Advent Talk
Issues & Concerns Category => 3ABN => Topic started by: Bob Pickle on May 17, 2010, 10:01:36 AM
-
At http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuitcourtdocket/ (http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuitcourtdocket/) one can click "I agree," and then select "Party Name," and then scroll down to "Tommy Shelton."
So the case numbers are FE-2010-0000786 and FE-2010-0000787, and the Grand Jury hearing is being held in courtroom 4J today at 8:59:00 am.
-
Selecting "Attorney Name" instead of "Party Name" indicates that the only attorney appearing for the above cases is "Commonwealth Attorney."
-
Selecting "Attorney Name" instead of "Party Name" indicates that the only attorney appearing for the above cases is "Commonwealth Attorney."
That's interesting.
-
Selecting "Attorney Name" instead of "Party Name" indicates that the only attorney appearing for the above cases is "Commonwealth Attorney."
The not-so-subtly insinuation that something is strange about this is mitigated by a simply knowledge of how the process works:
http://www.courts.state.va.us/courts/circuit/handbook_grand_jurors.pdf
From the VA Handbook for Grand Juries (linked above for those who want to understand how things happen and what it all means):
The Grand Jury does not hear both sides of the case and does not determine the guilt or innocence of the accused person. This is determined by a "petit (trial) jury" if and when the accused is tried later. The Grand Jury only determines whether there is probable cause that the accused committed the crime and should stand trial.
(b) Bills of Indictment. After a case has been certified to the Circuit Court [by a judge], the Commonwealth's Attorney will prepare a written document called a "bill of indictment," in which the accused is charged in a legal and formal manner with having committed a specified felony.
As will be described in greater detail later in this handbook, it is this "bill of indictment" that the Regular Grand Jury considers to determine if probable cause exists to require that the person accused stand trial at a later date in the Circuit Court.
-
Tommy Shelton has been indicted on 6 felonies. :amen:
-
Samuelthomas, how did you find out? I searched for news on the internet, but couldn't find anything. Did he plead guilty, or insane? Was this a regular or special grand jury?
-
Mrst53,
Many people can go right into the county court docket and they post it for public records. The very links that Bob posted give you the county and court numbers. Just put that info in search of the county clerk or courts and up it comes after clicking on different links. But very possible that Samuelthomas found it from other.
-
Samuelthomas, how did you find out? I searched for news on the internet, but couldn't find anything. Did he plead guilty, or insane? Was this a regular or special grand jury?
Most probably a verification will appear later. It may not look too good for Tommy Shelton.
-
Samuelthomas, how did you find out? I searched for news on the internet, but couldn't find anything. Did he plead guilty, or insane? Was this a regular or special grand jury?
The court house. They have to release that information.
-
Samuelthomas, how did you find out? I searched for news on the internet, but couldn't find anything. Did he plead guilty, or insane? Was this a regular or special grand jury?
Mrst53
There is no plea before the Grand Jury, it was a regular, not special, Grand Jury (from the document linked above, "Handbook for Virginia Grand Jurors"):
2. Function of a Regular Grand Jury
A regular Grand Jury is composed of from five to seven citizens of a city or county, summoned by the Circuit Court of that city or county, to consider bills of indictment and to hear witnesses and determine whether there is probable cause to believe that a person accused of having committed a serious crime did commit the crime and should stand trial at a later date. The Court may summon up to nine people to ensure a sufficient number.
The Grand Jury does not hear both sides of the case and does not determine the guilt or innocence of the accused person. This is determined by a "petit (trial) jury" if and when the accused is tried later. The Grand Jury only determines whether there is probable cause that the accused committed the crime and should stand trial.
3. Function of a Special Grand Jury
A Special Grand Jury is composed of from seven to eleven citizens of a city or county, summoned by a Circuit Court to investigate and report upon any condition which tends to promote criminal activity in the community or by any governmental authority, agencies, or the officials thereof.
If a majority of the regular grand jurors so request, and if the judge finds probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed which should be investigated by a special grand jury, a special grand jury must be empanelled to be composed of the grand jurors so requesting and willing and such additional members as are necessary. If a minority so requests, a Special Grand Jury may be empanelled.
