You know, you were absolutely right. This man did testify before congress. However, the other attributions which are currently making the rounds on the net are urban legends.

Not only did this guy actually give this speech before Congress, he's made quite a lot of money on it. I did some calling around to the contact numbers for his speaking engagements. For a man who doesn't accept a speaking fee, as Ain't claims, he sure costs those who would host him quite a bit of money. Then of course, there are the books and the solicitations for donations on his website. Some people turn disaster into opportunity. This guy seems to have turned his disaster into dollars.

Dr. Pibb-

Thanks for agreeing with me even though I made that statement on another post. It is beyond me why some people seem to think that silent, private prayer isn't enough.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 19, 2001.

Darrell Scott Addresses The House Judiciary Sub-Committee ***NOT AN URBAN LEGEND AS YOU SAID! STORY LINK TARZAN*** (Ain't Gonna Happen, Not Here Not@ever.com, 2001-02-16)

I waited to respond to your claim until I heard back from Darrell Scott himself.

Below is the reply to my email to him regarding how much money he 'makes' off his daughters death. I have removed my name from the start...beyond that, this is the entire message Darrell Scott sent me.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

*****, thank you for the email. The money from my speaking goes into The Columbine Redemption which is a 501C3 non-profit organization. I am on a set salary, making less than I made as a sales trainer. There are 4 full time staff members supported by the Columbine Redemption in addition to travel expenses, office expenses, etc. It's too bad that any time someone begins to try and make a positive difference the critics come out of the woodwork, but that's what happens. I would gladly go back to being a sales manager if I could have my daughter back.

Sincerely, Darrell Scott

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001

Answers

Horse apples. I called this guy's agent, The Ambassador Agency at 615-370-4700. He charges $5000 a pop PLUS expenses for two people, including airfare, hotel and meals for two people. Note that this is at variance with Darrell Scott's statement. You can say the agency's lying, but since they're the ones who get paid first (and they pay Darrell after their cut), they would have no reason to lie. You can say that I'm lying. Go ahead, call them yourself.

Looking at this guy's schedule of events, he's got 26 events scheduled, not including events that have already passed. This means he will make, at a minimum, $130,000 a year, not including donations, t-shirts, and books. Of course, according to his agent, he was booked solid last year, so the agency suggested I schedule him as early as possible.

I spoke with our HR deparment. Our sales trainers make between $90,000 and $110,000 a year. I checked out a couple of web-based salary surveys. They both gave similar figures. So maybe this guy is making less than he was. But it's impossible to tell from his e- mail whether he's making $5,000 less or $20,000 less. It's also impossible to tell who and how much this second person is making. Is he paying his wife a fixed salary to travel with him? What about his daughter? The only way to know for sure is to look up their tax records. If I have the time, I will, and I'll be sure to publish the results for your edification.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

Yeow...I think I may have hit a nerve there Ape Man....take a pill... B-R-E-A-T-H DEEPLY!

Once you've relaxed a little, click on the link I provided for you and write to Darrell Scott yourself. You will find him to be a pleasant personable man and seems to be willing to answer your questions in a reasonably timely manner.

Have a nice day!

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

It's not that you hit a nerve, it's just that hypocrites make me ill.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

They do? For me it's the big mouths that continue relying on second hand information to base their conclussions on that make me sick.

They spend all their time making big noise slinging as much 'horse apples' as they can find once they get just enough info to justify their opinions but not enough for a complete picture. While avoiding the simplest, yet most direct approach.

Which is: ASKING THE MAN FOR YOURSELF!

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

I must agree. I myself was sickened when you claimed the man receives no speaking fee despite not having checked any facts. I was further sickened when I read the bald-faced LIE Darrell Scott wrote regarding his organization's funding of travel fees. And just a few minutes ago, I almost lost my breakfast when I found out from our event planner how unusual it is for a single speaker (using local AV equipment)to require airfare, hotel, and meals for two people.

