Leaderboard 728 X 90

Tuesday, March 8, 2016

Ashley Madison customers revealed: Edgar C. Gentle III,, founding partner with Gentle Turner Sexton law firm in Birmingham, AL is among site's affair seekers


Attorney Edgar C. Gentle III
(First in a series)

The founding partner of a Birmingham law firm known for mass torts and class-action cases is among paying customers at the Ashley Madison (AM) extramarital-affair Web site, records show.

Edgar C. Gentle III has earned both bachelor's and master's degrees at Oxford University in England, where he was a Rhodes Scholar and received Honors in Jurisprudence. In the states, Gentle earned undergraduate degrees at Auburn University and the University of Miami before completing his legal education at the University of Alabama.

Gentle heads Gentle Turner Sexton and Harbison, an eight-lawyer firm that is tucked away in Riverchase, a leafy, moneyed section of the Birmingham suburb, Hoover.

Does Gentle sound like the kind of guy who would participate in a notorious Web site with the motto: "Life is short, have an affair"? You wouldn't think so. But our research shows dozens of high-end professionals--lawyers, doctors, architects, wealth managers, vice presidents, and so on--give the Alabama list an elite feel. The same holds true in Missouri.

According to Gentle's professional biography, he has helped create and administer more than $2 billion in settlements. Here is more about his background:

Mr. Gentle has comprehensive experience in serving as Special Master and Claims Administrator in Mass Tort Litigation, and providing claims administration and financial and business advice to Courts, Settling Parties, and Mass Tort Settlements. He has helped create and administer over $2 Billion in Settlements during the past 20 years.

From 1992 to 2015, Mr. Gentle has served as Special Master and Escrow Agent for the MDL 926 Global Breast Implant Settlement, paying over $1.1 billion dollars in claims. From 2001 until 2003, he was Interim Financial Adviser for the Settlement Facility – Dow Corning Trust (the Dow Corning Breast Implant Settlement) overseeing the investment of over $1 billion and providing tax and accounting support for the Settlement.

Commencing in December 2003, Mr. Gentle was appointed as the Settlement Administrator in the $300 million Anniston, Alabama Tolbert PCB Settlement with Monsanto and Solutia in connection with the administration of a Global Settlement before the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Alabama applicable to approximately 18,000 claimants with respect to PCB contamination of property and PCB personal injury claims. In administering the $300 million settlement, Mr. Gentle has designed the claimant payment program for property damage and personal injury, collected criteria for payments for each of the 18,000 Claimants, ranked the claimants for payment amounts, and remitted payments to each of the claimants. He now helps manage a medical clinic for the claimants in Anniston.

In the legal world, Edgar Gentle has been entrusted with multiple billions of dollars. Is he to be trusted in his personal life? Documents made public after last summer's hack of the Ashley Madison Web site suggest the answer is no.

According to published reports, Gentle does not appear to be currently married. Public records indicate, as of 2013-14, he owns property in Hoover with a woman named Beverly Denise Carlisle.

We twice contacted Gentle via e-mail seeking comment for this post. He replied to our second inquiry with the following statement:

Beverly Carlisle and I were married but are now divorced. In the divorce her share of the property was deeded to me.

(To be continued)

62 comments:

Anonymous said...

So, you've got one question in the article---should he be trusted in his personal life? I don't care what people do in their personal life as long as they don't bother me. This seems pointless....nothing more than a public shaming. The guy has done his job and done it well for his clients. What does his personal life have to do with anything?

Strange and suddenly weird turn to the blog here Roger.

legalschnauzer said...

How do you know Mr. Gentle has done well for his clients? How do you know he doesn't bother you?

Your taxpayer dollars support the public courts that Mr. Gentle has used to make himself rich. How do you know he has used those public facilities, that you have helped fund, in an honorable fashion?

Answer: You don't.

We do know that Mr. Gentle has a tendency to cheat in an extremely important area of his life. By the way, his divorce from Ms. Carlisle was conducted via courts that you help fund. Was the divorce caused by his dalliance with Ashley Madison--or his documented tendency to cheat (or attempt to cheat)?

