”, or as Yogi supposedly stated, “It ain’t over til its over”. Also Alan, take it to the bank that if Gerald bought the verdict in my case he’ll have to buy one in Lima on appeal. The cost of that attempt could be jail. Now Gerald could have me hit before that to prevent the need of a defense in Lima. That’s the only way out for him as I see it. But I think he is too much of a coward for that because he knows the fact that what goes around comes around.
By the by John Z. I like your style (most of the time).
Comment by dave sheridan — January 5, 2008 @ 5:23 pm
Dave, calm down man, get well.
Gerald have you hit? Surely you are not that nuts or paranoid? There’s no “hits” happening here so please get your mind off it unless you want others to believe that it is actually your thinking. Let’s not get silly here. This is a simple disagreement. Buying verdicts? Everyone knows this could not happen here. Had any of you been golfers anywhere, you would have recognized that this was and is an argument among gentlemen and some lose and some win.Just like elections. So you let it be, you lost and so maybe next time you win. Some of you will continue being friends with everyone - as you can, as need be and to eliminate negativity. Others? Those unfortunate sons of bitches will carry this with them to the grave, unfortunately.
Dave Sheridan. I know you somewhat .. and I suspect that instead of melding the pot, you will take this along with other past things not correctly digested… to your grave instead of seeing this in another light.
So what should happen? My opinion.. and I know that nobody asked me for it.. So don’t call in Kamrma Zongi or the lone Zeti or etc. etc. etc. when I tell all of you.
Mike and all of us too, believed in a golf course. As it is with gringos, we like to trust each other. We all put funds into this, quite informally, and we actually built a golf course.
Amazing really. Think about it.
And in order for the course to be built, Mike sold memberships to others so there would be the funds to continue the project. Seemed to me at the time that he was also the best person to do this being that he was an X insurance salesman and was in the center of town all the time. So maybe 60 or so people bought those memberships. And most of them thought that they were buying into a for-profit situation, i.e. that they could sell their shares down the road for profit or whatever. I know that I did. Hey, I believed that I could play golf forever.. my family too.. with my measly investment. this was a very informal thing among gringos and was as if we were just building a club out of thin air.
But then we were shown by an attorney in Iquitos that the constitution that was taken from another golf club was not congruent with a non-profit entity. So the original Amazon Golf Club (or whatever it was called then)was dissolved and another constitution was put in place that was congruent with a non profit status.
So what is the solution? I know that the judges looking at this situation read this blog.
Everyone that bought memberships into the golf club should be members, regardless of the confusion of the status of the club. Many have been called in to testify and the truth seems to be pretty fickle.
Now there is one major problem. Many people actually believed that there were people actually trying to steal the club. That never happened, that was invented. There are reasons why but those are useless right now. The point is that everyone that honestly purchased memberships should be allowed to play golf and come to the club (if we will actually have one after all this).
But there is a codicil: Those persons that jumped on a band wagon and attempted to take Ryan’s land away from him would now need to fill out an application for membership. Read that as eating humble pie. Forgive and forget and let’s move on. We all live here. Get it?
Stop the denuncios, quit bothering the police. There’s no real damage done here.. just time. No one is hurt.
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 6, 2008 @ 12:42 am
That is a nice well thought out comment Alan. I don’t agree with all of it, but at least you seem sensible.
The most important part I disagree with is your continuing implication that we have “lost”. We have not “lost”. I keep hearing about how mayeaux has “stuck it up our ass”, how our “balls are in a vise”, how we are “going to prison”, being “deported” and a lot worse. There is only one way I will think we have lost. If mayeaux plays a round of golf and does not get arrested for trespassing, then and only then will I will think we have lost. If that ever happens, I will offer to shake your hand like a man. Don’t expect me to concede anything until then.
Comment by Bill — January 6, 2008 @ 8:26 am
If any of you were a party to the attempt to take over Ryan’s land, then you indeed have “lost”. That is over. If those same people wish to throw more good money after bad, because your attorney tells you too, then by all means do that. We would all be better off if you simply donated those funds to me cause at least I would do something for the good of everyone.
