Fund For Burned Dancer's Children

16 comments

• Dudester

  •

  15 years ago

  Thanks founder. This is an absolutely horrific case. The suspect in this case deserves life without parole, too bad there's no Devil's Island with a hole to throw her into. The victim, if she survives, will have no quality of life. Her children will be scarred for life.
• giveitayank

  •

  15 years ago

  Dudester, I heard that she died. Maybe I'm wrong. Yank
• arbeeguy

  •

  15 years ago

  MSNBC reported on February 12 that she remains in critical condition and is getting skin grafts. A horrific, unforgivable, and totally useless crime.
• Book Guy

  •

  15 years ago

  Make sure you only give to a legitimate charity. Currently it looks (from the evidence I've seen on a few web pages, after just a little Googling) like no non-profit has been set up yet, so your money might go to the hospital nurse's christmas stocking if you aren't careful.
• Dudester

  •

  15 years ago

  Book Guy, I know that ordinarily it's okay to be cynical on this site, but keep in mind that most dancers live month to month, hoping on good nights to pay the rent, phone bill, utilities, and car insurance. Right now, there are some frightened kids who don't know if their mother is going to live. Their sole means of support is in agony, in a hospital, not drawing any kind of pay. Even if she survives, she's going to need vocational training, never to give a LD again. Now is not the time to be cynical or mean. I didn't hesitate to send a check. I only wish I could be there to help more.
• gridget

  •

  15 years ago

  You guys on this site are awesome. This is a tragedy and my heart goes out to this dancer and her family. I have to agree with Dudester this is a good cause, she probably has no back up plan for survival following an unexpected tragedy like this. I went into the club last week and worked for a family of three children who's mother died and the 21 year old took on his 15 and 17 year old siblings to raise who needed help getting started. I will now go in this week when I am able to work for this cause. Thanks to those of you taking up an interest and helping this family.
• arbeeguy

  •

  15 years ago

  Book Guy, you have proved yourself as a thoughtful and thorough person over the years. You have written many good posts. You could do us all a favor if you took it upon yourself to do a little "due diligence" here in behalf of Founder and all the rest of us. When Founder gives us explicit instructions on how to help Roberta, we assume that everything is legit. Can you verify that it IS LEGIT or that it ISN'T LEGIT? Thanks.
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  I won't be sending a penny, but bravo to those of you who are going to be sending money. If I was going to send money, then I'd err on the side that it is a legitimate charity for her benefit. Again, warm regards to those of you willing to send money.
• Clubber

  •

  15 years ago

  Even though this is a terrible thing that happened, I have to agree with jablake on this one. If we sent his "penny" to everyone that has something terrible happen to them, God knows how much it would cost. That is why we contribute (without the government confiscating our money under threat)to other causes that can be shared by those in need.
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  One negative with giving to professional charities, especially if one is a conservative, is these charities may lobby government to protect their interests and their donors be damned. For example, when Republicans were seeking tax reform some major charities were pushing hard to keep high tax rates and deductions for charitable giving. The thinking being that if donors were allowed to keep more of their money safe from taxes, then less would be donated to charity i.e. some people's main motivation in giving was getting a nice tax deduction. Giving directly to the needy can be much more rewarding to the recipient. It is one thing for a charity or government to lend a hand, but it seems a lot more special when ordinary joes and janes write letters and show tangible concern by sending even small donations. I prefer giving directly to those who I come in contact with. A success story was that homeless roofer. It is amazing how far he went with a little money---I'd assumed I was just feeding his drinking (he claimed he's stopped drinking and didn't need to drink because he'd gotten over his nasty divorce). Heck, if he needs the drink that bad, then I'm more sad for him than anything else.
• Book Guy

  •

  15 years ago

  Arbeguy: I have no idea how to do that type of verification. I'm not in California. I'd suggest to folks out there, that you simply make sure you're writing a check to a registered non-profit foundation or other similar organization, not to some PERSON you've never met.
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  It isn't a check to just some PERSON. It is check in to "Rodrigo Busby For The Benefit Of The Children Of Roberta Busby" and should be delivered to any Washington Mutual branch. Yeah, I can see where a person would cynically think that is just like writing a check to Rodrigo Busby. Given the publicity of this case Mr. Rodrigo Busby seems to be taking a fair amount of risk if it is just some scam. If the government isn't watching out for a scam such as this, then I doubt your money is any safer than with a "registered non-profit foundation or other similar organization"; unless you've check 'em out or they're big and audited). For example, The Salvation Army is supposed to have one hell of a good track record of spending money responsibly and getting results. Anyway, cynical is good as long as it is encompassing.
• Book Guy

