|
Post by HorrorMetal on May 19, 2018 2:53:41 GMT
Oh wow! Can't believe I hadn't heard about this until now.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 19, 2018 2:58:17 GMT
If that is the case then why has it become a main news item? The first reports seemed like a main news item...except when you actually note that it was all one report from notorious shit rag The Daily Mail (a paper that backed the Nazis just before the outbreak of WWII and blamed a death from an undiagnosed heart condition was the result of being gay...that's the tip of the iceberg)re-reported by other sites online. There were no names given and no formal complaint to authorities against Lee were made. The second claim came just after a month of reports and concern about Lee's physical health and reports that he was being abused and exploited by his new "management" team, who had hidden him away from his friends and refused him contact with the outside world. That a complaint was made a year after it was meant to have occurred, it came just after his financial upheavel and declining state of health, it is an attempt to sue for monetary gain, and no complaint was made to authorities or police, makes it look like a cash grab. Yet instantly some think he is guilty....for no other reason than they don't like Marvel films. Petty as fuck. I'm sure you or I would expect at least some benefit of doubt under the same circumstances. LOL at your clams that everyone else is lying and Stan Lee is the only one telling the truth. That's as pathetic as King Kong Shady's defense of Tom Brady's cheating by claiming that the NFL's Commissioner (who is Patriots' owner Robert Kraft's best friend), an independent investigator (whom even Patriots' owner Robert Kraft praised for his integrity when he was hired to conduct the independent investigation into Brady's cheating), a Physics Professor and former Chairman of the Department of Physics at Princeton University, and 2 federal appellate court judges (who took an oath to judge fairly and objectively) all lied and conspired against Brady.
|
|
|
Post by merh on May 19, 2018 4:52:35 GMT
Oh my.
TEXT:
The creator of Spider-Man, the Avengers and Marvel has filed a billion dollar lawsuit against his former company, POW! Entertainment, and current CEO Shane Duffy, and Gill Champion, claiming they tricked him into signing documents that handed over the company to the Chinese, which includes the use of his name.
The lawsuit says Stan Lee would have never signed the documents in 2017 and claims he was in poor health, dealing with vision loss due to macular degeneration, and he was also grieving over the death of his wife, Joan.
Stan Lee says he would never have signed over the use of his name - "the most important and prized possession Lee and his family owned his entire life" - and points to the fact he wouldn't let Disney use his name when he signed a million dollar movie deal with them (via TMZ).
I'd say he had good csuse to claim mental distress
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on May 19, 2018 6:56:50 GMT
The first reports seemed like a main news item...except when you actually note that it was all one report from notorious shit rag The Daily Mail (a paper that backed the Nazis just before the outbreak of WWII and blamed a death from an undiagnosed heart condition was the result of being gay...that's the tip of the iceberg)re-reported by other sites online. There were no names given and no formal complaint to authorities against Lee were made. The second claim came just after a month of reports and concern about Lee's physical health and reports that he was being abused and exploited by his new "management" team, who had hidden him away from his friends and refused him contact with the outside world. That a complaint was made a year after it was meant to have occurred, it came just after his financial upheavel and declining state of health, it is an attempt to sue for monetary gain, and no complaint was made to authorities or police, makes it look like a cash grab. Yet instantly some think he is guilty....for no other reason than they don't like Marvel films. Petty as fuck. I'm sure you or I would expect at least some benefit of doubt under the same circumstances. That's as pathetic as And yet still not quite as pathetic as wishing someone was a sexual predator and molested women just because you don’t like movies based on comic books he created.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on May 19, 2018 8:53:55 GMT