No one is “going to prison”, but yes there are assholes out there but not quite big enough to put anything into them, yet; and the only way you can get your psychological balls in a vise is if you do it to yourself.
As I understand it, the course will officially be turned over to Ryan on Thursday.
Game, Set and Match.
Elvis has left the stadium.
Turn off the lights cause nobody is home.
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 6, 2008 @ 5:45 pm
Alan my good friend read your own comment. You say “So maybe 60 or so people bought those memberships. And most of them thought that they were buying into a for-profit situation, i.e. that they could sell their shares down the road for profit or whatever. I know that I did.”.
Please explain where the rights of the “60 or so” went? Please explain Gerald’s comment to me that “I could be a member of the new club but not the others”. Please explain where the rights of those “60 or so” members were the day Gerald dissolved the club without the knowledge of the majority? Please explain who authorized the inception of the “new ” club with 19 people denying the majority? Please explain, my good man, how you defend Gerald stating Bill Grimes was never a member of the original club (PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS ONE!!!).
Comment by dave sheridan — January 6, 2008 @ 7:38 pm
Isn’t it amazing. If you want Alan to stop talking, ask him a few questions. He is not an “artful dodger”, just a dodger
Comment by dave sheridan — January 9, 2008 @ 7:47 am
Alan,
With regard to your comment number 79, please enlighten us if you were personally sitting with the judges and listened to their decision or was it the information fed to you in the Smelly Rose? Also I re-iterate:
Alan my good friend read your own comment. You say “So maybe 60 or so people bought those memberships. And most of them thought that they were buying into a for-profit situation, i.e. that they could sell their shares down the road for profit or whatever. I know that I did.”.
Please explain where the rights of the “60 or so” went? Please explain Gerald’s comment to me that “I could be a member of the new club but not the others”. Please explain where the rights of those “60 or so” members were the day Gerald dissolved the club without the knowledge of the majority? Please explain who authorized the inception of the “new ” club with 19 people denying the majority? Please explain, my good man, how you defend Gerald stating Bill Grimes was never a member of the original club (PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS ONE!!!).
Comment by dave sheridan — January 10, 2008 @ 6:35 pm
I have explained this over and over since the beginning of the blog.
Dave Sheridan: I personally saw the ruling from the three judges in the Superior Court. Mike no doubt has copy of this too.
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 11, 2008 @ 12:40 pm
Please everyone. Help me out here. Has Alan answered and explained the questions I asked in comment 87 or the ones way back when that I numbered to help him out?
Comment by dave sheridan — January 11, 2008 @ 1:12 pm
Even Alan can not defend mayeaux on the question about whether I was a memeber of the original Amazon Golf Club. mayeaux has sworn in two different courts, in front of three ficals and three different judges, on several occasions, including when he lied in front of his wife, who knows it is a lie, and several members of the original club, that know it is a lie, that I was never a memeber of the Amazon Golf Club. How are you going to respect a person like that, or anyone that supports him. To Alan’s credit he agreed with the obvious that I was and am a member, in comments # 16 and # 17.
Comment by Bill — January 11, 2008 @ 2:10 pm
problem is he (Alan) will never admit his FRIEND Gerald is a liar (ie Bill’s membership).
Comment by dave sheridan — January 11, 2008 @ 7:50 pm
I actually wrote out a long response to this…
But you know what? This is tiring now and I have already told you the truth too many times. So just sit back and watch what happens.
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 11, 2008 @ 8:32 pm
Thursday has come and gone. What happen? Is it over Alan?
Comment by David Volkmann — January 12, 2008 @ 8:21 am
The three judges didn’t get around to writing up the official report so now the date is set for the 18th.
Just to give you an idea of their caseload (and this case is not very important in their scheme of things), one of the judges had something like 1,200 cases piled up there that he had to respond to.
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 12, 2008 @ 5:50 pm
In comment 90 Alan says “I personally saw the ruling from the three judges in the Superior Court. Mike no doubt has copy of this too”. In Comment 96 he says “The three judges didn’t get around to writing up the official report”. hmmmmmm They even discussed with Alan how many cases they had piled up. Apparently they must have shown him a rough draft of their decision. Just how involved are you in this case Alan?
