There are some really nice people in the world, and I would like to thank all of you who have written and called me and thanked me for keeping Beth's name in the news for the past 19 months. You all are all the more appreciated after today. I realize I missed writing about Beth last week and also today, and I thought maybe no one had noticed (or cared).
And just now I found out that someone does care. She wrote:
"Dear Gus,
You don't need to know who I am but you are very sick individual for constantly having to get your nose into other people's business. It's disgusting to think that you have no relation to Beth and yet you write about her and her family every week. Drop it. It doesn't concern YOU or anyone YOU care about. Your over 50, go move to Del Webb and get a hobby. Your BS and slander is the fact that you have nothing better to do than to keep getting on Beths case and her family. Why don't you put yourself in the families shoes and then think about what you say. Josh is a very sweet, kind, caring, loving, respectable, and RESPONSIBLE individual. Stop thinking you are high and mighty because you sit behind a computer and talk about other people's lives like it's nothing. Seriously old man it's about time you find something better to do than waste all your time (the time you do have left) on other people's personal business. You have many enemies my friend and don't think that someone won't do something to you one day. Whether it be revealing one of YOUR secrets or YOUR families just be aware of your surroundings. One thing is for sure Gus, what goes around will come back around and I can tell by your cocky attitude that you will be bitten 10x harder and you will get what you deserve.
"PS. I don't know if you remember deputy but libel and slander is illegal and that's exactly what your doing because YOU have nothing to do but ASSUME things and spread it like wild fire"
Shall I provide the email address through which she wrote?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
Wow... I sometimes disagree with the things you say and do, but that email from that person was way out of line. Although some of the things you say are a bit questionable, you do still keep Beth's name out there, and I respect that a whole lot.
I don't think you should put her email out there for everyone to see, because I think that would be kind of petty.
Thanks, Danielle. I thought it might be kinder to let the guilty remain anonymous - for the time-being ... but there is always another day. Let's see if another blast follows.
I have some ideas about the identity, but I'll hold back for a while.
I certainly didn't miss the threat it contained.
If it happens again... then I think pettiness goes out the door.
You thought that it might be kinder to let the guilty remain annonymous? Really? I guess it could mean one of two things:
1. It could mean that you think who ever wrote the letter is guilty of some sort of threat. Although they didn't threaten you, they merely said they thought you had enemies who might someday seek some sort of retribution. I don't believe you have any enemies who believe that strongly.
While I agree that you have performed a service keeping Beth's story in front of the public. The measure how much that helps I will leave to others. Certainly your "cranky" challenges of early fund raising efforts can be tallied against your positive help. Especially when you consider all of the times where you decided it was better to publish things that were not true than to truly vet them. You seemed to feel that your efforts were all ok because you meant well, rather than consider your actual results, much like your run for Sheriff.
2. Or you could have meant that you want to use it to boost interest in your blog, which I am sure a rational person would agree is a nasty use of that information.
Then you say that a blast may occur?
Really Gus, I wish you would find a friend to edit your stuff. A good editor would point out ambiguities and problems with clarity. Your blog would be more readable and perhaps garner a bigger audience. You work very hard on it, isn't it worth that extra step? Also an editor would give you someone who could tell you don't be such an ass, and save you from yourself on occasion.
Lastly, to the contents of the letter. I have to say that I agree with the ideas that the author was trying to convey. To this story you have inserted yourself as Chief Investigator of the Trust Paperwork, which was produced and then you didn't like the way it was written. Then you were the 50/50 raffle policeman, which caused the 50/50 raffle to not be held. Then to the funds actually raised you were the auditor ... but by that time people who were close to the family didn't want to account to you because you were such a pain in the ass at a very delicate time in their lives. So they shut up.
Now all of that and the other things would make the normal individual say less, especially in a blog where someone pretends to be an advocate (lawyer/policeman), but not you, you went on to report on many things that were never confirmed like when Jeremy got the call from Beth (never happened)...
You are almost the only feature on a Facebook page that has attacked the family for having get togethers at Scott's house, getting rid of some of their pets, for cleaning a garage, keeping some office staff on that you believed might have some involvement in Beth's disappearance. There seemed to be no issue that you didn't insert yourself. (It was truly inspiring--but not in a good way)
In addition you have vilified many members of the community, because you felt they had some connection to this case. You relied on rumors and innuendo.
You have to recognize that these actions by you, (and really dozens more that I don't want to bother to list), have made me agree with the author of the letter.
Do I agree totally with him or her, no. I don't believe that anything you have said is libel or slander (except for two cases with Scott). I believe in your right to express your opinion, however, as I said almost two years ago, you are not very helpful or intuitive and that is why I believe that you will always be on the outside looking in. You are not a very good judge of who to believe or what to print. And right or wrong, I kind of blame you for where we are at in this matter because when you could have explained you accused, when you could have enlightened you took wild ass guesses, and when you could have been kind, you were as the writer of the letter said, cocky
Ray Flavin
P.S. I feel like I need an editor.