The first reports seemed like a main news item...except when you actually note that it was all one report from notorious shit rag The Daily Mail (a paper that backed the Nazis just before the outbreak of WWII and blamed a death from an undiagnosed heart condition was the result of being gay...that's the tip of the iceberg)re-reported by other sites online. There were no names given and no formal complaint to authorities against Lee were made. The second claim came just after a month of reports and concern about Lee's physical health and reports that he was being abused and exploited by his new "management" team, who had hidden him away from his friends and refused him contact with the outside world. That a complaint was made a year after it was meant to have occurred, it came just after his financial upheavel and declining state of health, it is an attempt to sue for monetary gain, and no complaint was made to authorities or police, makes it look like a cash grab. Yet instantly some think he is guilty....for no other reason than they don't like Marvel films. Petty as fuck. I'm sure you or I would expect at least some benefit of doubt under the same circumstances. LOL at your clams that everyone else is lying and Stan Lee is the only one telling the truth. At what point do I say that? And don't bother with Egg Ball comparisons...as soon as you start with anything with the words NFL and Brady in there I usually switch off
|
|
|
Post by sostie on May 19, 2018 8:57:57 GMT
Oh wow! Can't believe I hadn't heard about this until now. That's a report on The Daily Mail's claims that came to nothing (it remains "no lawsuit has been filed, and no criminal complaint has been made.") and two reports on one incident. Not exactly establishing a pattern. Might be an idea to just look it up yourself and make your own judgement, DC-Fan's judgement based on the fact that he is linked to MCU films...to him there is no other possible scenario than guilt...and he wallows in it. DC-Fan has also accused the MCU fanbase of being paedophiles and hating those that serve in the military. He is, let's say, a little biased.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on May 19, 2018 14:17:17 GMT
That's as pathetic as King Kong Shady's defense of Tom Brady's cheating by claiming that the NFL's Commissioner (who is Patriots' owner Robert Kraft's best friend), an independent investigator (whom even Patriots' owner Robert Kraft praised for his integrity when he was hired to conduct the independent investigation into Brady's cheating), a Physics Professor and former Chairman of the Department of Physics at Princeton University, and 2 federal appellate court judges (who took an oath to judge fairly and objectively) all lied and conspired against Brady. What’s the matter cupcake? Is the automatic ridiculing of your it’s too stupid to believe trolling posts no longer satisfying your need for attention? ... so you’ve now been reduced to outright lying in order to illicit an angry response? Sorry to disappoint you, chum. All I can muster is a yawn ... If you want to tick someone off, I suggest you go vandalize Wikipedia again. That was your greatest success.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on May 19, 2018 16:45:48 GMT
Oh my.
TEXT:
The creator of Spider-Man, the Avengers and Marvel has filed a billion dollar lawsuit against his former company, POW! Entertainment, and current CEO Shane Duffy, and Gill Champion, claiming they tricked him into signing documents that handed over the company to the Chinese, which includes the use of his name.
The lawsuit says Stan Lee would have never signed the documents in 2017 and claims he was in poor health, dealing with vision loss due to macular degeneration, and he was also grieving over the death of his wife, Joan.
Stan Lee says he would never have signed over the use of his name - "the most important and prized possession Lee and his family owned his entire life" - and points to the fact he wouldn't let Disney use his name when he signed a million dollar movie deal with them (via TMZ).
Stan Lee is not in the best of health, and contrary to his appearances in the movies, in which he seems lucid, everyone that meets him in person says the same thing: That he's not all there anymore. So I'm not surprised that he was "tricked" into this, if that's true.
However, I cant believe that he was in the room signing important contracts all alone; especially if its true that he's not all there. He MUST have lawyers and managers and agents working for him, people who oversee such contracts and look out for his best interests. He didn't just show up alone.
So this doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on May 19, 2018 18:29:16 GMT
Oh my.
TEXT:
The creator of Spider-Man, the Avengers and Marvel has filed a billion dollar lawsuit against his former company, POW! Entertainment, and current CEO Shane Duffy, and Gill Champion, claiming they tricked him into signing documents that handed over the company to the Chinese, which includes the use of his name.
The lawsuit says Stan Lee would have never signed the documents in 2017 and claims he was in poor health, dealing with vision loss due to macular degeneration, and he was also grieving over the death of his wife, Joan.