Comment by dave sheridan — January 13, 2008 @ 8:23 am
Hey Shawn,
Quote from your comment
YOU GUYS KNOW EXACTLY WHO I AM TALKING ABOUT, YOU COLLIS, AND BOBBY KNIGHT OR SHOULD I SAY MR,FRIVOLOUS, WITH YOUR BASELESS LAWSUITS, AND YES, DAVE ( LETS TURN THE COURSE INTO A PARK) VOLKMAN, AND YOU TOO SHERIDAN, YOU BEEN FLAPPING YOUR BIG FUCKEN MOUTH OFF STEADY ON THE BLOG, YOU ARE VERY FUCKEN COCKY FOR SOMEONE WHO ONLY INVESTED A FEW HUNDRED BUCKS, IN THIS VENTURE,
Hey Shawn….how about around $6,000.00 (not counting my purchase of two lawnmowers). (I admit only about $1,300.00 was direct investment, the rest defending my and others rights.)
AND NEVER SPENT 5 MINUTES AT THE COURSE. YOU GUYS ARE THE FUCKEN JOKE, THE MONEY YOU SPENT ON YOUR FRIVOLOUS SUITS, THE THOUSANDS YOU GUYS WASTED BECAUSE OF YOUR PERSONAL HATRED FOR GERALD
Gerald was one of my closer friends in Iquitos before he screwed me and so many others. Just the opposite of hate, Shawn. I carried many items, including a camera, mixer etc for him from the States. Because he was a friend. I guess as is often said, your friends can screw you much easier than your enemies. I have tried to think of anyone who screwed me and became my enemy. Guess what. There is only Gerald and his cronies. And I must admit that they probably didn’t begin this trying to screw anyone in particular. Greed blinded them and they didn’t think or care about anyone else.
I spoke to a few people Shawn. The consensus is you are an alright guy. Just primarily frustrated at the result of all the crap. Do yourself a favor. Stand back and be objective. Write out the facts from the day Mike shouted “EUREKA!!”, or whatever the hell he shouted when the golf club/course was born in his mind.
Comment by dave sheridan — January 15, 2008 @ 6:30 pm
I promised myself I was going to stop commenting. Sh*t. Here I am in my study, four finger typing, wasting my time again, spouting my frustrations. Why in hell did I sit with Mike that day and buy two memberships. Lets get drunk Shawn.
Comment by dave sheridan — January 15, 2008 @ 6:34 pm
For the last time, the Superior Court’s three judges have ruled that the land be given back to Ryan and that there was no evidence what so ever for the lower court judge to have concluded that it should be in Mad Mic’s control. I saw the ruling Sheridan.
As I understand it now, the date for the official return of the land is on the 18th of Jan.. That can change of course. I’ll keep you informed and when I have the time of this official turnover, I’ll post that too so any of you can be at the golfcourse when it is officially handed back to Ryan.
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 16, 2008 @ 1:53 pm
Alan,I am willing to make a wager with you that you are wrong about the Superior Courts decision. i am giving you the benefit of the doult because spanish is your second language and you may not have read all the documents correctly. Put the wager here on the blog so we both have plenty of witnesses.
Comment by David Volkmann — January 17, 2008 @ 7:38 am
Hmmmm…. Okay Dave. Let’s make a wager. How much money do you have?
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 18, 2008 @ 9:51 pm
It’s awfully quiet here now Dave…
So, what kind of bank account do you have? Let’s get on with it.
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 20, 2008 @ 10:14 pm
Alan,
I think I can see myself clear to let Capt. Bill hold the bets. Give him $5,000.00 US. BILL LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE IT. Fork it up Alan.
Comment by dave sheridan — January 21, 2008 @ 6:36 pm
I forgot it’s last names eh Shoemaker. Or mayhaps you forgot my first name, Shoemaker.