You know, I can't blame Darrell Scott for wanting to make a quick buck. He had an opportunity drop right in his lap, why shouldn't he pursue it? After all, Cassie Bernall's family sure cleaned up. Likewise, Jim and Tammy Baker were able to live obscenely well off a 501c3 organization. The part that really makes me ill is how much the deluded people, like yourself, Ain't, want to believe in someone who agrees with you so badly that you will twist yourself into knots to maintain that illusion. Referring to the man's talent agency as "second hand knowledge" is a good example. The talent agent is the one who gets paid first, they take their cut, and the rest goes to the talent. Why on earth would they misrepresent the fees that are associated with their talent? The answer is, they wouldn't. However, if you believe that Darrell Scott is nothing more than a greiving father-turned-crusader, and you are confronted with the fact that this guy rakes it in every time he steps in front of a microphone, you will cling to whatever shred of hope remains that he's not actually making roughly $5000, plus airfare, hotel, and meals for two people, plus the $15 on each book he sells, plus whatever he makes in donations.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

For me it's the big mouths that continue relying on second hand information to base their conclussions on that make me sick.

ROTFLMAO!!!

Look into the bathroom mirror while reading the above quote out loud, Ain't. Make sure the toilet lid's up cause you'll surely endure some projectile vomiting when you realize that you are the definition of that which sickens you so.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), February 22, 2001.

Tarzan...a couple questions. Would you say the $130,000 figure would represent the majority of income they receive?

What would you say is the agency's 'cut' on this money?

How much would be a good 'guesstamate' as to how much $$$$ they take in for books, tee shirts, other donations? Is $5,000? $50,000? $100,000?

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

Oh..one more thing...expenses for airfare & hotel stay, car rental for two people per event. Would about $1,000.00 be about right?

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

You are getting your ass kicked on this, Ain't. Tarzan's got this guy dead to rights. Do you actually think he's going to tell you how much he's making from this? Do you actually think he's going to tell you? More likely that he will LOWBALL his revenue estimates so that credible folks like you will want to "donate" more to him.

Give it up, Ain't.

-- Done Happened Already (oh.yeah@it.did.com), February 22, 2001.

Since the $130 K figure comes straight from Scott's schedule, which has him booked through May, and the agency said he was booked solid last year, I would say his organization is more like to make over 1/4 a million dollars this year. That's a lot of trained staff members!

According to my event planner, an agency employing speakers charges between 10-15%. Some charge as high as 20%. Of course, 130K minus 26 K will still pay for a lot of staff. And that's only if he doesn't ever speak at another event again this year beyond what's scheduled, an outcome his agent seemed to think was pretty unlikely.

Books and t-shirts are low-cost items that generate a high profit margin. It only costs roughly $3 to make a t-shirt which you can sell for $12 and claim to be a bargain. Without seeing this organization's tax report, I can't say how much they sold or how much they collected in donations. It's likely that this organization's $$ comes from his speaking engagements, and his daughter's, to a lesser extent (on his website, he references his surviving daughter's availability). Hmmm... I wonder how much she charges every time she speaks?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

I'm just sitting here shaking my head in utter disbelief at the way this whole thing started.

And Aint, SHAME on YOU. I cant believe you actually emailed this guy to tell him what you did. How awful.

Its bad enough he lost his child in a horrible fashion w/out someone questioning his 'profit' or lack thereof.

I can be and am at times very mean spirited but wow this one totally Fu$%s me up.

Shaking head in disgust.

FWIW, who gives a crap HOW much money he makes or doesnt make?

I've seen he and his wife on a christian station and it broke my heart. Oh the pain of losing a child.

-- The Brat (shh@aol.con), February 22, 2001.

"Shaking head in disgust."

Yeah, me too. I'm disgusted that this guy has turned his kid's death into a money-making opportunity. That's a scam that the Internet Make Money Fast Crew hadn't thought of yet.

"FWIW, who gives a crap HOW much money he makes or doesnt make?"

If he's using his dead child to cash in, then I give a crap.

"I've seen he and his wife on a christian station and it broke my heart. Oh the pain of losing a child."

Obviously not hurting so much that he can't hear the "ka-ching" of the cash registers.

-- Done Happened Already (oh.yeah@it.did.com), February 22, 2001.

Hmmm, yet jesse gets away with supporting his mistress and love child with house and monthly stipend from donations. Where's the outrage?

-- someone (who@sees.hypocrites), February 22, 2001.

Sumer-

I am not unsympathetic to this family's loss. However, I don't think we should accept everything they say as truth simply because they had a child die. By the same token, the fact that they had a child die should not be some kind of free pass to live their lives and conduct their business and organization completely without examination.

Someone-

What on earth does Jesse Jackson have to do with Darrell Scott?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

According to my event planner, an agency employing speakers charges between 10-15%. Some charge as high as 20%. Of course, 130K minus 26 K

Agreed.