Stan Lee says he would never have signed over the use of his name - "the most important and prized possession Lee and his family owned his entire life" - and points to the fact he wouldn't let Disney use his name when he signed a million dollar movie deal with them (via TMZ).
Stan Lee is not in the best of health, and contrary to his appearances in the movies, in which he seems lucid, everyone that meets him in person says the same thing: That he's not all there anymore. So I'm not surprised that he was "tricked" into this, if that's true.
However, I cant believe that he was in the room signing important contracts all alone; especially if its true that he's not all there. He MUST have lawyers and managers and agents working for him, people who oversee such contracts and look out for his best interests. He didn't just show up alone.
So this doesn't make sense.
Unfortunately his manager was Max Anderson, who also has the title of "Event Co-ordinator" at POW - the company he is suing. Anderson was sacked recently along with Lee's lawyer and his nurse after trying to isolate him from his daughter - his sole heir, and millions went missing from his accounts. Maybe he did have them there but they weren't working in his interests His nurse is also being investigated by Adult Protective Services and Police for providing naked showers and happy ending massages with the knowledge of Anderson in order the seperate him from his daughter and money. His nurse started working for him whilst in the employee of the agency that was first reported to make claims against Lee. All the details are here. I know it is from the terrible Daily Mail, but unlike their earlier sketchy report with no detail, this seems more thorough. link
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on May 19, 2018 18:46:17 GMT
Unfortunately his manager was Max Anderson, who also has the title of "Event Co-ordinator" at POW - the company he is suing. Anderson was sacked recently along with Lee's lawyer and his carer after trying to isolate him from his daughter - his sole heir, and millions went missing from his accounts. Maybe he did have them their but they weren't working in his interests His nurse is also being investigated by Adult Protective Services and Police for providing naked showers and happy ending massages with the knowledge of Anderson in order the seperate him from his daughter and money. His nurse was once an employee of the agency that was first reported to make claims against Lee. All the details are here. I know it is from the terrible Daily Mail, but unlike their earlier sketchy report with no detail, this seems more thorough. linkOh well that's all unfortunate to hear.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 19, 2018 19:08:11 GMT
Oh my.
TEXT:
The creator of Spider-Man, the Avengers and Marvel has filed a billion dollar lawsuit against his former company, POW! Entertainment, and current CEO Shane Duffy, and Gill Champion, claiming they tricked him into signing documents that handed over the company to the Chinese, which includes the use of his name.
The lawsuit says Stan Lee would have never signed the documents in 2017 and claims he was in poor health, dealing with vision loss due to macular degeneration, and he was also grieving over the death of his wife, Joan.
Stan Lee says he would never have signed over the use of his name - "the most important and prized possession Lee and his family owned his entire life" - and points to the fact he wouldn't let Disney use his name when he signed a million dollar movie deal with them (via TMZ).
Stan Lee is not in the best of health, and contrary to his appearances in the movies, in which he seems lucid, everyone that meets him in person says the same thing: That he's not all there anymore. So I'm not surprised that he was "tricked" into this, if that's true.
However, I cant believe that he was in the room signing important contracts all alone; especially if its true that he's not all there. He MUST have lawyers and managers and agents working for him, people who oversee such contracts and look out for his best interests. He didn't just show up alone.
So this doesn't make sense.
Agreed. If Stan Lee is represented by lawyers and agents, then POW! Entertainment knows that they're not allowed to contact Stan Lee directly or speak to Stan lee without his lawyers present so they would've never contacted Stan Lee directly. They would've contacted Stan Lee's lawyers and Stan Lee's lawyers would've never had Stan lee go to a contract signing alone. This sounds like bullshit.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 19, 2018 19:11:59 GMT
Stan Lee is not in the best of health, and contrary to his appearances in the movies, in which he seems lucid, everyone that meets him in person says the same thing: That he's not all there anymore. So I'm not surprised that he was "tricked" into this, if that's true.
However, I cant believe that he was in the room signing important contracts all alone; especially if its true that he's not all there. He MUST have lawyers and managers and agents working for him, people who oversee such contracts and look out for his best interests. He didn't just show up alone.