Comment by dave sheridan — January 21, 2008 @ 6:39 pm
Oh wait!!! I forgot. It was SFU right Shoemaker? (short for let me try to recollect what SHOEMAKER named me) Oh yes. Short Fat and Ugly.
Comment by dave sheridan — January 21, 2008 @ 6:42 pm
And a loooooooooooong drum roll whilst everyone waits for Shoemaker’s deposit of $5,000.00 with Capt. Bill. Hey Shoemaker, maybe Gerald will kick in a few thousand to help. After all, it should only be a short term loan. What do you think Alan? (I hold a distaste for using last names. Even when it is appropriate.)
SFU…..(I like that name)
Comment by dave sheridan — January 23, 2008 @ 7:42 am
I didn’t say anything about $5,000 dollars Sheridan. I said: How much money have you got?
Comment by Alan Shoemaker — January 30, 2008 @ 8:16 pm
Or are you just $5,000 dollars sure?
Comment by Alan Shoemaker — January 30, 2008 @ 8:18 pm
Whatever…
I will take you bet.
I saw the three Superior Court Judges siged an order to tell the lower court to overrule their previous judgement.
Now put your money where your mouth is Dave Sheridan.
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 31, 2008 @ 10:45 pm
That is in, I saw the order signed by the three Superior Court Judges… just to be clear.
So senor, put up now or shut up.
I don’t need anyone holding my money. Are you nuts too? But that’s a pretty retorical question.
Comment by alan shoemaker — January 31, 2008 @ 10:50 pm
Alan I have found your comments about the bet to be insulting and disingenuous. To suggest you would bet as much as Dave Volkmann or Dave Sheridan “have” sounds so stupid, because it would be impossible for you to cover the bet if you lost. To say you do not need anyone to hold the money is equally stupid. No one believes you would pay if you lost $100, let alone $5,000, let alone as much as these gentlemen “have”. On the other hand the other two gentlemen would be honor bound to pay if they lost. So, yes of course you would have to put the money up front, so you shut up.
Comment by Bill — January 31, 2008 @ 11:23 pm
Alan you saw what gerald wanted you to see and NOTHING ELSE…You do not have a clue to anything but what gerald says period….S oquit lieing about these things…Everyone knows you do not have the money to put up for a 100.00 bet like Bill says…EVERYONE KNOWS YOU…..OH AND KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF OF THE BALLS AT THE CLUB…I DID BRING SOME DOWN FOR THE CLUB….
Comment by Mark — February 1, 2008 @ 7:38 pm
Well now, let’s see. Not only do you not believe but you are also saying that if I lost the bet that I would not pay up. That’s character assination in a public place.
So, tell you what I’m going to do. I’ll call the $5000 dollar bet and raise you $5,000 more.
Call the bet and I’ll prove this to you instantly. I have the order in my hand right here from the Superior Court.
Now what are you going to do?
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 2, 2008 @ 12:32 pm
If there is a bet it will not be about some pissy little document you may have in your hand. The bet will be whether Mike Collis, or Ryan Richards will have control of the land the Amazon Golf Course is on. No one cares about the pissy little corrupt document you are so proud of. How do you propose to guarantee payment if you lose Mr Honorable Big Shot?
Comment by Bill — February 2, 2008 @ 1:40 pm
It was Sheridan that said there was no such paper from the Superior Court which nulified Mike having control of the land.
So, again, what are you going to do? Bet or no bet?
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 2, 2008 @ 1:55 pm
Alan, I never make bets. I am trying to facilitate a bet between you and David Sheridan. I think we need to clarify what the bet is and how payment is guaranteed to the winner.
This is Alan Shoemaker, comment # 100
“For the last time, the Superior Court’s three judges have ruled that the land be given back to Ryan and that there was no evidence what so ever for the lower court judge to have concluded that it should be in Mad Mic’s control. I saw the ruling Sheridan.
As I understand it now, the date for the official return of the land is on the 18th of Jan.. That can change of course. I’ll keep you informed and when I have the time of this official turnover, I’ll post that too so any of you can be at the golfcourse when it is officially handed back to Ryan.”