Books and t-shirts are low-cost items that generate a high profit margin. It only costs roughly $3 to make a t-shirt which you can sell for $12 and claim to be a bargain. Without seeing this organization's tax report, I can't say how much they sold or how much they collected in donations. It's likely that this organization's $$ comes from his speaking engagements,

Agreed.

Math time

Income

Speaking Fee's $104,000(majority source of income as stated by you)

Since I haven't seen any of Darrells books on the NYTimes best seller lists, I will assume books are not a major source of income.

T Shirts, Donations, Books $80-$90,000 ???

$104,000

+$90,000 = $194,000

Ok...expense time.

Expense

Hotel/Meals, Airfare, Car Rentel per event $1,000 x 26 events = $26,000

Four full time staffers at say $25,000 a piece? = $100,000

Taxes, Social Security, Benifits, Insurance, for four full time staffers $50,000.00

Office Space, phones, office equipment $1,000 month??? x 12 = $12,000.00

GRAND TOTALS

INCOME $194,000

EXPENSES $188,000 = $6,000 left for him to pocket!

WOW!!!!! He is really making a killing here isn't he...

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

off!

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

Even if this guy is making $250,000 a year...that gives him $62,000 a year.

WOW!!!

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

(on his website, he references his surviving daughter's availability). Hmmm... I wonder how much she charges every time she speaks?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

Hopefully enough so they can put food on the family table and pay the remaining bills on Darrells salery of between $6,000 and $62,000

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

In response to Consumers jab at me..here is the original letter I sent to Darrel Scott.

********** Mr. Scott, I am involved in a (discussion with some skeptics of your courage in testifying to your daughters memory. I am being faced with charges that you are making financial gain from your daughters death. I know this is untrue. Would/could you please confirm or deny my position as to what speaking fees and monies are involved and where this money goes (if any) as result of your outreach speaking engagements?

Please also address as to whether you take a salary as well. I pray these questions are not too personal to answer.

Thank you, and may God continue to bless you/your family and your ministry.

- XXXXX XXXXXX

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

Sorry, Ain't, but your figures, like Mr. Scott's sense of honor, are off.

Assuming Mr. Scott works a full year, he'll be making at least $260,000. After the agent's cut, he'll still be making $208,000.

Add this $208,000 to your chosen figure of $100,000 for other items he's selling and you have a total of $308,000. I happen to feel that you've set this figure way too low, but it's your fantasy, so go ahead. This figure does not include donations.

Contrary to Mr. Scott's lie, he charges for airfare, meals, and hotel. For two people. You may not deduct this cost.

Subtract $100,000 for Scott's staffers, and you still have $208,000. Assuming, of course, that Mr. Scott doesn't consider himself a full-time staffer. I have no idea where you come up with the idea that a non-profit organization would pay 50% in employer's burden. In the state of Colorado, the figure would be closer to 20% each for four people making 25 K, so instead of your rather fanciful figure, that leaves us with $188,000. I know this because we have employees in Colorado who are at this wage. Of course, with a 501c3 organization, his tax burden would be considerably less than a private company. But once again, it's your fantasy, so I'll indulge it. The average company pays roughly $200 a month per single employee in health insuarnace.At $5000 an employee per year, this leaves Mr. Scott $168,000. Minus office expenses of $12000 a year, this leaves Mr. Scott $146,000, without considering the money he gets in donations or the money he gets from his daughter's speaking engagements.

Now $146,000 isn't nearly enough to compensate someone for the death of a daughter. But it certainly makes it easier to mourn.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

One more item. I noticed that you claim to have asked Mr. Scott to tell you (in an extremely round-about way) how much he charges for each appearance. I also noticed that he didn't touch that topic with a ten foot pole. I wonder why that is?

Something's rotten in the state of Colorado.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

Ooops, looks like my math is off. Using these figures, Mr. Scott is pocketing $156,000 per year from the Columbine tragedy, and not the $146,000 I reported. Looks like grief pays good.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

Tarzan, you yourself have stated he would be making $130,00 dollars this year at the top of this thread. You now change the numbers to something you like and proves you right in your own mind. Kinda like the three-five Florida recounts.

You also assume because of this additional income you have 'found' that expenses will not change.

I'm not playing the 'what if' game with you any longer.

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

Ooops, looks like my math is off.

Yep.