We don't know, but if the answer is yes, your taxpayer dollars were used because of Mr. Gentle's dishonesty in his personal life--including his participation at Ashley Madison.

So you see, Mr. Gentle has had an impact on you, and it's possible he's done it because of Ashley Madison. Maybe it doesn't bother you because you don't realize what he's done. But people who care about how their tax dollars are used should find this illuminating.

legalschnauzer said...

P.S., @11:07 --

There is nothing "strange or suddenly weird" about this. I've said for weeks that I am going to cover this aspect of the AM story, and I've explained why. You might not agree with it, and that's fine, but if you weren't aware of it, you haven't been paying attention.

Anonymous said...

Hasn't Gentle worked with Don Siegelman, or vice versa?

legalschnauzer said...

Yes, I think that is true, @11:29. Not sure how extensive their legal connections might be.

Anonymous said...

Geesh! The rich and powerful pick you to "mate" with and now they are complaining because the baby is not pretty.

Anonymous said...

Great reporting, Mr. Schnauzer, on an important topic. No one else has the cojones to take this on. I'm glad you do.

Anonymous said...

I'm just a little dubious about the theory that a person's private sexual morality is of public relevance regarding how they interact with the public in their job. Roger, if your blog had been active years ago, perhaps Jefferson, FDR, Eisenhower, and Kennedy would never have become presidents- all considered good presidents by historians, and all whom had well-documented affairs.

legalschnauzer said...

So, you are saying, @11:51 (3) that journalism should not advance past the way things were done in the 30s, 40s and so so? Journalism evolves, as does technology, which allows me to write a blog.

BTW, do you tend to vote for one party over the other? How did you feel about the Bill Clinton investigation, based largely on allegations of sexual impropriety? Did you vote for Bill Clinton? Will you vote for Hillary Clinton?

legalschnauzer said...

Hah, @11:51(a), what a great comment. I'm still laughing about it. And thanks for your comment @11:51(b). Much appreciated.

Anonymous said...

So, you're saying that be may have misused my tax dollars because he signed up for Ashley Madison? Isn't that a stretch? Good grief, Bernie Sanders asked pot like crazy in college. It was quite illegal back then. Does that mean I shouldn't trust him with my tax dollar?

I agree with 11:51...a real stretch here to have a cause and effect relationship between his signing up for AM and somehow misappropriating tax dollars.

Anonymous said...

Roger, the Clinton impeachment was a travesty. I voted for him, and will vote for his wife. To me, this is a non-story as a serious public issue. Everybody gets horny from time to time. But, it is very entertaining from a trash-tabloid perspective.

Really -- I want to hear more about Don Gosen, the Donald Ducker. That guy rules!

Anonymous said...

Here is where I am confused. You pay a total stranger to publish language, that Jerry Springer would pay you to say on his program;the total stranger sells it to other total strangers, and you want to claim it is a private matter.A record of everything I buy at Kroger is sold to other total strangers. I always buy xxxlarge condoms.

Anonymous said...

Reason I signed up for Ashley Madison?

I was single and looking for women to date. Yes, really. Even met a girlfriend there, who was also single.

Roger, do you know anything about paranoid personality disorder?

Anonymous said...

According to my analysis of the transaction database, Mr Gentle was never a paid member of Ashley Madison.

legalschnauzer said...

Congrats, @2:24. You found a blatantly defamatory Web site, with a publisher who believes so strongly in his work that he is anonymous. Why don't you try to find out who is behind that site and whether anything it publishes is true.

legalschnauzer said...

I'm guessing your analysis is flawed, @2:24. Mr. Gentle had every opportunity to claim he was not a paying member of AM, and he did not. You seem to make a claim that even Mr. Gentle does not make. Great analysis on your part.

legalschnauzer said...

Here's a question, @2:16. If you were single and looking for women to date, why would you go to a site that promotes extramarital affairs? Aren't there plenty of dating sites out there for single folks?

Anonymous said...

Strange that the people who claim to find Ashley Madison coverage offensive sure do make a beeline to read your posts on the subject.

Anonymous said...