The function and duties of a Special Grand Jury are set forth in detail in Part III of this Handbook.
13. Procedure in the Jury Room
(a) Quorum .A Regular Grand Jury consists of not less than five members. At least four must concur (agree) in returning "A True Bill" on an indictment.
Should an emergency arise necessitating the absence of a Grand Juror, the Grand Jury should cease deliberations while this fact is reported to the judge.
Business of the Grand Jury should be conducted only when all members are present in the jury room. If it is necessary for a member to be temporarily absent, a recess should be declared by the Foreman until the member rejoins the group.
(b) Hearing Witnesses. The bills of indictment you are to consider will be delivered to you. It is your duty to determine if probable cause exists to require the person accused of a crime in a bill of indictment to stand trial. You will determine this from the testimony of witnesses.
The names of available witnesses in a given case will appear on the bill of indictment. These witnesses will have been sworn by the judge to tell the truth while they are in the jury room. You will notify the judge when you are ready to call a witness.
If any person who is not listed on the bill of indictment, or is listed but not called to testify by the Grand Jury, wants to testify he or she must obtain permission from the judge. Even then, the Grand Jury may refuse to hear this testimony unless the judge orders that it be heard.
Witnesses should be examined one at a time. There is no set manner in which a witness is examined. One appropriate way is for the Foreman to ask the witness to tell what he or she knows about the charge against the accused, after which questions may be asked of the witness by any member of the Grand Jury if additional testimony is desired.
All questioning should not show any viewpoint on the part of the questioner.
It is not necessary to call or hear every witness listed on the bill of indictment, to approve it ("A True Bill"). It is only necessary to hear as many (one or more) as it takes to satisfy four members of the Grand Jury that probable cause exists to require the party accused to stand trial.
On the other hand, a bill of indictment should not be disapproved ("Not a True Bill"), unless every witness listed on the bill of indictment who is available has been examined.
(c) Witness Refusal to Testify .If a witness refuses to answer a question, the Grand Jury should not press the question or attempt on its own to compel an answer. The reason for the refusal by the witness may involve the technical issue of whether the question asked violates this witness's constitutional privilege against self-incrimination. If the jury desires to press the matter further, the question should be written out on a sheet of paper, a recess declared, and the matter reported to the judge orally in open court, whereupon the judge will determine if the witness is compelled to answer.
(d) Accused as a Witness. The accused person named in the bill of indictment will not be listed as a witness, nor will any witnesses favorable to him probably be listed. This is because the Grand Jury does not determine the guilt or innocence of the accused, but only determines whether the testimony of the witnesses produced by the State establishes probable cause to require the accused to stand trial.
If an accused desires to testify, he or she must obtain permission from the judge, who will tell the accused of the privilege against self-incrimination. And even if the judge permits her or him to testify, the Grand Jury may refuse to hear the testimony unless it is ordered to do so by the judge.
14. Determination to Indict or Not
As has been repeatedly stated, the Grand Jury does not sit to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused. The function of the Grand Jury is to determine whether there is probable cause to require the accused to stand trial.
Only members of the Grand Jury are in the jury room while it is deliberating and voting.
When the Grand Jury has heard all necessary or available witnesses in a given case, the Foreman will ask the members to discuss and vote on the question of whether or not "A True Bill" should be found on the charge. Every Grand Juror may now comment on the sufficiency of the evidence and express an opinion on the matter.
After each member who desires to speak has been heard, the Foreman will call for a formal vote to find out if there is the required number of four affirmative (yes) votes.
15. Finding of Indictment
An indictment may be found "A True Bill," only upon the affirmative vote of four or more members of the Grand Jury.
If there are enough affirmative votes in favor of finding an indictment, the Foreman will endorse (write) the phrase "A True Bill" on the back of the bill of indictment and sign it.
If there are insufficient affirmative votes, the Foreman will endorse the phrase "Not a True Bill" and sign it.