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

One more observation....I think it is very sad you feel the need to continue to dig, and find an angle this guy, in your mind,'must have' in order to do this ministry work.

...very sad.

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

Read it again, Ain't.

Since the $130 K figure comes straight from Scott's schedule, which has him booked through May, and the agency said he was booked solid last year, I would say his organization is more like to make over 1/4 a million dollars this year.

The 130 K figure comes from, and always has come from, his estimated earnings for the years SO FAR, assuming he did not work past May. Since he was booked solid last year, as his agent put it, it is not a valid assumption that he will not have anymore speaking engagements. Unless, of course, you're grasping at straws to prove that this man isn't making money off the death of his daughter.

Ain't, you said, You also assume because of this additional income you have 'found' that expenses will not change.

Exactly what expenses are you referring to, his cost of travel? That cost is paid for by the same people who buy his speaking time.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

So who's digging? This guy's angle has been immediately apparent to everyone but the willfully ignorant. That would be you, Ain't.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

Looking at this guy's schedule of events, he's got 26 events scheduled, not including events that have already passed. This means he will make, at a minimum, $130,000 a year, not including donations, t-shirts, and books. Of course, according to his agent, he was booked solid last year, so the agency suggested I schedule him as early as possible.

I spoke with our HR deparment. Our sales trainers make between $90,000 and $110,000 a year. I checked out a couple of web-based salary surveys. They both gave similar figures. So maybe this guy is making less than he was. But it's impossible to tell from his e- mail whether he's making $5,000 less or $20,000 less.

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

off

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), February 22, 2001.

Well looky here... Ain't's a sore loser! I never would have figured him for it. Dang, there goes the neighborhood.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 22, 2001.

Ain't --

DIS-MISSED!

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), February 22, 2001.

Okay, Ain’t. I’ll play your silly game. Let’s do some REAL analysis of your numbers.

Mr. Scott has events booked through May, which we have estimated to bring in a minimum of $130,000. But that’s only five months. $130,000 for five months equates to $26,000 per month, and if we multiply that by 12, we’re looking at $312,000. Roughly. At a MINIMUM.

Representation agents take between 10% and 20%. Let’s split the difference and say 15%, or $46,800. I’ll even be generous and round it up to $47,000. That leaves $265,000.

Now let’s add in other sources of income. Assume a t-shirt or sweatshirt can be produced for an average price of $5, which is a little high. Let’s even keep the sale price low and say that they sell for an average of $15 each, for a per-unit profit of $10 (very conservative). Let’s assume he sells 10,000 shirt-units per year, which is a net profit of $100,000. Now we’re holding $365,000.

Regarding the books – let’s say he went with a “vanity” press, which is a small, boutique-style publishing house. Writers usually turn to vanity presses when the big publishers pass on their work, so that’s not unreasonable to assume that he’d go with one. Profit margins are a little better for writers who go through vanity presses, so let’s assume Scott sees $5 for each book he sells. Let’s assume he sells 5,000 books a year, a manageably small figure. Another $25,000 in the till. Now we have $390,000.

Scott also solicits donations at his appearances and through his website. I’m going to assume he can pull in around $1,000 a month, which seems to be a reasonably small figure. Another $12,000, so now we have $402,000. Please note that we have NOT added in any additional income that Mr. Scott’s surviving daughter might generate – she’s advertised as being available. I’m going to throw in another $10,000, representing any additional incremental value she might generate in a year, and I think that is a rather low number. We now stand at $412,000.

Now let’s pay the bills.

Hotel, meals, airfare, car rental, parking, assorted other travel costs – NOTHING. If you ask for Mr. Scott to come and speak, you pay these costs IN ADDITION to his speaking fee. This was CLEARLY STATED EARLIER. If Mr. Scott’s income increases due to speaking fees, his travel costs still remain FLAT. Still looking at $412,000.

Let’s pay for the staffers. I’ll accept Ain’t’s figure of $100,000 annual salary for four people. Now we have $312,000.

Let’s deduct for benefits, taxes, etc. I’m going to go higher than Tarzan and deduct 30% for benefits. That’s another $30,000, so now we have $282,000 left.

Office expenses. I’m going to be very generous here, since I know what office space, equipment and phone charges can mount up to. I’m going to call it $2,500 a month (two and one-half times Ain’t’s estimate), or a total of $30,000 a year. Now we have $252,000 left.

