Posted by panch from pool1101.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net (22.214.171.124) on Tuesday, July 16, 2002 at 1:59AM :
Jackie Bejan never loaned me $6000. That's absurd. If I wanted to get
money out of her I could simply have sold her a sculpture. The money was
given to me for the Hammurabi Monument, and not be her either...she
wasn't even in the room, or the building when the deal was made between
Lincoln and I. He didn't like the model of the Hammurabi and asked to be
shown new pieces at a later date to choose from. And he never brought it
up...and Jackie never asked me to re-pay it "repeatedly". If that were
true why would she buy more sculpture from me at a later date? If she
was as pissed as her lawsuit claimed, why wouldn't she have told me to
repay what I "owed" before buying more...or why not deduct what I owed
or take sculpture for payment?
This is something she cooked up to make herself appear the aggreived
party and further smear my reputation. Same with the silly "Land
Swindle". Lincoln asked ME to get him involved...I never offered it to
him. I and the other person involved, as well as Lincoln, took the loss
graciously...it was only later that Jackie stuck her nose in and said
this was a land swindle...a deliberate one. Lincoln had even refused my
offer to pay him back with sculpture...saying it was just a risk gone
bad..."forget about it". Jackie came flying up our arses with claims of
swindles...again for the same reasons.
I did, however, grind the balls off of the winged bull sculpture she
bought...the "tiny" one ...thet one I "immediately" cashed the check
for...like she doesn't cash the checks she gets immediately.
I owe her a set of balls...that's it. And not mine either.
-- signature .
Post a Followup