"...his divorce from Ms. C[] was conducted via courts that you help fund... your taxpayer dollars were used because of Mr. G[]'s dishonesty in his personal life--including his participation at Ashley Madison."

So by your logic no conduct should really be private since it might lead to a case before publicly-funded courts?

This is good news. Roger, please share your username and password with me so I can check your email for behaviors that have in the past, or may in the future, cause taxpayers' dollars to be spent on the operation of courts in the Yellowhammer State.

Actually, on second thought, what we really need to know right now is this:

Roger, have you ever been diagnosed with a personality disorder and/or schizophrenia?

Anonymous said...

@2:16 here.

Roger, I was looking for dirty women, and I found a few on that site. And on Match and Okcupid and.... You going to write about profiles on those sites, too?

Roger, the only sexual deviant here is you. Should I know my dentist's sexual preferences? No!

Anonymous said...

Mr Gentle was never a paid member of Ashley Madison.

Anonymous said...

Roger, who cares? Move on.

legalschnauzer said...

Apparently, you care, @2:59. You read the post and commented on it.

legalschnauzer said...

Mr. Gentle had two opportunities to say he was not a paying member of AM and did not do so, @2:54. I've consulted multiple tech experts on this, and their analysis shows him as a paying member. If you want to discuss with me privately, my contact info is rshuler3156@gmail.com and (205) 381-5673. I would like to know what is in your background that would make you qualified to make such an assessment.

Anonymous said...

Roger -- how many people do you intend to expose in this series? And, are there any women or are all these men?

legalschnauzer said...

Share your username and password with me, along with other personal date and contact info, and you've got a deal, @2:44. My contact information has been on here numerous times--it's rshuler3156@gmail.com and (205) 381-5673.

To answer your question, no, I've never been diagnosed with a personality disorder or schizophrenia. Have you?

Look forward to hearing from you.

legalschnauzer said...

I don't have a number in mind, @3:13. It depends on the data. What I've seen so far indicates I easily could do several hundred profiles, just from Alabama and Missouri. And yes, there are women in the group, including a Birmingham lawyer, interior designer, etc.

Anonymous said...

There are women on the paid list?

Also, be careful with women. Slut shaming women online is not to be taken lightly.

Anonymous said...

Like 2:16 I was single and went in there to find single women. My very first search showed that there were 350 single women within 50 miles of Birmingham. We're most of them bots? Sure...but not all! ;-)

So, if a single guy going to a site to meet single women hoping for something more physical and less emotional in nature is newsworthy, let me invite you to go to any of hundreds of bars in the southeast. Just take down the guys names and numbers and feel free to expose all them! All the DUIs coming out of that bar are certainly taking up taxpayer money.

legalschnauzer said...

So, 3:23, journalism now is equivalent to "slut shaming." Thanks for cluing us in. I had no idea.

Anonymous said...

How do you have information on woman if they were non paying members? According to you research,you supposedly are only unmasking paid members which are only men.

legalschnauzer said...

Sorry to say, @3:27, but I don't believe a word you or @2:16 are saying. Makes no sense to go to AM seeking single women when there are so many dating sites with single women on the Web. If you go to AM, by definition, you are seeking a married woman--and that says something about your own character.

I agree with you on the DUIs, and that is public information, unquestionably news.

Anonymous said...

@2:16:

It is true -- I was single. I'm laughing that you would think otherwise, actually. I am in the data and can send you my info to prove it. Have you been on the site? Do you know anything about what you are talking about here? There are many single people and a few swingers on the site.

You are going to be sued, and you're being a dick. What is the point of this?

Anonymous said...

Two problems with the women:

1. The website was free for women, so they should not be in the paid data - which is really the only reliable data in the Ashley Madison dump. If you are seeing a woman's name in the paid data, then something is off.

2. Slut shaming is a real element of this. If you expose a man for being on this website, it is embarrassing and potentially bad for his job and family. But, you expose a woman, and she is much more vulnerable to online harassment, threats of violence, etc. Like it or not, imputing sexual immodesty to a woman is much more damaging than doing the same to a man. I would think you would exercise some discretion before subjecting a woman to those sorts of risks. No?

Anonymous said...