As far as implications, Grand Juries rarely make a decision contrary to the judge before them, thus this is not surprising, nor unexpected. The decision is not a comment on guilt or innocence, it is merely a jury indicating that they feel both sides need to present their case before a jury to determine the truth and that jury (petit) will make a decision of guilt or innocence. As much as some want to use this a proof of guilt, vindicating their position, it is nothing of the sort.
-
Memo from Danny to the defenders:
OK. When the indictment comes, I need you all to act like it's no big deal and that we all knew this was going to happen. Make SURE that you slip in something about it not meaning he's guilty. I'll email you all about the time of our next meeting.
BTW Cindy, thanks for your posts on Topix.
Dan
-
anyman,
Did you actually read this yourself;
As has been repeatedly stated, the Grand Jury does not sit to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused. The function of the Grand Jury is to determine whether there is probable cause to require the accused to stand trial. Evidently, they found enough cause to indict and so will a jury as long as the witnesses and the evidence is there. So what are you trying to emply..Yet? Possible innocence?? from (hoping for an ignorant jury??
Only members of the Grand Jury are in the jury room while it is deliberating and voting.
When the Grand Jury has heard all necessary or available witnesses in a given case, the Foreman will ask the members to discuss and vote on the question of whether or not "A True Bill" should be found on the charge. Every Grand Juror may now comment on the sufficiency of the evidence and express an opinion on the matter.
-
Memo from Danny to the defenders:
OK. When the indictment comes, I need you all to act like it's no big deal and that we all knew this was going to happen. Make SURE that you slip in something about it not meaning he's guilty. I'll email you all about the time of our next meeting.
BTW Cindy, thanks for your posts on Topix.
Dan
NOW THIS IS DAMAGAING INFO.
-
Just to be clear, I assume that the "memo" post is a joke, and NOT a copy of any real memo. Duane, is that correct?
-
That would be correct. Just trying to lighten the mood. :wave:
-
Memo from Danny to the defenders:
OK. When the indictment comes, I need you all to act like it's no big deal and that we all knew this was going to happen. Make SURE that you slip in something about it not meaning he's guilty. I'll email you all about the time of our next meeting.
BTW Cindy, thanks for your posts on Topix.
Dan
NOW THIS IS DAMAGAING INFO.
LOL!
-
anyman,
thank you for the explanation. I guess I missed that part in HS government. Of course that 28 years ago :ROFL:. Was there a trial date set?
-
I was informed that no trial date has been set yet.
-
anyman,
thank you for the explanation. I guess I missed that part in HS government. Of course that 28 years ago :ROFL:. Was there a trial date set?
IF (and it must be "if" at this point, since no decision has been released/acknowledged by the court as I write this) Tommy is indicted today, the court will convene tomorrow and set the trial dates for all indictments (Grand Jury meets the 3rd Monday of every odd-numbered month and reviews multiple cases) handed down today. It is likely that any jury trial will not occur for the next nine to eleven months.
-
anyman,
thank you for the explanation. I guess I missed that part in HS government. Of course that 28 years ago :ROFL:. Was there a trial date set?
IF (and it must be "if" at this point, since no decision has been released/acknowledged by the court as I write this) Tommy is indicted today, the court will convene tomorrow and set the trial dates for all indictments (Grand Jury meets the 3rd Monday of every odd-numbered month and reviews multiple cases) handed down today. It is likely that any jury trial will not occur for the next nine to eleven months.
That is not correct. I have heard that it could go to trial as early as next month.
-
Memo from Danny to the defenders:
OK. When the indictment comes, I need you all to act like it's no big deal and that we all knew this was going to happen. Make SURE that you slip in something about it not meaning he's guilty. I'll email you all about the time of our next meeting.
BTW Cindy, thanks for your posts on Topix.
Dan
Duane,
Be very careful as this could be used aganist and not be a joke. I know you meant that would happen and it did with Anyman right off the bat but I admit I sort of believed someone slipped the info to you undercover that knows the truth. OH, well!