This is David Sheridan comment # 101
“Alan,I am willing to make a wager with you that you are wrong about the Superior Courts decision. i am giving you the benefit of the doult because spanish is your second language and you may not have read all the documents correctly. Put the wager here on the blog so we both have plenty of witnesses.”
When I read Sheridan say, “Alan,I am willing to make a wager with you that you are wrong about the Superior Courts decision.” Then I read Alan saying “Sheridan said there was no such paper.” It kind of makes me wonder…hhmmmmmm…
I think it is clear there is only one important result worth betting on, ultimately it is who has control of the land the Amazon Golf Course is on, not the existence or the interpretation of some pissy little document. So, I think that we can agree that the bet is who controls the land, not some pissy dirty little piece of paper.
Now, I ask you again, how do you propose to guarantee the winner of the bet receives the prize money?
Comment by Bill — February 2, 2008 @ 2:55 pm
alan someone saying that you would not pay up is not character assination but the truth. everyone knows you do not have the money for this and if you did would not pay the money when you lost. you can not afford it. you need your money for your wifes temple in the corn field. Hey I have an idea alan.
why don’t you visit me in indiana so we can play golf and talk about the Amazon golf club, then you can take some balls of your own back with you to use.. I will pay for the golf OK..Hell I will let you use a set of clubs of mine also. since you are in the need of a place to play…I went for a visit out there just last month when I was there and it is beautiful. especially the holes that Shawn had his crew work on. If Shawn would have gotten involved from the beginning with other ideas for the layout it might have played even tougher all of the way thru.
Comment by Mark — February 2, 2008 @ 8:46 pm
Just forget the whole thing. No bets.
However, I have done nothing on this blog but tell the truth and I am telling you. So who wants to see a copy? Give me your emails at alanshoemaker@hotmail.com and I’ll scan it in and send it to you.
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 3, 2008 @ 2:52 pm
And by the way Mark, what makes you think I don’t have money?
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 3, 2008 @ 2:55 pm
Hello Alan, it would be nice if you scan it and put it on the blog. I am sure everyone will be interested. Thanks, Bill
Comment by Bill — February 3, 2008 @ 5:22 pm
I’d love to do that but… how can I put a scan on this blog? at times I’ve wanted to put photos here too but how can I do that?
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 3, 2008 @ 8:13 pm
scan the paper to a file, then open it and take you mouse and left click and move down tohigh light all of the words,,,right click then copy …..
move to blog where you right and right click and paste …tada….
Comment by Mark — February 3, 2008 @ 9:17 pm
photos will not work that way sorry but I do not know that one. but with text ,it is this way. I am sure there is others but i am not a guinuess..
Comment by Mark — February 3, 2008 @ 9:19 pm
a Scan is a photo…
So unless Bill has some ingenius way of doing this, I will have to send to everyone’s email.
Or perhaps you and everyone else still don’t believe me. Of course I know that’s the case and that’s why I don’t just type it in here. Needs to be a scan.
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 3, 2008 @ 11:03 pm
What’s happened Sheridan, cat got your tounge? And Volkman, what’s up senor?
Zeller… disappeared?
Collis… been very quite for a while. This Superior Court order was issued on the 27th of December, 2007, by the way.
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 3, 2008 @ 11:13 pm
Hi Alan, you can type it in as far as I am concerned. You could email me the scan and I can verify the content. If that is alright?
Comment by Bill — February 3, 2008 @ 11:49 pm
I’ll drop it off to you tomorrow. You can personally see it, verify it and put it here.
the order is to return the land to Ryan. Nullifys the orders from the lower court that gave Mike control of the property.
It is over.
Dave? Where are you? Volkman???
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 4, 2008 @ 1:15 am
Alan, Just type the document in here. No one needs your editorial. This is your document that you are so proud of, you type it, I will verify that what you type is accurate, and then everyone can decide for themselves if you have interpreted the document accurately.
