Sheri Coleman, sons Garett and Gavin murdered 5-5-09, Columbia, IL. Pt9

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm pretty sure Mrs. C has lupus, not ALS. It was posted on the boards early, around the time of the funeral. Can anyone confirm or deny? I think if it were advanced enough for her to require supportive bandaging on her legs (and the bandages I saw did not correspond to supportive taping, such as is done with athletes, but rather resembled wound dressings), she'd be using a wheelchair, especially on the soft earth of a graveyard where her feet might slip. Or at least a cane.
 
I'm pretty sure Mrs. C has lupus, not ALS. It was posted on the boards early, around the time of the funeral. Can anyone confirm or deny? I think if it were advanced enough for her to require supportive bandaging on her legs (and the bandages I saw did not correspond to supportive taping, such as is done with athletes, but rather resembled wound dressings), she'd be using a wheelchair, especially on the soft earth of a graveyard where her feet might slip. Or at least a cane.

Another thing I thought was odd - no one was assisting her - she was walking by herself and no one was helping her by holding an arm, and she wasn't holding on to anything. It is hard walking on soft dirt, and what looked like a small embankment to me.
 
My email friend agrees that CC's mom is suffering from ALS. They checked around again and had been misinformed about Gehrig's disease, it is ALS. Also told she is having problems with her legs (ulcers?), but doesn't have any problem walking. CC's mom is reported to be a friendly person.

How awful to have to deal with such a thing under this amount of stress!
 
My email friend agrees that CC's mom is suffering from ALS. They checked around again and had been misinformed about Gehrig's disease, it is ALS. Also told she is having problems with her legs (ulcers?), but doesn't have any problem walking. CC's mom is reported to be a friendly person.

How awful to have to deal with such a thing under this amount of stress!

Is your email friend speaking from personal knowledge of Mrs. C's condition? ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) IS Lou Gehrig's disease. It doesn't cause ulcers on the legs, but the variety of lupus I described earlier does. If you look at pictures of her at the gravesite, her bandages are wound dressings.

I don't wish to argue, but others posted on the PD website weeks ago, speaking from knowledge of the family, that she has lupus. So if you're sure your friend is correct, please post the corroborating information she says she has, or how or from whom she gets this information.

I could certainly see that stress might cause an aggravation of any disease she might have. If she had ALS, I doubt she'd be up and around, as I believe stress would worsen the neuronal damage already under way. But that would not cause leg ulcers.

Both lupus and ALS can go into remission.
 
Well, I'm not going to enter into a pissing contest over who is right and who is wrong. I was merely offering information I know to be true due to witnessing my Dad fight the good fight with ALS for 10+ years. Just because someone has been diagnosed with ALS they are not automatically thown into a wheelchair rendered unable to walk, this I know as fact. For the first few years my Dad was actually able to still play golf (on grass and lumpy ground and everything), although noticing weakness in his right hand, and he did not do this from a wheelchair nor with a cane, again, fact.

It isn't about who is right or who knows more to me, so I am going to bow out of this direction of the conversation to allow others who think they know more continue. I was only trying to offer knowledge from personal experience to the conversation at the time.

Whatever it is that Mrs. Coleman is dealing with, it's very unfortunate, as the matter at hand (the murder of her daughter in law and two grandsons) is enough to try to deal with for any person.

I sincerely hope that she is getting proper medical attention for whatever it is, (not that it has any relevence to the matter at hand anyway.)

The reason we are here is enough to make any person sick without the addition of pre-existing medical issues.

That's all I have to say about that.

:cool:
 
I don't believe it is any of our business what condition his mother has as it doesn't apply to the case. The only reason it came up initially is due to the hospital visit on the day of the burial. At that point, it did apply because we were not certain if CC was being checked into the hospital.
 
Yes, whatever illness she has is magnified by this tragedy, and the stress will only add to it.
 
Well, I'm not going to enter into a pissing contest over who is right and who is wrong. I was merely offering information I know to be true due to witnessing my Dad fight the good fight with ALS for 10+ years. Just because someone has been diagnosed with ALS they are not automatically thown into a wheelchair rendered unable to walk, this I know as fact.