-
Memo from Danny to the defenders:
OK. When the indictment comes, I need you all to act like it's no big deal and that we all knew this was going to happen. Make SURE that you slip in something about it not meaning he's guilty. I'll email you all about the time of our next meeting.
BTW Cindy, thanks for your posts on Topix.
Dan
Duane,
Be very careful as this could be used aganist and not be a joke. I know you meant that would happen and it did with Anyman right off the bat but I admit I sort of believed someone slipped the info to you undercover that knows the truth. OH, well!
I understand what you're saying; however, after all the garbage that was posted about me on another board I don't think they want to open that can of worms.
-
Selecting "Attorney Name" instead of "Party Name" indicates that the only attorney appearing for the above cases is "Commonwealth Attorney."
The not-so-subtly insinuation that something is strange about this ....
There was no insinuation in my post whatsoever.
-
IF (and it must be "if" at this point, since no decision has been released/acknowledged by the court as I write this) Tommy is indicted today, the court will convene tomorrow and set the trial dates for all indictments (Grand Jury meets the 3rd Monday of every odd-numbered month and reviews multiple cases) handed down today. It is likely that any jury trial will not occur for the next nine to eleven months.
Trials are set for July 19 and 26, 2010. Hmmm...let's see....seems like that's a LOT sooner than 9 to 11 months.
-
That's not a lot of time to get a defense together- wonder what Tommy's defense will be? Insanity?Mental Instability?
Will the Commonwealth Attorney be able to call previous victims?
-
Not an easy job being on the jury.
-
I know I could not be on Tommy's jury. I am too angry. I could sooner serve on a murder trial, than on this type.
-
Believe it or not, I have to testify in another sexual abuse case next week regarding one of my former youth. Just found out today. Please pray for the young lady who is the victim. Her life has been forever changed. This also happened IN the church. :'(
-
Duane, I feel for you. Will you be allowed to testify in the trials in Virginia in July?
-
Believe it or not, I have to testify in another sexual abuse case next week regarding one of my former youth. Just found out today. Please pray for the young lady who is the victim. Her life has been forever changed. This also happened IN the church. :'(
It is especially sad when it happens in your own church. Unfortunately such things are way too common among the saints and relatives. Where you do not expect it. Too many people hide their sins behind their religion in stead of bringing them to Jesus Christ and asking for forgiveness.
The religion of Jesus Christ requires honesty and truth and this is a fact we have to deal with, although love and concern is what is needed to deal with people. But love and concern also means that you have to tackle evil that is intruding into our Christian society.
-
Duane, I feel for you. Will you be allowed to testify in the trials in Virginia in July?
Don't know yet. I've been told it's a possibility.
-
That is so right and one thing other is that we have to be so careful not to place our sympathy in the wrong directions. The story of Aron and sympathizers was enough lesson to read. We seem to all care for the sinners in our "hope" of "planting the seeds" but when it comes to the "ones totally against the law of God and Society, one must stand up to do as you just posted. That is why it has been so abhorrent for ones to "claim innocent" until proven guilty when the victims and evidence are what did not go unseen or are there. I totally believe the "innocent until proven" with the lack of witness and evidence. In this case both is there before the arrest. That was too much for protectors to deny, it was too long for family to protect. Now the protection is to "protect the pew money" and their :horse: feed. so of course they had to deny it all as reaching fingers will connect. You know I just wished this whole thing wasn't so. I think DS does have some good but he can't control the wrong direction of his "sympathy" for love of family more then "God". I am sure it was a test too as he has lost much and some that remains to be seen. Now you can detect a little of my sympathy. (smile) Its in us all......Sympathy--the devil can count on it and uses it to the worst devestations in our lives.
-
Two of the major legal systems in the world are English Common Law which generally forms the basis of the legal system in the United States. In much of Continental Europe and in Latin America their legal systems are substantially based upon the Napoleonic Code.
NOTE: The legal system of the State of LA has a substantial basis in the Napoleonic Code. There laws are modified by the U.S. Constitution when that becomes a factor.