Remember, the income figure was a minimum. And what do we have left?

A quarter-million dollars. I have been stingy with the income estimates and generous with the costs, and I still see this guy pulling in a quarter-million dollars this year. Even if I overestimated income and/or underestimated costs, you could cut that figure in HALF and still be holding a very nice income.

Tell us again, Ain’t – this guy DOESN'T have an angle?

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), February 22, 2001.

In response to Consumers jab at me..here is the original letter I sent to Darrel Scott

Dear Aint: My you ANY other time, I'd be "jabbing" at you. But this time I dont consider it a 'jab'.

FWIW, I didnt even take the time to read what you wrote to the deceased child's father, mainly because I still CANT believe you did that. For what? To prove a point? Pleaaaaaase.

And Tarzan, no offense, I just dont think this WAS that important to email a grieving parent over. IMHO.

The REAL fact of the matter is this.......No one, not anybody can change the fact he may/may not make some cash in public speaking.

On a personal note, I'd speak out regarding the tragedy as well IF I had lost a child in that matter, I'm sure it would be good for my soul. It would hurt me deeply because critics would wish to nitpik over whether or not I received payment for it.

I dont see it as a PROFIT scheme in no way at all.

Where is the compassion? For real.

Ok, now hops off soapbox and you all know sumer DOES have a heart.

Why not drop it already this is not really going nowhere and it is certainly not worth 'fightin' over, or is it? :-)

-- sumer (shh@aol.con), February 23, 2001.

Sumer, the issue is not that he is getting paid for speaking out. The issue is HOW MUCH it appears he is raking in. I returned to his website and found that he's selling two books (not one) and a videotape. Obviously, my figures should be adjusted upwards a bit.

I am as sorry as can be that Mr. Scott lost his daughter. No parent should have to bury a child. But to claim that this man deserves compassion while he's holding his hand out for money seems to me to be hypocrisy of the highest degree.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), February 23, 2001.

Sumer, the issue is not that he is getting paid for speaking out. The issue is HOW MUCH it appears he is raking in. I returned to his website and found that he's selling two books (not one) and a videotape. Obviously, my figures should be adjusted upwards a bit.

I am as sorry as can be that Mr. Scott lost his daughter. No parent should have to bury a child. But to claim that this man deserves compassion while he's holding his hand out for money seems to me to be hypocrisy of the highest degree

Okay I'll get in on the 'debate, whatever we choose to call it' once more. First let me say, I'm not trying to be combatitive (eh, for a change:-) But lets address somethin here.

1. You said it not that he IS raking in the cash, but How much.

okay, what difference does it make, ie. who are any of us to care? So he gets paid. NOW, IF the ISSUE and perhaps you meant to say the real issue is the fact he 'maybe' ripping off folks using nonprofit as a 'front' cool, I'll roll with the whole arguement. Wrong is wrong. FWIW, there are LOTS of peeps doing that under the guise of lil league ie boxing and all sorts of Not for profit (yeah right) ventures and SCAMMING the hell out of 'us'. I am against that wholeheartedly.

2. IMHO, ANYONE who LOSES a child deserves compassion PERIOD. Lets seperate that from the money making. You call it hypocricy in the highest degree, he has his hand out. Please explain how you KNOW this to be true or provide me a link, okay? And by that I mean is he Soliciting Jobs/ie speaking engagements etc? If not, then why claim he is holding out his hand for money?

3. If you were approached by some folks desiring your experience in life, whatever, would you not wish to make some money?

Lastly as many of you know, I have a son who is Hiv pos. When/If he dies, I would wish to share my experience, true, for me, for free, but I'll be honest, IF I were offered money, depending on the situation, I'd graciously take it, MAYBE...I dont know, I'm being honest.

I will make ya a promise to be fair, I will read EVERY link provided.

I betcha I could (if I wanted to) speak personally to him w/compassion call me naive. I HATE to think of death/profit. I dont wish to fathom it but I am having an open mind.

Link please?

Thank you. :*)

-- sumer (shh@aol.con), February 23, 2001.

"Okay I'll get in on the 'debate, whatever we choose to call it' once more. First let me say, I'm not trying to be combatitive (eh, for a change:-) But lets address somethin here."

Okay.

"1. You said it not that he IS raking in the cash, but How much."

