First: Kill All The Lawyers

Forgot the "H" stood for Henry.

Met the bloke 12 years ago in Hong Kong. Was sitting there in ridiculous horse boots talking to some independent types. Made me laugh, but he spoke 5 languages, so not the typical Yank. Few years after that, had a team that was in a bad way. AF was "occupied." Picked up the sat phone and called a DC number. Turned out to be H. Peyton. Two hours later, we got an airdrop. No excuses, no red tape - he just made it happen. Later, he thanked ME.

Only person I ever met that could fly a plane, run a boat, and drive a semi - and secure the legal crap.

Heard about the suit a few weeks ago. Had to laugh. What ignorant prick fucks with Peyton?

I have a tip for those that talk about killin Peyton. Be sure you jest from the safety of mom's couch.

To those that need to know, Peyton will give the shirt off his back and bail out a complete stranger without a thought. Selfless to a fault unless kicked.

But if you pissed on his leg or stole from friends, repent. He won't stop until you've been held accountable and will pluck your life apart like a kid with blocks. Bloody dedicated this one. Wish there were more like him.

HP- you cant save a shit show. The targets have hidden behind the ignorant and neither have the stones to change. Let them burn it, then rebuild.

Or call.

 

Looks like we got a new player and another gear!

Welcome, Mr. Smith.

 

Does anyone know the answer to this?

 

oh my... Just when we all thought this was drying up and blowing away in the wind... BAM!

 

Probably not.. But then again, Peyton wants full disclosure so you never know.

 

I doubt the CMRA will. I've been told in the past that the BoD will not disclose who voted which way on things.

 

Isn't it normal in most settlements that both sides agree to an NDA on the terms and neither side admits fault?

 

If there is a settlement, that's an option.
Based on the things i've read in this thread, I"m guessing that a settlement isn't what's wanted.
I'm guessing it's more like blood & vindication.

 

I doubt that's going to work this time. It's not about the money.

 

A payoff without disclosure would be disastrous for the club. It would further fracture what little trust still exists. Regardless of which side wins, the members will see no benefit. Truth, whatever that may be, is the only "settlement" of which we are eligible. Sweeping anything under the rug could result in additional lawsuits from other members

 

Oh I'm sure there will be full disclosure for sure.
The truth is what this has always been about. The people who have been trying to keep that from coming out are ones who have drove Cmra into this abis.

Steven Isenhower #52

 

*Abyss

 

Spell check Nazi. Blame it on spell check. If this is all anyone can complain about then this thread has run its course. Bahhhaaa
Steven Isenhower #52

 

Well it came up as that and as everyone knows I suck a writing. So as to not spend any more time on this dead thread I just let it ride. But as is always the case did anyone die reading this. NOPE and still no dead lawyers. Bahhhaaa
Steven Isenhower #52

 

Agreed. Quite simply, I didn't catch all the collective "digs" at him and such, but when you contact someone's place of employment over a civil issue, that's a big problem. That takes it ta whole different level.

I still don't see how this will benefit the club in the end, but it is apparent that SOME of those members need to grow up.

 

.

My source on that particular bit of information was CMRA President Steve McNamera. He volunteered it during a phone call I had with him while doing some fact-checking for a website story Michael Gougis was doing for Roadracingworld.com. Steve had previously been concerned that CMRA wouldn't have a chance to say whatever it was it wanted to say in response to Mr. Inge's allegations in our story on the lawsuit. I went out of my way to ensure that CMRA's side of the dispute was included in the story.

I would also like to point out that current CMRA employee Nancy Selleck worked as a full-time employee of Roadracing World for a number of years and I never saw anything that would make me think she was not honest, trustworthy and reliable. She still does some freelance work for the magazine.

Having said that, let me interject my personal opinion as a racer: Over the years I have seen and heard comments made and have observed decisions made and actions taken by a current CMRA official and a current CMRA BoD member that made me wonder why anybody would put them in a position of having any authority or power at racing events. Because at the time I made my observations they were clearly unable to make fair and objective decisions and to take actions based on facts and a correct reading of the rulebook and normal racing procedures. It seemed (and seems) to me that they thought racing events were all about them imposing their will upon the paying customers, i.e. racers.

I also have discussed Mr. Inge's conduct at CCS and WERA events with Kevin Elliott of CCS and with Evelyne Clark of WERA and both have told me that they have never had an issue with him at any of their events. It's hard to believe that he's been so bad at CMRA events that he had to be thrown out of the club, yet has caused zero problem at CCS and WERA events. It does not make sense. Based on my 43 years of racing experience, in my opinion people who actually create serious trouble at events, do so everywhere they go. In my opinion, this case is similar to the AHRMA debacle that cost the AMA $750,000 to defend (before settling) and put AHRMA into bankruptcy: Some club officials screwed over the wrong racer, and now the entire club is paying the price. I think the same officials probably got away with screwing over other racers as well, without litigation being the result.

Your experience and opinion may vary.

 

Game over.