My favorite book title is What You Think of Me Is None of My Business.
Thanks, Ray. (My comment about the book title was posted before I read your message this morning.
From your message:
1. About the trust. It was the poorest excuse for a legal document that I have ever read in 45 years. Before it was released for public view, it was grossly misrepresented by Kool Breeze, who said her information about it came from one of the women in Scott's office. The trust contained NONE of the provisions she had so highly touted.
2. The 50/50 raffle? It was illegal.
3. An accounting of the trust account at Chase Bank? You mean the one with $140 in it?
Well Gus it sounds like you are ruffling a few feathers out there. GOOD FOR YOU!!!! KEEP IT COMING!!!!
I have never met Beth Bentley and yet I still have a missing person flyer on the wall of the business here so others won't forget that one of our towns people went missing. Keep reminding us every week! As for the letter writer..... it was a veiled threat to you was my perception. If it was me... I would come out swinging! Not only would I post the email address I would turn it over to the WPD. (Not that it would do any good) :)
The venom of that e-mail sounds familiar ...
This manipulative moron would have everyone believe that Beth's kids are being attacked. Anyone that knows Beth personally, or has just heard of this case, has nothing but compassion for her kids. They are just as much victims as Beth is.
Drop it? Please don't. Please keep Beth's name out there!
Well, ya certainly got torched by that email now didnt ya! :)
I don't know all the details of the missing person, but from what I have read, you've kept the issue "alive" and up front, instead of it becoming just another cold case.
As far as a "blog"... it's your opinion that is posted, not to be confused with reporting totally factual news, like what the NWH does... DOH!!! BAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!
You make us agree with you at times; you make us hate you at times. That's why we come back to read. Well, I can't read... I have my 90 yr old gramps read your blog to me... when he's not drunk. He does the typ'n too. DOH.
And in your own words "and I thought maybe no one noticed (or cared)."
I think way more people read you Gus than you think.
You may be a thorn in a few sides as are many journalists. Keep writing Gus!
I have to say I don't see you doing anything inflammatory to increase readership. You're not an ad driven blog, so if 10 people or 100,000 people read your blog daily it makes no difference to your pocketbook. I've always said that if you haven't done anything wrong, then why worry about what people say about you. Whether you are reporting facts or gossip, the point is you are keeping a conversation going that would otherwise die out.
If people don't like that, then they don't have to read your blog. Likewise, if they disagree with you that strongly, then they can engage you with some degree of civility and contact you with "their side" of the story, or simply ask politely that you "move on". The author of that email is nothing but a bully, hiding behind veiled threats and insults. I would say they have been the "petty" person in this. The face that you posted the email, speaks volumes about you.
MBlue, many thanks for your comment. I appreciate it!
Like my grandfather always said ... I'm going upstairs to F*** your grandmother.
"I would say they have been the "petty" person in this. The face that you posted the email, speaks volumes about you."
Yes, Gus, I would have to say the fact that you published this email speaks volumes about you. My guess is that you have a pretty good idea who wrote this email, and you aren't too worried about it. I'd say it probably came from a young friend of Josh's that cares about him and feels that your 'stories' are actually soapboxes and platitudes but the writer doesn't possess the confidence, wisdom or maturity to refute you.
If you were going to reveal the writer you would have done so within the original story.
How you handle it from here will speak volumes about you.
Angela Montgomery
If you want to continue "reporting" on the status of Beth's case you should really get involved in helping find her. If you care so much about finding her, get out from behind your computer and help in the effort. I happen to know Josh and the author of this email, and i fully empathize with them. This "insightful reporting" you are doing isn't helping find her. And to all of your readers, have you guys been trying to help find her? Or are you just like Gus? Opinionated but lacking the capacity to get up and help find her? You say he is doing a good job by keeping her name out there? People already know her name and already know the story. We don't need weekly updates. What we need is Beth to be brought home safely. Get out there and help.
Excellent suggestion, frankdatank. Why don't you ask Jeremy, Josh, brother Ron and brother Brett and Beth's father why they won't talk with me?
Think Beth's friends in the party crowd at the former Gus's Roadhouse would talk to me? The "posse"? Think the person who took apart Beth's Facebook page would talk to me?
Think Jenn would talk to me and let me nail down exactly what happened that week-end? Or Ryan Ridge or Nathan Ridge?
The people who know what happened to her have clammed up. Maybe some of them watch CSI. You know, the part about "Anything you say can and will ..."
Funny thing about that word "Anything."
How about you, frankdatank? Willing to sit down with me and tell me everything you know about Beth and her friends? Some "friends"...
Should you post that e-mail address?
Post a Comment