Under English Common Law, guilt and/or innocence is generally determined in a legal proceeding or trial and the person is considered innocent prior to a determination of the court that the individual is guilty. Of course, trials do not generally take place prior to a determination (A Grand Jury is one method used to bring to trial.) that the evidence is sufficient to raise a question of innocence and it is appropriate to bring the person to trial to determine if the person is guilty and to apply the appropriate judgment in the event guilt is determined.
The Napoleonic Code differs from English Common Law in many ways—although it does have its positive points. Wikipedia makes this statement in part: “ . . . the Napoleonic Code was criticized for de facto presumption of guilt, particularly in common law countries.”
The above is a very simplistic statement on the subject. Let me ask: Would rather live in a country with a legal system based upon English Common Law, or in one based upon the Napoleonic Code?
-
And I understand that in Canada, Quebec law is based on Napoleonic Code, whereas the rest of Canada is based on English Common Law.
-
Such a textbook generalization can also be misunderstood. What is the basis of any law? British? Napolean?
The Icelandic founding fathers gathered in 930 to establish a new parliament. They were pagans and based their laws on common sense. A farmer had killed his slave, and they took the act seriously. They decided that nobody had the right to take the life of another human being, even if he was a slave. As a punishment this farmer had to relinquish the best part of his farmland to the common good of their country. It had good pastures for their horses and provided plenty of wood to heat up their lodging and cooking while assembled, so this is now one of the unique historic places established by the United Nations where thousands of foreign tourist come every year.
So when the American Constitution was written these Icelandic farmers had been making laws for about 800 years. Some of the most unreasonable laws came with the advancement of Christianity when redheaded females - probably of Irish ancestry - were hunted down as witches, declared guilty by the Christian bishops. At the lake where "criminals", were drowned a sign tells us the worst period was after the Lutheran Church became our state religion. We have passed the time when Columbus discovered America. Sad story, in spite of the pastors preaching justification by faith based on the epistles of Paul in the churches of those days.
Today our principle is that the accused is innocent until it is proven that he has broken a law. But just like in the United States a judge has the power to place the person under arrest immediately if there is a good reason. In many cases this does not quite make the accused innocent until proven guilty by a court case, does it? Why was there a bond of $80.000 on Tommy Shelton if he was considered completely innocent?
Several bank managers have been placed in confinement here in Iceland when it became clear how they had cleared out the assets of their banks with loans to themselves with no other security than worthless papers, thus causing the present financial crisis. They were declared guilty pending a later judgment, in spite of their right to be innocent until proven guilty. It was essential that they be under surveillance to prevent them from destroying evidence and fleeing to havens for criminals. Now some of these men have been released again pending trial, but they will be arrested again if they attempt to leave the country.
Innocent until proven guilty seems like such a lofty doctrine that some use like a crown of glory. It is like saying, "Our system is better than yours because this is what we believe in."
When I studied American Government in an American college we learned how the president of the United States can avoid the limitations of the American Constitution - legally. But that's another story. Where is the perfect system? Do we find it anywhere in this sinful world?
-
Can a policeman accuse you of speeding and write you a ticket if you haven't first been convicted in a court of law, since you are innocent until proven guilty?
-
Johan: You have raised several interesting points, and I am going to respond.
1) I am not going to hold one system as better than another. The application of the system often fails to live up to the lofty thoughts of the system itself. So, in application the system often fails.
2) "Innocent until proven guilty" is simplly a legal term. It relates to the statute and a judicial decision that the statute has been violated.
3) You asked: Why was there a bond of $80.000 on Tommy Shelton if he was considered completely innocent?
In your question I think you fail to understand the issue of bail bond as used in the United States. The bail bond is NOT set on the basis of guilt or innocence. Rather it is set on: 1) The resources available to the defendent. 2) The likelyhood that the defendent would flee the area. 3) The costs that would be incurred to bring the defendent back if he fled.
One does not go to trial if that peson is considered completely innocent. Rather, one goes to trial when it is believed that there is enough evidence to support taking him to trial so that guilt or innocence may be determined. IOW going to trial is not smply the "whim" of some DA. The DA has evidence to raise a litigimate question that can only be determined in a judicial enviornment.