Nor am I--in any event, the truth will be made clear at some point.

My points are these: someone claiming to know the family posted on the PD board at the time of the Cape Girardeau visit (May 13) that Mrs. C suffered from lupus, and that the bandages on her legs were wound dressings. Leg ulcers correspond to a particular kind of lupus which often targets women. It made sense. She was female, she had bandages on her legs but was able to walk with no visible sign of muscular weakness, lupus is known to cause skin lesions.

ALS is not that kind of disease. It is a disease of progressive motor weakness, and symptoms are directly related to motor weakness. It does not express symptoms of spontaneous leg ulcers. Whether a person walks or not does not matter. Did your father ever suffer from lesions on his calves, fingertips, tips of his ears, or feet that the doctors said were a symptom of ALS? The symptoms are so frank you would not fail to notice them.

I don't doubt your experience with ALS, which is why I'm sure you would have noticed and had such lesions as Mrs. C's treated.

V

Lupus erythematosus is a connective tissue disease.[1] Lupus is a chronic inflammatory disease that occurs when the body's immune system attacks its own tissues and organs. Inflammation caused by lupus can affect many different body systems, including joints, skin, kidneys, blood cells, heart, and lungs. Lupus occurs more frequently in women than men[citation needed], though the reasons for this are unknown. Four types of lupus exist — systemic lupus erythematosus, discoid lupus erythematosus, drug-induced lupus erythematosus and neonatal lupus. Of these, systemic lupus erythematosus is the most common and serious form of lupus. With treatment, most people with lupus can lead active lives. Chilblain lupus erythematosus is a chronic, unremitting form of lupus erythematosus with the fingertips, rims of ears, calves, and heels affected, especially in women.[1]

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is a form of motor neurone disease. ALS, sometimes called Maladie de Charcot, is a progressive,[1] fatal, neurodegenerative disease caused by the degeneration of motor neurons, the nerve cells in the central nervous system that control voluntary muscle movement. In the United States and Canada, the condition is often referred to as Lou Gehrig's Disease. The disorder causes muscle weakness and atrophy throughout the body as both the upper and lower motor neurons degenerate, ceasing to send messages to muscles. Unable to function, the muscles gradually weaken, develop fasciculations (twitches) because of denervation, and eventually atrophy because of that denervation. The patient may ultimately lose the ability to initiate and control all voluntary movement; bladder and bowel sphincters and the muscles responsible for eye movement are usually (but not always) spared.

Are there still those who say it's cancer? Lupus is sometimes compared to cancer (it's an auto-immune disorder).

We have one person's inside information, another person's inside information, some photographic evidence, and some comparison of symptoms.

Is there a lupus specialty clinic in Cape Girardeau? Like the Mayo in Minnesota?
 
Is your email friend speaking from personal knowledge of Mrs. C's condition? ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) IS Lou Gehrig's disease. It doesn't cause ulcers on the legs, but the variety of lupus I described earlier does. If you look at pictures of her at the gravesite, her bandages are wound dressings.

I don't wish to argue, but others posted on the PD website weeks ago, speaking from knowledge of the family, that she has lupus. So if you're sure your friend is correct, please post the corroborating information she says she has, or how or from whom she gets this information.

I could certainly see that stress might cause an aggravation of any disease she might have. If she had ALS, I doubt she'd be up and around, as I believe stress would worsen the neuronal damage already under way. But that would not cause leg ulcers.

Both lupus and ALS can go into remission.

The information came to my friend from a neighbor, not directly from the Coleman family. I am sorry for the confusion! I've been mostly concerned about her health and not as much about the disease itself, I guess. I have prayed for her. No matter what the disease, it can't be getting better with all the stress surrounding what her son has done to their family.
 
I don't believe it is any of our business what condition his mother has as it doesn't apply to the case. The only reason it came up initially is due to the hospital visit on the day of the burial. At that point, it did apply because we were not certain if CC was being checked into the hospital.