Yes. Based on what we know of the number and frequency of his speaking engagements, the amount charged, and based on some rather paltry income assumptions and generous outlay assumptions, we can reasonably conclude that this fellow is profiting well in excess of $125,000, and possibly upwards of $250,000 a year. We could get to the bottom of the matter pretty quickly by getting a copy of Mr. Scott's Form 990, which he is legally obligated to give to anyone who asks. Interestingly enough, Mr. Scott does not seem interested in complying with the law and giving a copy to me. I say, where there's smoke, there's likely to be fire.

"okay, what difference does it make, ie. who are any of us to care?"

Fine with me if you don't care. However, I care a great deal. I'm perfectly content to leave you to your opinion. Perhaps you could leave me to mine?

"So he gets paid."

He might be getting paid quite a bit. If he's getting paid that much, then why does he need to be begging for donations?

"NOW, IF the ISSUE and perhaps you meant to say the real issue is the fact he 'maybe' ripping off folks using nonprofit as a 'front' cool, I'll roll with the whole arguement."

That COULD possibly be happening. But whether that's what's going on or not, he's taking in quite a bit of money by trading on victimhood. Doesn't that bother you at all?

"Wrong is wrong. FWIW, there are LOTS of peeps doing that under the guise of lil league ie boxing and all sorts of Not for profit (yeah right) ventures and SCAMMING the hell out of 'us'. I am against that wholeheartedly."

Fine. If we discover that's what's happening, then we will have some serious common ground.

"2. IMHO, ANYONE who LOSES a child deserves compassion PERIOD."

I respectfully disagree. You seem to be suggesting that someone who loses a child deserves UNRESTRAINED and UNLIMITED compassion. I beg to differ. No one deserves that level of compassion. Ain't seems to be suggesting that this fellow deserves such a high level of compassion that we should not under any circumstances question his motives, actions or finances. I say "bull."

"Lets seperate that from the money making."

Can't do that. He's using misfortune TO MAKE MONEY. He made the connection himself. Not me, not Tarzan, not anyone else here.

"You call it hypocricy in the highest degree, he has his hand out. Please explain how you KNOW this to be true or provide me a link, okay? And by that I mean is he Soliciting Jobs/ie speaking engagements etc? If not, then why claim he is holding out his hand for money?"

He is, in fact, soliciting speaking engagements at $5000 a pop, plus all travel expenses prepaid for two people. Right now, he's got more than 20 scheduled between now and the end of May. Mr. Scott also solicits donations through his website and at his speaking engagements. If you go back to early in this thread, you can find the link already present. If you still cannot find it, then please tell me, and I will repost it for you.

"3. If you were approached by some folks desiring your experience in life, whatever, would you not wish to make some money?"

There's a difference between trading on positive experience (knowledge and skills) and trading on negative experience (misfortune). The difference is that trading on positive experience is called "work," and trading on negative experience is called either "charity" or "victimhood." If this guy is making as much money as we're guessing, then this ceases to be a question of charity.

"Lastly as many of you know, I have a son who is Hiv pos. When/If he dies, I would wish to share my experience, true, for me, for free, but I'll be honest, IF I were offered money, depending on the situation, I'd graciously take it, MAYBE...I dont know, I'm being honest."

Sumer, there's NOTHING wrong with accepting SOME money for that. However, it looks like this Scott fellow has traded in his life wholesale in order to cash in on his daughter's death. And it appears that he may be raking in a very substantial amount of cash. I don't know about you, but that sickens me.

"I will make ya a promise to be fair, I will read EVERY link provided."

Okay. Sounds good to me.

"Link please?"

It's back up near the top. If you have trouble finding it, let me know, and I'll repost it for you.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), February 23, 2001.

Good points, Already.

Regarding point number 1, I can't speak for anyone else, but for me the whole thing started when Ain't made this claim:

"Did you know he never asks for or accepts a speaking fee for any of his appearances? I believe he does sell some tee shirts to cover his traveling expences. Airfair...hotel stay etc. This guy IS one of the truly squeaky clean good guys with a heart for God."

It's become apparent that far from not accepting a speaking fee for his appearances and selling a few t-shirts to cover expenses, Mr. Scott in facts collects $5000 plus expenses for two people every time he steps in front of a microphone. Given the sheer volume of his speaking engagements, someone is getting a substantial sum of money. Let's throw the books open to the light of day and find out exactly who and how much.