Comment by Bill — February 4, 2008 @ 6:26 am
Here I am Alan. Why are you making it so complicated. To place a wager was agreed upon. The wager to be $5,000.00 was agreed upon. All that is left is for someone to hold the wager, which would be done in any circle of gentlemen no matter how rich you are. I can understand you may feel Bill Grimes may not be the best person to hold the wager. Someone outside the circle and more neutral perhaps. You nominate someone. Without much thought I am thinking of a couple of Americans who are residents of Peru. Jim King and Papa Dan.
A simple question. Gives us a list of people you would trust in Iquitos to hold your money and have David Sheridan (sfu) choose one. Put the ball in his court unless you just like everyone picking on you.
Comment by David Volkmann — February 4, 2008 @ 8:00 am
Well Volkmann, I hear from you that you want this bet to happen but SFU Sheridan has been so far silent. What’s up wid dat?
Perhaps he should take the original $5,000 bet and you should pick up the bump of $5,000.
Call? or do you not understand poker?
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 4, 2008 @ 7:40 pm
Oh,… and anyone else that would like to raise the bet is more than welcome to chime in here. I was willing to let this go and just scan it and send it to all that sent me the emails.. but this is the most hard-headed group of idiots that I have ever run into..
So, let’s play. I call the 5 grand and bump you 5. Your turn Zeller, Sheridan, Mark no balls and Easy Bill. I have told you from the beginning….
So make me show my hand, then I can say - Read ‘em and weep
Go ahead, Make My Day
Who’s in? Cost $5 Grand to play.
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 4, 2008 @ 7:46 pm
wow… it is really quiet here.
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 4, 2008 @ 10:22 pm
Alan, what part of comment 130 do you not understand? Who do you suggest hold the wagers? And I don’t play or understand poker.
Comment by David Volkmann — February 5, 2008 @ 10:49 am
Volkmann…., I can truly understand that you have High Hopes that what I am telling you is a lie. So high that you should put up $5,000 as well.
And Volkmann, always know one very important thing: Keep your High Hopes up, believe in yourself -
Nobody Else Does.
So grab what little balls you might still have and anty up, chicken shit.
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 5, 2008 @ 8:11 pm
The question is still the same. Who is going to hold the money?
Comment by David Volkmann — February 5, 2008 @ 9:17 pm
Alan I just read your comment 135 again. Your challenging me to bet you when many of us have challenged you first. You must be back in the hospital. I hope you get well soon.
Comment by David Volkmann — February 6, 2008 @ 7:52 am
Alan you mist be an idiot. what makes you think that a judge would give you anything before they gave the documents to the other attorneys on the case. Did you get it from your friend gerald? Probably so and it would be a false document so he could show his friends that believe him. just like the one he hung up in the yrot that has gotten him and his fiscal buddy in deep shit. He posted a document(illegal to post in public) and false because it was just given to him to shut him up and was never run thru the legal system to be approved. so an attorney and a couple of police investigators went and took photos of it for more litigation against “ol honest gerald”. Alan take the document BACK to gerald and forget your bet because I doubt you would ever pay up.
Comment by Mark — February 6, 2008 @ 8:20 am
hey Alan,
Was in Brazil (re silence). Have you been committed yet? If not someone should sign the papers. I see you backed off on letting Bill hold the $5,000.00. It would have been fun to see you scratch up $5,000.00 US. I trust two people there, Bill and Luis. How far down the list do you think you are? Also. Also Alan, I noted you used the word “gloat” in a certain sentence. Do not EVER expect anyone to believe your horse-shit about being neutral. Do me and others a favor. Go to the Yellow Rose, sit in Gerald’s lap and stroke the back of his head (and by the way, keep your pants on) and keep telling him how truthful and wonderful he is. Say awww are they picking on you again Sweety.
Comment by dave sheridan — February 6, 2008 @ 10:19 am
Frankly I doubt that betting on this is legal so let’s not do it. Instead… I am off to BGrimes’ apartment and will hand deliver this copy of the order.
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 6, 2008 @ 11:14 am
Thank God I don´t play golf.