SS, I read your post after I made my last post and I concur :)

The main reason I even said anything was to gain sympathy for Mrs. C. I feel bad that she is dealing with everything! I can't even fathom what she is going through.
 
This case reminds me of the wrestler that killed his wife and son, then committed suicide except CC probably didn't have the guts for that at the time. Maybe someone can slip him some steroids in jail and he can then use the 'roid rage' theory of why he really did this, not just being a psychopathic killer.
 
Hello All,

I believe that we have reports that JMM is supposed to respond by today? Was Nick Pistor that source via Lajr56. [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3905456&postcount=920"]Answered my own question, yes, here.[/ame]

So...perhaps we will hear something today? Granting the attorneys or family feel to share?

In the meanwhile, about the issue of Mrs. Coleman. I certainly feel compassion for anyone with any nagging illness, and certainly for anyone whose relative has launched that which she is being put through now.

Having written the above, I continue to remember Jackie Peterson and that which seemed to be obvious moves at "heart tugs" (opportune appearances with air tank, wheelchair, etc.) I'm NOT comparing JP and Mrs. C, I am just recalling that I felt that SP's defense attorneys were coaxing an effort to score some compassion points.

At anyrate, I'm thinking there might be some value in learning which illness or illnesses Mrs. C might have. It may, later, help us to understand some things during trial. And, BTW, ALS, Lupus, cancer...we have heard a number of things, we are not sure what affects Mrs. C. I am reminded that it is possible for people to be affected by more than one illness at a time.
 
Hi, Wrinkles! ITA.....
IIRC, the reason we all talked about Mrs C's illness in the first place was because of JP and what we all felt was the performance she put on. And the reason we had a hard time feeling sorry for JP was because of her denial - just like GA and CA - and just like Mrs C. Having said that, I do feel bad for Mrs C - I don't know how I'd act in her position, and I wouldn't want to be in her position. The added stress certainly won't help her no matter what she has.

I HOPE we hear something today regarding JM - I'd like to hear about RC even more.....
 
Howdy Who Knew :blowkiss:

<snipped> I HOPE we hear something today regarding JM - I'd like to hear about RC even more.....

I sure would too. We are kind of at the mercy of the Sheri's family attorneys in terms of whether they feel to release information.
 
This case reminds me of the wrestler that killed his wife and son, then committed suicide except CC probably didn't have the guts for that at the time. Maybe someone can slip him some steroids in jail and he can then use the 'roid rage' theory of why he really did this, not just being a psychopathic killer.
I think the main difference between the two cases though is in this one it seems the motive was to move on to a new life and he wanted to get rid of everything in his way. MOO
 
Greetings Analytical,

Thanks for the article. Frankly, when I read the information that was requested in the civil suit, I thought I would not be too happy to make certain information public (i.e. it wouldn't be pertinent to the civil suit.) Although I would want to do whatever I could do to help, I would be uncomfortable about releasing certain information that could go public. Some things, not pertinent to the case, really do not need to be out there, in my estimation. On the other hand, how can we know what is pertinent or not until we see the information?

I can understand JMM's concern, while I understand Sheri's family's concern. I hope that the attorney's can come to a quick and satisfactory agreement.

I have had to work on major detailed cases (not legal, but medical) and have had to weave and bob through that which "can be known" without unduly exposing someone, and that which really is not proper to share. This can be HUGELY time consuming, details details details to sort through. There were times I just wanted to throw all the information out there -- but just could not without endangering some one or some entity not directly involved in the need for sharing of information in the first place. Sure, tossing it all out there might have been easier for me, but it also put me and others at risk -- no good. IF I had felt that the person receiving the information would be discreet, that might have been one thing, but I have learned not to trust the discretion of others in very important cases. People can err, better to not let them have that with which they can err.

Curious how this will be worked out and if RC has turned in the interrogatories or responded yet. I hope so.
 