  •

  15 years ago

  Jezus ... I just suggested that people be careful ... (but in any case, whether or not it's about a burned dancer, I'd look out for myself, rather than hoping the government is doing it).
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  Hi Book Guy, My mistake; I thought you were giving specific advice. Nothing wrong in the least with suggesting that people be careful. If the check was just to a person, then to be really safe I'd be thinking American Express Money Order made payable to the burn victim (AAA members use to get AE Money Orders at no charge). Or, U.S. Postal Money Order? In addition, to being careful I'd suggest that people be cynical. Hell, even if this Rodrigo Busby was a close relative or her husband it would raise the question of his true intentions. Even if his intentions were initially good, money can corrupt. Seems like a lot of ways to lose, which unfortunately may keep people from at least trying to do the right thing. Here in Florida a tiny percentage children ripped off their parents. Oh, the horror and I mean that genuinely when the children's theft was done with evil intent. The problem is that the solution involved all manner of laws that basically created many more victims. I think most people if they understood what was happening would like to see these laws repealed. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't think registered non-profit foundations or other similar organizations as a whole are clean. They're just another manifestation of corruption. To place them above her close relatives or husband (if she is even married) or even a bank account opened in trust for the benefit of her children seems like wishful thinking or naive.
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  I'm not sure what the saying is for when the wrong doing of a small number of people ends up hurting those far removed from the actual crimes. It is akin to one rotten apple spoils the bunch. I help my neighbor (his English is poor) buy cars from all over the country for export to Haiti. The number of people who are unwilling to accept Western Union, Moneygram, U.S. Postal Money Orders, etc. for the exact amount of the car is fairly high. I explain to them that they don't sign anything or release their car until the actual CASH is their hands. Oh no, they know is it a fraud and they're so smart and educated. My neighbor is actually the one taking a huge risk. Once they have his money, the reality is that there is practically nothing he can do to make them honor their verbal agreement. These scared car sellers can become extremely abusive. Sometimes even threatening to call the police----I always say that is an excellent idea and hopefully the police will investigate. The latest scared seller was a true weirdo. He demands nothing but CASH---OK, there is a transporter nearby who works with my neighbor so the neighbor transfers funds to the transporter. Transporter shows with CASH in hand and seller goes nutty demanding a certified bank check---he doesn't want CASH, which was his previous demand. So transporter makes a 60 mile trip and delivers the demanded certified bank check. Scared seller is finally happy. :) The point that I'm trying to make---very poorly----is that just because there is risk or corruption doesn't necessarily mean that 99 good guys out of a 100 should get screwed for the one. Out of all my neighbors transactions there was only one true fraudster and I recognized her a million miles away. Sadly, the scam (I did a google search of her phone number) had been successful with other people (I knew it was a scam before the google search). I had believed the rip off rate against my neighbor should be around %5---it seems like maybe that was too high an estimate on my part. Long and boring? Well, I just wanted to more fully explain why I have a high opinion of those willing to send some money to help the burned stripper despite the obvious risks. (Remember I ain't sending a penny---that sure as hell don't mean that I'm right.) Anyway, again very warm regards to those who do choose to send money and hopefully a card. Thumbs up 100%!!! :)
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  "AP IMPACT: Army charity hoards millions By JEFF DONN, AP National Writer Jeff Donn, Ap National Writer – Sun Feb 22, 10:21 pm ET FORT BLISS, Texas – As soldiers stream home from Iraq and Afghanistan, the biggest charity inside the U.S. military has been stockpiling tens of millions of dollars meant to help put returning fighters back on their feet, an Associated Press investigation shows. Between 2003 and 2007 — as many military families dealt with long war deployments and increased numbers of home foreclosures — Army Emergency Relief grew into a $345 million behemoth. During those years, the charity packed away $117 million into its own reserves while spending just $64 million on direct aid, according to an AP analysis of its tax records. Tax-exempt and legally separate from the military, AER projects a facade of independence but really operates under close Army control. The massive nonprofit — funded predominantly by troops — allows superiors to squeeze soldiers for contributions; forces struggling soldiers to repay loans — sometimes delaying transfers and promotions; and too often violates its own rules by rewarding donors, such as giving free passes from physical training, the AP found. . . . " [view link] I don't have much faith in charities; government approved or not, but I wonder what the other side of this story is. Seems like soldiers giving to other soldiers would be ideal----I'm always amazed how most former soldiers have such an ebullient view of the military and the U.S.