The whiners here never will reveal their real names to you because they are on the AM list. That's why they are so upset about your reporting. Mark it down. They don't want to be exposed themselves.

legalschnauzer said...

Send me your info, @3:37. I'd like to see it. You have my contact information.

legalschnauzer said...

I see no reason to treat women any differently than men. My reporting says that subjects were members of Ashley Madison. It doesn't say they engaged in sexual immodesty, whatever that is.

I've seen several hundred women on paid lists, for just two states. Why they appear there, I don't know. Might come out in one of the many lawsuits against AM.

Anonymous said...

Really, your reporting simply says X person was a member of Ashley Madison? Not so, at least if we use your report on Rob Campbell as an example. You lead with the headline that he likes to perform oral sex. That's more than just saying he was on the site; you got into the gory details.

Now imagine this applied to a woman. If you say Rob Campbell likes to eat pussy, it's really not that big of a deal. If you say "Nancy Jones" likes to suck cock, that is very damaging for her. As in, it trashes her reputation and puts her safety at risk in a way that is just not an issue for Rob Campbell.

I can't believe you don't see this.

legalschnauzer said...

I was talking about my reporting on this post. The comments are attached to this post.

How I will report on women at AM is still to be determined, based on what the data shows.

You are welcome to contact me privately if you want to discuss. But I see no reason why a woman should be treated differently from a man in this regard.

Anonymous said...

I owned three side gas tank GM trucks that I was not the origional owner of. Recieved three letters in mail asking if I wanted to be included in class action lawsuit.I mailed Three letters saying no.Few years later, I recieved three settlement claims in the mail.
GAWD! I glad my name is not on their list of customers.

Anonymous said...

Roger, now you are contradicting yourself, which unfortunately does not surprise me.

You state clearly in the headline that the man you are defaming was an "affair seeker".

Roger, do you have any actual indication that this man was, in fact, seeking an "affair"? Do you know if he was single when he used the site? In an open marriage? A swinger? Registered to chat, but not to meet?

No, you don't know.

Today you've shown repeatedly that you do not know nearly enough about the Ashley Madison website or why people have used it.

This is why a real journalist would not be doing what you are doing. A real journalist behaves professionally and in the public interest.

Roger Shuler is a paranoid who has needlessly bullied dozens of people over the years... including this man.

e.a.f. said...

some people can put their lives into compartments and none of them "touch" each other. some are good at it, others not so much. the presidents which are listed, were good at keeping things in compartments.

At times the issue is "judgement". Having good and/or bad judgement is important if you are in a position of trust. Generally speaking exercising bad judgement in your personal life means it spills over into your business/public life. That is the problem. Most of those who "played" on A.M. exercised "bad judgement" and not all of them were able to keep that bad judgement from spilling over into business.

There is also a big difference from having a discreit affair and going on line on a public website trolling for sex. That is were good and bad judgement comes into play.

Anonymous said...

What a dirt bag you are Roger. You are much worse than anybody who was on that site. Shaming people to keep yourself relevant. Karma is a bitch my friend.

Anonymous said...

I agree with @3:42. The whiners are on the list, and they fear being outed. Thus, all the hysteria and threats.

legalschnauzer said...

Shaming people to keep myself relevant, @8:52? My blog already ranks among the top 50 law blogs in North America. It's been relevant long before anyone ever heard of Ashley Madison.

legalschnauzer said...

You might want to read things with a bit more clarity, @9:12. I said Gentle was among the site's affair seekers. If you read the site's motto--"Life is short, have an affair"--the site's whole purpose is to facilitate and promote affairs. There is no other reason for going there.

You're take would be like saying, "Yes, I visited the ESPN baseball scores page, but I wasn't looking for baseball scores."

My reporting on Mr. Gentle is factual--he didn't deny it's factual. You should be throwing around a word like "defaming" if you don't know what it means.

Anonymous said...

"he didn't deny it's factual" doesn't mean that it is factual. It could be that he doesn't feel the need to talk to you about it. If it turns out that it isn't true, then you are defaming him and could open yourself up to a lawsuit, but fortunately for you, your judgement proof.

Anonymous said...