Hopefully the Judge will rule there are no stipulations to be placed on those. It is wrong to be asking for special treatment because of who she is! The law really doesn't care and this is a legal proceeding. JMM has no standing to make such requests, imo.
 
Howdy All,

To get it into this thread with the other text/info from the Civil Suit.

Other posts in this thread containing text from the civil suit:
Are [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3893995&postcount=797"]here (797)[/ame], [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3895639&postcount=802"]here (802)[/ame] and [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3895645&postcount=803"]here (803)[/ame].


From the Request for Production (to JMM)

p. 5 of 40
Pursuant to the provisions of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 214, you are hereby requested to furnish Plaintiffs' counsel with copies of the following:

1. Copies of Christopher Coleman's complete personnel file.
2. Copies of all policies of Joyce Meyer Ministries regarding employment with the organization.
3. Copies of Christopher Coleman's work schedule for the past 36 months, including all out of town events, appointments, destinations, and schedules.
4. Copies of all airplane schedules, both commercial and private on which Christopher Coleman is listed as a passenger.
5. Copies of all airplane manifests, both commercial and private on which Christopher Coleman is listed as a passenger.
6. Copies of all private airplane manifests, held by Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. which list all passengers.
7. Copies of all reports, correspondence, contracts, agreements or other writings regarding the facts and circumstances alleged in Plaintiffs' Complaint.
8. Copies of the Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. policy of employment as it related to Christopher Coleman.
9. Copies of all correspondence, notes, memorandums, deeds, contracts, policies or other documents relating to the hiring of Christopher Coleman.

From the Interrogatories to Respondent in Discovery (JMM)

p. 7-9 of 40
Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule, you are requested to answer the following Interrogatories under oath within twenty-oight (28) days of service hereof;

1. State the full name, current residence, and business address, and relationship to Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. of all persons answering and signing these interrogatories.

2. Have you or anyone acting on your behalf had any conversations with any person at any time with regard to the manner in which the occurrence complained of in Plaintiffs' Complaint occurred? If your answer to this interrogatory is in the affirmative, state the following:
(a) The date(s) of such conversations and/or statements;
(b) The place of such conversations and/or statements;
(c) All persons present for the conversations and/or statements;
(d) The matters and things stated by the person in the conversation and/or statements;
(e) Whether the conversation was oral, written, and/or recorded; and
(f) Who has possession of the statement if written and/or recorded?

3. Have you overheard any conversations made by any person at any time with regard to the occurrence complained of in Plaintiffs' Complaint? If your answer to this interrogatory is in the affirmative, state the following:

(a) The date(s) one overheard such conversations and/or statements;
(b) The place one overheard such conversations and/or statements;
(c) All persons present for the conversations and/or statements;
(d) The matters and things overheard by the person in the conversation and/or statements;
(e) Whether the conversation was oral, reduced to writing, and/or recorded; and

4. Do you know of any statements otherwise taken by any former or current employee or staff member of Respondent in Discovery with regard to the allegations made in Plaintiffs' Complaint? and, if so, state the following:

(a.) Identify who gave such statement and the date the statement was given;
(b.) Identify the format of the statement, oral, written, videotaped, audio taped, or otherwise;
(c.) Identify who has current possession of said statement;
(d.) For each such statement taken, identify the persons present at the time of statement, and the person requesting the taking of each statement.

5. List the names and addresses of all other persons (other than yourself and persons heretofore listed) who have knowledge of the facts of the occurrence and damages claimed to have resulted from the actions set forth in Plaintiffs' Complaint.

=====
Some blurbs from the complaint:

p. 36 of 40 Complaint Count I
6. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's conduct which caused the deaths of Plaintiffs' decedents, the Plaintiffs'decedents died and their next of kin have been permanently deprived of their love, companionship, society, support, guidance, and have incurred and become liable for large sums of money in burial expenses, all to their damage in a substantial amount.

p. 37 of 40 Complaint Count II
5. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant, Christopher Coleman is guilty of causing the deaths of the Plaintiffs' decedents by one or more of the following negligent acts or omissions:

a.) Negligently and carelessly failing to provide plaintiffs'decedents a safe place to live.

b.) Negligently and carelessly failing to protect plaintiffs'decedents from a dangerous condition when Defendant knew or should have known of the dangerous condition.

c.) Negligently and carelessly failing to protect plaintiffs'decedents from an unreasonable risk of harm which Plaintiffs' decedents would neither discover nor appreciate and thus would be unable to seek protection.

6. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid negligent acts, omissions and carelessness of the Defendant as aforesaid, Plaintiffs' decedents died and their next of kin have been permanently deprived of their love, companionship, society, support, guidance, and have incurred and become liable for large sums of money in burial expenses, all to their damage in a substantial amount.
 
Hello SeriouslySearching :blowkiss:

Morning to you (well it is morning here :) -- bright and sunny, AC running already.

Hopefully the Judge will rule there are no stipulations to be placed on those. It is wrong to be asking for special treatment because of who she is! The law really doesn't care and this is a legal proceeding. JMM has no standing to make such requests, imo.

I guess I don't see this as an issue of JMM "asking for special treatment because of who she is." I see this as an issue of asking for confidentiality on certain things that I think any number of people involved in ministry, business, or personal business might feel is either a.) not pertinent to a need and/or b) could cause undue and unnecessary exposure and/or harm to any number of people or entities who are not directly involved in the matter of the civil suit going forth.

Example:
>>6. Copies of all private airplane manifests, held by Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. which list all passengers.<<

If I had a private airplane, if my airplane was used for the workings of my business, ministry or personal business, I would NOT want all of my airplane manifests handed to anyone without an agreement of confidentiality. If you want my manifests to assist you in a wrongful death suit, great, I want to help. IF you find a manifest that assists you in the wrongful death suit you are pursuing, then that is pertinent to your case -- the one with which I wish to assist you. I could come to an agreement of no confidentiality on that manifest OR I might ask for certain information to be blotted out so that you can use the manifest for your purposes.

IF, on the other hand, I hand you a thousand manifests and only 1 or 2 are pertinent to your need, the other 998 are completely confidential -- full stop. These are not necessary to your case, they could be exposing, damaging, hurtful, problematic to others and the business of those other manifests are clearly not your affair. In my estimation, you are asking me to breach my right to privacy for a no good reason. I would not do it to you, and I would not want it done to me. I will give up my right to privacy (or some of my right) for that which can assist you, but I will not give you a free ticket to blow up my life, business, personal business or ministry, nor that of others.

Example:
>>5. List the names and addresses of all other persons...<<

IMO, people who will eventually have NO USE in the case being pursued do NOT deserve to have a lack of confidentiality for their personal addresses. If I give these out without asking for confidentiality, then IMO I breach the other person's right of privacy -- or so it seems. Sure, you may need to contact these people to assist you, but I do NOT want to give these out without requesting confidentiality of those addresses. If those people must be contacted, if their help must be used, then the lack of confidentiality for their addresses seems it would be their business.

Now then... I fully admit that I am not aware of how the law works in cases such as this. Perhaps someone can assist me to learn why others, just because of someone else's lawsuit (whatever it might be), can be asked to give up their right to privacy in matters which may not be or are not pertinent to a case at hand. IF they can, then couldn't people sling frivolous lawsuits, hand out interrogatories, demand information with no confidentiality, then use the information for their own means/gain or just flat to cause hell in other lives which is absolutely undue?

The above are only a few examples that, if it were me (a no one), I would put my foot down and ask for confidentiality. Just because someone else has a situation with which they need assistance, I do not feel that it is right or appropriate to ask me to expose certain things in my life and affairs -- any of which may have NOTHING AT ALL to do with your need. This is a slippery slope, IMO.

Again, I do not see this as anyone asking for special treatment. My opinion. I see it as right and appropriate to ask confidentiality, at least upon certain things.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
204
Guests online
1,930
Total visitors
2,134

Forum statistics

Threads
599,322
Messages
18,094,510
Members
230,845
Latest member
sidsloth
Back
Top