Regarding point number two, the fact of the matter is that you can't seperate the death of Rachel Scott from the career that Mr. Scott now has on the lecture circuit, since Mr. Scott uses his status as a grieving father to further that career. Mr. Scott has chosen to wrap himself tightly in his status as victim. For example, here's a link to his website where he is selling a video that actually contains clips of his daughter's funeral.

Books and video for sale

Man, that makes my skin crawl every time I think about it. I had a cousin die at the age of 16 from drinking (he died of alcohol poisoning). If I thought one of my relatives was selling portions of his video taped funeral, I would not stand for it for a moment.

It offends me that Mr. Scott claims some kind of status as an expert because he had a daughter die tragically. This life experience makes him a grieving father. Period. It does not make him a saint, nor does it make him an expert on school violence, the first Amendment, American history, or even the Columbine shooting in and of itself. If he wants to lecture about things he knows little to nothing about, and charge a substantial fee for it (as well as expenses for two people) then so be it. It's his right to free speech.

However, freedom of speech does not also involve freedom from criticism. I think that Mr. Scott has used his daughter's death to advance his career as a public speaker and as a platform for his other views(notice that the first book for sale on the last link is a book called "Important American Documents"). I think he uses it as a distraction from the fact that he's a self-ordained expert. I think he way have profited from it substantially.

You are free to form your own opinion of course. All I'm trying to do is provide another point of view and more information. You can take it or leave it.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 23, 2001.

Here's that link again:

Book and Video

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 23, 2001.

Slaps head, uh duh, I did go and read the link at the top. I will also follow from there, I appreciate the comments, sincerely, and we can agree to disagree. I hear and see your opinion, I just dont agree with All of it. I will follow thru w/my promise.

I followed 1st link:

I challenge every young person in America and around the world to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School, prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain.

The above is Not true in all reality. AFAIK they did away with ORGANIZED prayer, so in fact Prayer in schools has never been done away with. It does anger me that so many think children can not pray in school. BS, they can and they do. I try to give him the benefit of the doubt as being 'misinformed' as many are. But the truth of the matter is....Prayer has NEVER left schools or anywhere for that matter therefore, it Cant return if it were never gone. :-)

I still believe any parent deserves compassion w/exception of those who are to blame for their childs death. Call me naive. That is how I feel. Regardless of $$$ or not. We can agree to disagree.

Actually I find this discussion quite stimulating. So far, I've not really been involved in discussions, just funning, to me this is a good serious one.

I'll follow the other links the one 'blood money' is next :-)

-- sumer (shh@aol.con), February 23, 2001.

"I still believe any parent deserves compassion w/exception of those who are to blame for their childs death."

Unlimited and unrestrained passion? Such a parent gets a "Do Whatever You Like" pass for the rest of their lives? Surely you jest.

"Call me naive. That is how I feel. Regardless of $$$ or not. We can agree to disagree."

We shall certainly have to. Tell me this, sumer -- do the parents of Harris and Klebold also deserve unrestrained and unlimited passion? After all, they weren't responsible for their sons' deaths.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), February 23, 2001.

Already:

Why not? I suspect that Harris and Klebold's parents aren't cashing in only because they have no market for their tale. Personally, I'd be willing to talk about anything people would pay to hear. All this moral breast-beating about how Scott is cashing in on his daughter's death is just so much pompous self-righteousness. Scott has a product he's selling, and people are buying and paying enough for him to apparently do quite well, thank you. If you don't like it, you're free not to pay to listen to him.

When life hands you a lemon, make lemonade. Scott is doing exactly that. The daughter won't return either way, so why not take advantage of the situation and make the most of it?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), February 23, 2001.

"Why not? I suspect that Harris and Klebold's parents aren't cashing in only because they have no market for their tale."

Hmm. If you look at Scott's website, you'll notice that he claims to be an expert on several things that have nothing whatsoever to do with the death of his child. So . . . when you lose a child to violence, dream up whatever money-making scheme you can and cash in? There's something sick and wrong about that. The only other Columbine parents that have attempted to do anything like this are the Bernalls. Are you suggesting that Isaiah Shoals' parents should be able to start up some kind of religious Ponzi scheme without any public comment or public recourse to records? I don't think you are, but I think you're on a slippery slope to that.

"Personally, I'd be willing to talk about anything people would pay to hear."