So this doesn't make sense.
All the details are here. I know it is from the terrible Daily Mail, but unlike their earlier sketchy report with no detail, this seems more thorough. linkLOL! You claim the Daily Mail was unreliable when they reported Stan Lee's sexual misconduct but now you're trying to use the Daily Mail to defend Stan Lee being "tricked" into signing a contract. Such hypocrisy!
|
|
|
Post by sostie on May 19, 2018 19:35:50 GMT
All the details are here. I know it is from the terrible Daily Mail, but unlike their earlier sketchy report with no detail, this seems more thorough. linkLOL! You claim the Daily Mail was unreliable when they reported Stan Lee's sexual misconduct but now you're trying to use the Daily Mail to defend Stan Lee being "tricked" into signing a contract. Such hypocrisy! Quote me where I said that. I pointed out they are a shit rag - famous for muck raking - and gave examples. And I aknowledged that I was linking the mail and said at least it was a more detailed report than it's earlier report - which before gave no sources or detailed info. Quote me or fuck off.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 19, 2018 19:40:02 GMT
Quote me where I said that. I pointed out they are a shit rag - famous for muck raking - and gave examples. And I aknowledged that I was linking the mail and said at least it was a more detailed report than it's earlier report - which before gave no sources or detailed info. Quote me or fuck off. You're basically don't believe the Daily Mail when they write an article about Stan Lee being accused of sexual misconduct but believe the Daily Mail when they write an article about Stan Lee being "tricked" into signing a contract. That's hypocrisy!
|
|
|
Post by sostie on May 19, 2018 19:46:04 GMT
Quote me where I said that. I pointed out they are a shit rag - famous for muck raking - and gave examples. And I aknowledged that I was linking the mail and said at least it was a more detailed report than it's earlier report - which before gave no sources or detailed info. Quote me or fuck off. You're basically don't believe the Daily Mail when they write an article about Stan Lee being accused of sexual misconduct but believe the Daily Mail when they write an article about Stan Lee being "tricked" into signing a contract. That's hypocrisy! I don't believe there is enough in that initial report to believe it to be truth or otherwise. I know the Daily Mail has a record of raking up any scandal based on a modicum of info. You see, unlike you, I didn't chose to damn someone as being a sex offender based on a bias toward a man because he co-created characters in a franchise you hate. How fucking pathetic and childish. That you instantly believed him to be guilty based on no real info (or follow-up) in a Daily Mail report...the ONLY source for that initial allegation, but ignore the content of the far more detailed report by the same source, is actually hypocrisy. Again, I repeat, quote me or fuck off
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 19, 2018 19:54:45 GMT
You're basically don't believe the Daily Mail when they write an article about Stan Lee being accused of sexual misconduct but believe the Daily Mail when they write an article about Stan Lee being "tricked" into signing a contract. That's hypocrisy! I don't believe there is enough in that initial report to believe it to be truth or otherwise. I know the Daily Mail has a record of raking up any scandal based on a modicum of info. You see, unlike you, I didn't chose to damn someone as being a sex offender based on a bias toward a man because he co-created characters in a franchise you hate. How fucking pathetic and childish. That you instantly believed him to be guilty based on no real info (or follow-up) in a Daily Mail report...the ONLY source for that initial allegation, but ignore the content of the far more detailed report by the same source, is actually hypocrisy. You keep forgetting the fact that since that original Daily Mail article, there's been more articles (not written by the Daily Mail) from other sources and other victims. So it isn't a case of whether the Daily Mail article is true or false. It's a case of if the multiple victims who have accused Stan Lee are lying and Stan Lee is the only 1 telling the truth or if the multiple victims are telling the truth and Stan Lee is the 1 who is lying. Like I explained to you before, when there are multiple victims and multiple allegations, that establishes a pattern.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on May 19, 2018 20:08:22 GMT
I don't believe there is enough in that initial report to believe it to be truth or otherwise. I know the Daily Mail has a record of raking up any scandal based on a modicum of info. You see, unlike you, I didn't chose to damn someone as being a sex offender based on a bias toward a man because he co-created characters in a franchise you hate. How fucking pathetic and childish. That you instantly believed him to be guilty based on no real info (or follow-up) in a Daily Mail report...the ONLY source for that initial allegation, but ignore the content of the far more detailed report by the same source, is actually hypocrisy. You keep forgetting the fact that since that original Daily Mail article, there's been more articles (not written by the Daily Mail) from other sources and other victims. So it isn't a case of whether the Daily Mail article is true or false. It's a case of if the multiple victims who have accused Stan Lee are lying and Stan Lee is the only 1 telling the truth or if the multiple victims are telling the truth and Stan Lee is the 1 who is lying. Like I explained to you before, when there are multiple victims and multiple allegations, that establishes a pattern. Source them I count two allegations. You provided three links. One referencing & repeating the Daily Mail report and two are the same allegation made this year . How many have led to anything? And you came to your conclusion of his guilt after the first report, so I hope you are not now trying to make out your views are based on an "established pattern" (that isn't there) Still not quoted me? So will you be taking the "fuck off" option?