"Defamation" is a catch-all term for any statement that hurts someone's reputation. Written defamation is called "libel," and spoken defamation is called "slander." Defamation is not a crime, but it is a "tort" (a civil wrong, rather than a criminal wrong).

Example: Roger Shuler defamed Edgar C. Gentle III.

Anonymous said...

For a "Journalist" (smut writer), who claims to be researching this data for months now,it would seem to me that at this point you would know why woman's names are showing up on the paid list. Do you ever plan to expose people on the non paid list? Also, is you plan to only out one person a day?

legalschnauzer said...

Why are women's names showing up on the paid list, @6:44? If you know, you must be more of a "smut writer" than I am. As for my future coverage of the AM story, I would suggest you stay tuned and find out how it goes.

legalschnauzer said...

Mr. Gentle did talk to me about it, @5:08, which you would know if you had read the post.

Anonymous said...

Roger Shuler defamed Edgar C. Gentle III.

Anonymous said...

Response to @8:09: it is a defense to defamation that the statement is true. For example: if Mr. Shuler's statements about Mr. Gentle were true, then Mr. Shuler did not defame Mr. Gentle.

If Mr. Gentle was in fact a paying member of Ashley Madison, he could still sue Mr. Shuler for business libel, intrusion of privacy, and emotional distress. But, not for defamation.

legalschnauzer said...

Questions, @3:15--

1. What is business libel and it's elements?

2. How could I intrude on Mr. Gentle's privacy by publishing information that is publicly available? It's on the Web; to get it, you only need to know where to look.

3. How could I cause him emotional distress if I haven't contributed to any other torts?

Anonymous said...

9:12 Depends on where you look for the defintion of affair. The parties involved in an affair do not have to be married, by definition it is a secret relationship.

But if he was single, then why was he on a site that advertised itself to married people?

And for those saying that it is private, when does a married person having an affair matter? These are lawyers, how do I know that the lawyer that represents me is involved in an affair, married or not, could possibly affect my business relationship? Blackmail? What about doctors? I place my health in the hands of some one who is seeking a relationship, secretive, do I know if they practiced safe sex? Some how I doubt they would.

I think the people that are upset here, sound as though they themselves have something that they might not want revealed.

Anonymous said...

Data indicates that Mr. Gentle was separated when he was a member of the website in question. Why is this fact not included in your reporting?

Anonymous said...

Whether he accessed the site or not, shortly after a divorce it sounds like so probably wasn't in a great place emotionally. Who cares, this is the kind of stuff humans do when they are in an emotional bad place. He sounds a great lawyer to me:

Ed Gentle was born in Birmingham, Alabama, February 17, 1953. He graduated summa cum laude in 1975 from Auburn University where he was a Danforth Scholar and earned a Bachelor of Science degree. In 1977, he received a Master of Science (summa cum laude) from the University of Miami as a Maytag Fellow where he became familiar with the law of the sea and international resource planning issues involving competing nations.

He was a Rhodes Scholar (Auburn’s second and Miami’s first) at Oxford University where he earned a B.A. degree with honors in Jurisprudence in 1979. He received a M.A. degree from Oxford in 1980. He then attended the University of Alabama School Of Law as a Hugo Black Scholar. He earned his J.D. and was admitted to the Alabama State Bar in 1981.

Mr. Gentle has comprehensive experience in serving as Special Master and Claims Administrator in Mass Tort Litigation, and providing claims administration and financial and business advice to Courts, Settling Parties, and Mass Tort Settlements. He has helped create and administer over $2 Billion in Settlements during the past 20 years.

legalschnauzer said...

Have you read the post, @9:54? It says Mr. Gentle is divorced. You might try reading before commenting. It works pretty well.

legalschnauzer said...

What is your point, @4:06? I never said Mr. Gentle was a bad attorney. In fact, much of the material in your comment, indicating he might be a pretty good attorney, comes straight from my post.

Anonymous said...

Roger Shuler made false statements concerning lawyer Edgar C. Gentle III.

legalschnauzer said...

Cite one false statement from the story. Mr. Gentle himself could not cite one false statement from the article, so let's see how you do, @8:54.