Knock yourself out. The main problem I have with all this is Scott's (and Ain't's) claim to be a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, but his reluctance to present the legal proof that he is obligated to present to all who ask. I want to see this organization's finances, and I have every right to do so. If you don't care to see them, Mr. Flint, I have no problem with that. I, however, do want to see them, I have the right to see them and I mean to do so. I certainly hope you can accept that.

"All this moral breast-beating about how Scott is cashing in on his daughter's death is just so much pompous self-righteousness."

The only questions here are simply to what degree he is cashing in, and why he won't cough up the Form 990. If exercising one's right to fair public comment and to see the finances of a non-profit organization constitutes pompous self-righteousness, then I'm a pompous and self-righteous person.

"Scott has a product he's selling, and people are buying and paying enough for him to apparently do quite well, thank you. If you don't like it, you're free not to pay to listen to him."

I don't like it. And I don't plan to pay him or listen to him. However, he IS legally obligated to provide me -- or anyone else who asks -- financial details about his organization. And I will get them, one way or another. If you don't like that, you're free not to. And I am still free to comment as I see fit.

Mr. Scott is enjoying a number of benefits from his 501(c)(3) status. He enjoys those benefits at the expense of taxpayers like myself. He is answerable to those same taxpayers. That is the whole idea behind the Form 990 disclosure law. In exchange for his right to form a 501(c)(3), I receive the right to poke around in his finances and comment on them. If you don't like it, that's too bad.

In any event, if you don't care for my comments, that's fine. If you're trying to suggest that I shouldn't be commenting at all, then YOU are being pompous, Mr. Flint.

"When life hands you a lemon, make lemonade. Scott is doing exactly that. The daughter won't return either way, so why not take advantage of the situation and make the most of it?"

What's that I hear? When life hands you a dead child, cash in? Fine. Just give me a copy of your Form 990.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), February 23, 2001.

Already:

Don't misunderstand me. If Scott is doing something illegal, this should be stopped and he should pay the appropriate penalty. If he's reluctant to publicize that he's cashing in on his daughter's death, this is no excuse to refuse to provide documents the law says must be provided on demand. I'd like to read those documents myself, they sound interesting.

I was trying to distinguish the moral from the legal questions here. I don't regard Scott's current income as immoral, I see him as cashing in on an opportunity that happens to be marketable. Good for him. If he can get paid for pontificating in ignorance, good for him. I'd like to do the same -- I *already have* sufficient ignorance, I just lack the dead daughter to provide the leverage.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), February 23, 2001.

ATTENTION, "AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN."

What did the IRS tell you?

Your time is up. Either answer the question or wear the rightfully earned title of "liar."

Have a nice day.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), March 01, 2001.

just wondering why I can't find The Columbine Redemption in an IRS tax exempt organization search. http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/prod/bus_info/eo/eosearch.html

or why in a reverse lookup search on anywho, the telephone number listed on The Columbine Redemption website is listed not to a business but a private individual.

just wondering...

-- wondering one (nickels80@email.com), April 14, 2001.

Because he's probably not running a 501(c)(3) organization, that's why.

BTW, thanks for reminding me. I never received any notice back from Darrell Scott, and his 30 days are about a week overdue. I will now send him a registered letter repeating my demand for a copy of his Form 990. If he fails to respond within 30 days of receipt, or if he refuses delivery of the letter, then I shall most sssuredly set the IRS loose on his hind end.

Dig it.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), April 14, 2001.

Regarding point number 1, I can't speak for anyone else, but for me the whole thing started when Ain't made this claim: "Did you know he never asks for or accepts a speaking fee for any of his appearances? I believe he does sell some tee shirts to cover his traveling expences. Airfair...hotel stay etc. This guy IS one of the truly squeaky clean good guys with a heart for God."

I agree, the original dispute came about because of Ain't spouting off, (once again) making broad, sweeping claims about something, which if looked into, turns out to be completely opposite of what he claims.

I think he must not be able to comprehend that everything you read or see on TV is not always the truth. So many things that we are fed by the media have been carefully worded in an attempt to convey a specific impression that is meant to be gotten across. Unfortunately these days outright falsehoods (lies) can and have been "reported" and there are absolutely no oversight methods or safeguards in place to prevent it.

"Ain't" said "Did you know he never asks for or accepts a speaking fee for any of his appearances?" When "Already" Showed him proof that his statement was completely false, instead of admitting his mistake and apologizing like an adult, he changes his tactics and starts attacking those who are disturbed by the hypocrisy.

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), April 15, 2001.