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on May 21, 2018 14:16:08 GMT
You keep forgetting the fact that since that original Daily Mail article, there's been more articles (not written by the Daily Mail) from other sources and other victims. So it isn't a case of whether the Daily Mail article is true or false. It's a case of if the multiple victims who have accused Stan Lee are lying and Stan Lee is the only 1 telling the truth or if the multiple victims are telling the truth and Stan Lee is the 1 who is lying. Like I explained to you before, when there are multiple victims and multiple allegations, that establishes a pattern. Source them I count two allegations. You provided three links. One referencing & repeating the Daily Mail report and two are the same allegation made this year . How many have led to anything? And you came to your conclusion of his guilt after the first report, so I hope you are not now trying to make out your views are based on an "established pattern" (that isn't there) Still not quoted me? So will you be taking the "fuck off" option? I WILL TAKE THAT OPTION, SIR. ... Wait a minute...
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on May 22, 2018 12:27:59 GMT
This may or may not have happened, but the FACT is that there is no evidence, no police report ever filed, and no follow up at all. Allegations were made without anything to back it up and then they died pretty quickly. I am not going to say with 100% certainty that Lee did anything or not, but I want to call BS on this.
I can 100% prove that DC Fan is a complete biased moron and a troll. Multiple people on these boards have said it, including me. You can read his posts as evidence. Therefore, there is FAR more evidence of DC Fan being a moronic, biased, trolly, dipshit than there is against Stan Lee. By DC Fan's own 'logic', he should agree with me.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on May 22, 2018 17:24:34 GMT
Stan Lee is not in the best of health, and contrary to his appearances in the movies, in which he seems lucid, everyone that meets him in person says the same thing: That he's not all there anymore. So I'm not surprised that he was "tricked" into this, if that's true.
However, I cant believe that he was in the room signing important contracts all alone; especially if its true that he's not all there. He MUST have lawyers and managers and agents working for him, people who oversee such contracts and look out for his best interests. He didn't just show up alone.
So this doesn't make sense.
Unfortunately his manager was Max Anderson, who also has the title of "Event Co-ordinator" at POW - the company he is suing. Anderson was sacked recently along with Lee's lawyer and his nurse after trying to isolate him from his daughter - his sole heir, and millions went missing from his accounts. Maybe he did have them there but they weren't working in his interests His nurse is also being investigated by Adult Protective Services and Police for providing naked showers and happy ending massages with the knowledge of Anderson in order the seperate him from his daughter and money. His nurse started working for him whilst in the employee of the agency that was first reported to make claims against Lee. All the details are here. I know it is from the terrible Daily Mail, but unlike their earlier sketchy report with no detail, this seems more thorough. linkWhile I'm not sure about the information you quote, I do acknowledge that its a strong possibility that the people who work FOR him are actually the ones who are screwing him. Its a time honored scam. His daughter needs to get more involved. Much more.
|
|