Following is a post made by a former client of Ken Pangborn.  The client bravely posted this to usenet, despite Ken's threat to reveal confidential information about him.

View this post in Google.com archives

Path:
                   rQdQ!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!howland.erols.net!portc.blue.aol.com.MISMATCH!portc01.blue.aol.com!portc.blue.aol.com!audrey04.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
             From:
                   plumboy@aol.com (PLUMBOY)
        Newsgroups:
                   alt.dads-rights.unmoderated
            Subject:
                   Re: PangK
             Lines:
                   30
 NNTP-Posting-Host:
                   ladder07.news.aol.com
          X-Admin:
                   news@aol.com
              Date:
                   17 Apr 2000 15:44:38 GMT
        References:
                   <496c7c686e90a05cbad56539033530ea@anon.xg.nu>
       Organization:
                   AOL http://www.aol.com
       Message-ID:
                   <20000417114438.07805.00000615@ng-fn1.aol.com>
              Xref:
                   rQdQ alt.dads-rights.unmoderated:30707
 
 
 

In a message dated 4/17/2000 6:51:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time, PangK writes:

<< Thomas, Wilbur Streett is suggesting that you will start posting attacks on
me in alt.dads-rights. If you do so, your right to confidentiality will be
blown. Do you really want to do that? >>

Ken:

I have better things to do in life than to "attack" people. You sound like my
paranoid ex-wife. And by the way, in your correspondence to me above, the "your
right to confidentiality will be blown" statement implies an attack in and of
itself. A cursory look at this statement alone shows that it is made as a
"threat" to silence me. I have nothing to hide. Whatever was documented as part
of the court record has become public record and thus anyone can get a copy.

I'm sure in your mind you believe you are a champion of men going through the
strain and emotional turmoil of divorce and child custody. I have a much
different view personally. So, as to not "breach" the "confidentiality" factor
that you have made up in your mind, I will simply say that personally, I think
that you are a con man. While this is in no way reflective of my thoughts
toward your A-Team organization, I thought I would mention this outside the
bounds of our "professional relationship" which I keep trying in earnest to
forget about.

Finally, I wish to be removed immediately from your email list. Any further
correspondence from you is unwelcome. Have a pleasent day.

Regards,

Thomas
 
 

Following are e-mail complaints which summarize one "MEN International" customer's dissatisfaction with Ken Pangborn.  Ken responded by posting confidential information about this man's case to usenet.

 Ken Pangborn seems to be at it again. While caliming to be the saviour of fatherhood, he is but another cog in the divorce/custody machine. I had
 used him (or should I say he used me) at a time when I was extremely vulnerable to exploitation by such parasitic tapeworms.

 If he wishes to tell everyone the cost/benefit ratio afforded me from his "cutting edge" niche, I'd be more than happy to listen to it. So, go ahead Ken, tell
 everyone what I got for $7,000.00!

 I got a plane ride to SLC Utah. Got a worthless evaluation which the doctor refused to testify in person for. The ticket I had bought him to UGA, he gave
 me back in SLC because he was off to another father in "distress". Oh well,  it wasn't his money.

 Flew to Univ of Georgia for another worthless battery of tests.

 Paid for all lodging in the finest hotels, paid for meals for which he eats like a cow, cars, paid for EVERYTHING. Got 2 certifications and a video tape
 that wasn't even allowed into evidence.

 Stay away from the A-TEAM, try the B-TEAM instead.

 Volley back to you Ken.

 Thomas

From: PLUMBOY@aol.com
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 23:26:44 EDT
Subject: Re: air and water filters
To: WStreett@shell.monmouth.com
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 10

I'm not going to get into a pissing contest here. First off, your response shows what your about.....winning. Not what is just. In this way you can dangle a carrot out in front of men and charge way too much for way too little.

As far as the rest of your baseless rhetoric in regard to time spent. You were with me for 3 days. Please don't let me have to write a complete expose on my case, I really don't have the time. If however I'm forced to I will clearly and specifically put into writing and articulate the entire extent of your involvement and your "experts". Then others may judge for themselves if your little "enterprise" is financially in the "best interest" of anyone except you and your "experts"; one of which ended up playing both sides of the field in order to perpetuate the conflict and keep the money flowing.

Thomas

From: PLUMBOY@aol.com
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 23:31:17 EDT
Subject: Re: Will WILBUR do it????
To: WStreett@shell.monmouth.com
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 10

Never had a restraining order. And Lenore Walker ended up staying on the case anyway. Joint custody was because my ex got what she wanted, then didn't want
it. That is full Pendente Lite custody. After she found out that this would cut into time with her new boy toy, she came across as being sympathetic and offered me our ORIGINAL terms.

Give it up.

  Deja.com message: Re: Will .WILBUR do it????
 

From: pangk@aol.com (PangK)
Subject: Re: Will .WILBUR do it????
Date: 27 Jul 1999 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <19990727100813.07389.00001854@ng-fl1.aol.com>
References: <379cfa53.697951010@news.monmouth.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: wi.general
X-Admin: news@aol.com

>From: WStreett@shell.monmouth.com  (Wilbur Streett)
>Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights.unmoderated, wi.general, alt.mens-rights, soc.men

>A little more..
>
>>From: PLUMBOY@aol.com

>>I'm not going to get into a pissing contest here.

  Sure we believe you.

>>As far as the rest of your baseless rhetoric in regard to time spent. You
were with me for 3 days.

   3 days in Utah ALONE, remember?
The poly and the other testing in Georgia?
New math? 2+2+3=3?
 

>Then others may judge for themselves if
your little "enterprise" is financially in the "best interest" of anyone except
you and your "experts"; one of which ended up playing both sides of  the field
in order to perpetuate the conflict and keep the money flowing.

   Interesting you choose not only to attack ME, but THREE experts who helped
you.
One at the University of Georga. One at the University of Utah and one from
Philadeplia. Okay...

>>Never had a restraining order.

   Funny Tommy, not what the file Curtis sent ME said. Or did you forget about
Dr. Walker's testimony at the hearing just before you came to us?

> And Lenore Walker ended up staying on the case anyway.

   And was neutralized when she was faced down with ACCURATE pycholigal evals
that disproved what she planned to allege.

>Joint custody was because my ex got what she wanted, then didn't want it. That
is full Pendente Lite custody. After she found out that this would  cut into
time with her new boy toy, she came across as being sympathetic and offered me
our ORIGINAL terms.

     Not the way it was told to ME, Tom, even by YOU, forget those emails?