Comment by Douglass G. Norvell, Ph.D. — February 6, 2008 @ 12:14 pm
Hey Doug, whoever you are. I don’t play golf either. But I know something you do do. Read this blog. Keep in mind some of this is tongue in cheek (5%), some is delusional blather ??%, some lies 25%, real people fighting for a just cause 50% and the rest WWF (professional wrestling). You want to hold our coats? Who are you by the way? And welcome to insanity.
Comment by dave sheridan — February 6, 2008 @ 12:49 pm
By the way Doug. We’re going to have our first meeting on the Golf Course shortly. The dress is come as you are, bring your own battle-ax, sword and battle armor and pick a side. We have Atilla coming with a couple of his friends for our side. I hear from sources that they have Porky pig and Tiny Tim coming on their side if that info helps you decide whose side might be the correct choice.
Comment by dave sheridan — February 6, 2008 @ 12:56 pm
I am starting to wonder if it is only Alan that has not been taking his meds.
Comment by David Volkmann — February 6, 2008 @ 4:56 pm
Come on Dave, bare your funny bone.
Comment by dave sheridan — February 6, 2008 @ 6:10 pm
Recognizing that if you throw a rock on the Plaza de Armas, you will hit three foreigners who are “Directors” of an Institute in the selva, I will tell you that I am the Director of the Amazon Institute for the Indigenous Arts. The management team is 80% Peruvian and has the artist Cliver Flores, as well as Carlos Acosta (Victoria Regia. We had some good luck this year and were able to fund a new roof for Victor Morey Bellas Artes, which was a great relief to students who were rained upon while working. Gerald was kind enough to be the first donor.
Some of the discourse on this site is harmful. The comments about Alan Shoemaker were way out of line and embarassing if they came from a fellow American.
Will this issue ever be resolved?
Comment by Douglass G. Norvell, Ph.D. — February 7, 2008 @ 1:51 pm
Bill G. now has the copy of the Superior Court order. Don’t shoot the messenger please.
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 7, 2008 @ 2:01 pm
Doug, that is nice that Gerald did that. Aside from that I would suggest you read his admissions earlier in the blog (and admitted on public radio in Iquitos) of beating kids and stabbing them with a needle hidden in his hand. These acts and many others are, again posted way back in this blog. None of us are attacking this man because he is a nice guy. He conspired with others and with complete disregard for the rights of those who were once his friends cheated us. Try asking him about the sixty or so members of the original golf club that he dissolved without our knowledge with forged documents. Ask if they are all still members and what happened to their investment. Believe me Doug. He is a less than honorable person.
Comment by dave sheridan — February 7, 2008 @ 4:52 pm
gerald never had a hidden pin prick in is thumb… and the persons that said that should watch their ass. If you believe that you can say whatever you want here without repercussions… you better think again.
Just telling you like it is.
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 7, 2008 @ 10:00 pm
Of course I can tell the truth here all I want. Get your lawyer ready. mayeaux is the one that should watch his ass. He bragged to me personally about sticking the pin in the children. He told everyone that would listen. I can get dozens of witnesses to his atrocities. He wanted to get a cattle prod. I find it hard to believe he never bragged to you. This is old news. You should watch your ass also Alan. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
Doug Norvell, The comments about Alan Shoemaker were not out of line. They were restrained. Alan gives as good as he gets. Personally I have been holding back.
You asked if this issue will ever be resolved? Let me remind you AGAIN, that YOU advised us to use the legal system to resolve this issue. Since then mayeaux has been called to court to give his testimony seven times that he failed to comply with. Seven times he failed to appear in court to defend himself. An eight time he appeared without a translator, and was dismissed, as he knew it would be. It is always weeks before the next call to court. We all gave our testimony, immediately on the first call, but not mayeaux. Why would that be? Does that look like the actions of an innocent man? Or someone trying to stall hoping it will just all go away so he can sneak out the back door? On the fourth failure to appear in court the judge is supposed to send the police to handcuff the suspect and drag him to court to testify. How did mayeaux know the judge would not have him handcuffed and drug down the middle of the street screaming and shouting obscenities? Sounds suspicious to me.
So Doug, ask your benefactor of the roof why he is trying to keep this issue from being resolved! Let us know what his excuse is.
Comment by Bill — February 7, 2008 @ 11:03 pm
Why did you say “in his thumb” Alan. Interesting. All I heard was hand. Hmmmmmmm.
Comment by dave sheridan — February 8, 2008 @ 2:12 pm
Bill G. please scan in the document from the Superior Court that I handed to you. Everyone wants to see it and you have my only copy. Many have sent me emails at my address that I asked them to do.. but now you have it. Please enlighten everyone.
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 9, 2008 @ 9:28 pm
Bill……Have a lawyer explain it to Alan.
Comment by dave sheridan — February 10, 2008 @ 9:38 am
Hello everyone, Alan was kind enough to bring me a copy of the “$5000″ document. I have had two lawyers look at it, and two unofficial translations. I will post it here in the next few days so please check back and make your own evaluation. I think those of you with a personal interest, will find this case to be fascinating.
Comment by Bill — February 10, 2008 @ 11:19 am
the lower court judge that initially made the decision to put Mad Mic in charge of the property has now removed himself from Loreto and will “practice” in Madre de Dios. The judges at this time are on vacation, only half of them working, so it will take some time before another judge will be assigned to the case. The Superior Court ruled that there was no evidence to show that MMic should be in charge of the property and they (three of them) threw the case back at that judge and demanded he issue an order according to Peruvian law, which means he demanded that the property be handed back to Ryan, BECAUSE there was no evidence to have put the property in MM’s hands to begin with.
From what I gather, the return time of vacations for the judges is March 8th.
I saw the golf course today, just from the gate. I had never seen the putting green below the house there… but I could see the tops of the coco trees that were planted. Looked very nice. The.. guardian (I guess) came out to see me and told me that some of the course had been cut but most of it was high grass. I did not enter as this could present problems…
That said, I joined a glof culb and I paid my dues to play golf and so I have the the right to do this. Where is the order that says that I can’t go there and play golf. Hell, I can pay someone to cut the grass myself, right? Why not? And then we can get back to sports.
Why not?
Yes we can.
Yes we can.
Why not?
Can someone show me an order that says we can’t play golf there?
Comment by alan shoemaker — February 10, 2008 @ 8:07 pm
Alan, I would love to see you out on the golf course…so we can have you arrested for trespassing. You sir, are a traitor. You do not deserve to play golf.
I wonder if you know how to read Spanish “legaleezz”. I had those $5,000 documents translated by two Spanish-English speaking Peruvians. Then I took the $5000 documents to two different lawyers, both of which completely disagree with your interpretation. I am just guessing here but why do I suspect mayeaux translated those documents for you? ha, ja, je, ji… Let me just say that given the uncertainty of nearly all human endeavors, only a compulsive, sick gambler, with no concept of odds, would offer to wager $5,000 that those documents say what you seem to think they say.
I suggest, again, like I did way back in comment # 57, that you relax, try to stay out of trouble, and wait for the legal system to provide justice.
Comment by Bill — February 10, 2008 @ 8:52 pm
The BIG QUESTION IS: How did Alan get a copy of this “legal document” and MMics attorney does not have it?
Comment by Mark — February 10, 2008 @ 9:03 pm
The document which Alan gave to Bill is exactly the same document that I have. According to my lawyer and others it says that although there were ambiguities in the first document giving me the administration there was no reason whatsoever that Ryan should NOT be sentenced for violent trespass and there was NO reason why my administration should not be made permanent.
Of course Alan you and a few others can go and play golf. All you have to do is just bring back the tractor mower, the other mowers, the water tank & pump, the cups from the greens, the electrical and plumbing fittings and all the golfing equipment that was taken from the course the day before I was appointed as administrater. Its as simple as that.
Comment by Mike Collis — February 11, 2008 @ 11:03 am
Well,… I too had the documents translated and was told (and I read spanish too) that the Superior Courts three judges ANNULED the lower courts decision that put Mic in charge because there was no evidence that would have caused that judge to have ruled. Then the Superior Court demanded that the lower court judge re-do his original (now annuled) order according