4) In my personal opinon, the $80,000 bond was set based upon the idea that TS does not have a home in VA (as I understand it) and the costs to the State if TS were to return to him home and refuse to come back to VA for trial. If he owned a home in VA he might have been released on his own recognizence (sp), or by putting his home up for bond.
NOTE: I am not defending TS. I am simply making a couple of legal comments.
-
Bob said: Can a policeman accuse you of speeding and write you a ticket if you haven't first been convicted in a court of law, since you are innocent until proven guilty?
Of course. The ticket is the accusation. It is not a statement of either guilt or innocence.
The person who gets the ticket may plead "not-guilty" and take the consequences, plead innocent and go to trial, or follow a third option as exists in the State where I live.
-
It is possible to have some interesting discussion on the possibilities. In this connection I have also enjoyed reading an article on our system written by the president of our association of judges. It is my guess she might have a DJ degree from Harvard like several other lawyers have here. Others from various Universities in Europe and Scandinavia.
I also find it interesting to read the study outlines for lawyers in my country. 3 years to get a BA or BS. Then 2 years for a master's degree. Some of the classes take place in Brüssels where the students can watch the legal systems of Europe. International professors from various parts of the world.
Then I discovered the syllabus for a course also taught right here in our home town on the MA level dealing with victims in moral crimes. The main textbook is in English and for sale through Amazon. Food for thought.
-
Well, I still have to be at court Wednesday but there is a possibility I may not have to testify because the defendant has made some admissions. It would be nice if another certain someone would man up and do the same.
-
A pastor told me he was certain 3ABN would stand much better with honesty and forthrightness that with all these attempts at covering up.
When a liar tells you he's not been telling you the right things you know he's started telling you the truth, and you will admire him for it. Covering things is an abomination to the Lord, and it will get back at you if you do not repent.
-
A pastor told me he was certain 3ABN would stand much better with honesty and forthrightness that with all these attempts at covering up.
When a liar tells you he's not been telling you the right things you know he's started telling you the truth, and you will admire him for it. Covering things is an abomination to the Lord, and it will get back at you if you do not repent.
That's exactly right. And the truth is that Tommy wouldn't be sitting where he is right now if he had owned up to what he did years ago. The longer you wait to confess, the less admiration you get when you finally do.
-
Duane, I just read your statement at the ...........uuuuhhhhh......"other site" last night. I am not sure how often you read there. I just wanted to tell you how sorry I am that you had to experience that, but how proud I am that you are able to have the faith to allow God to heal and restore you. i am also deeply disappointed in those engaged in defending TS. Your testimony makes their evil comments to you even more cruel and un-Christ-like. I will pray for them and their soul's salvation. They cannot believe that it is alright with God that they treat another one of His children in such a manner.
My constant thoughts and prayers are with you(and other victims), your healing and restoration, and your ministry. God bless you!
-
To set the matter of bail bond in perspective:
Police in the area where I live have just arrested a male who turned 18 last January. He has been charged with two counts of sexual assault on a child--a 12 YO. His bond has been set at $100,000. It is likely that the thought was that an 18 YO is more likely to flee the area than would an elderly male who has a family, owned property and clear ties to the community.
NOTE: One cannot compare dollar amounts of bail bond between commuities. There will be clear differences between VA and the metro DC area and the place where I live.
-
Duane, I just read your statement at the ...........uuuuhhhhh......"other site" last night. I am not sure how often you read there. I just wanted to tell you how sorry I am that you had to experience that, but how proud I am that you are able to have the faith to allow God to heal and restore you. i am also deeply disappointed in those engaged in defending TS. Your testimony makes their evil comments to you even more cruel and un-Christ-like. I will pray for them and their soul's salvation. They cannot believe that it is alright with God that they treat another one of His children in such a manner.
My constant thoughts and prayers are with you(and other victims), your healing and restoration, and your ministry. God bless you!
Thank you for your concern, princessdi!
-
Duane, I just read your statement at the ...........uuuuhhhhh......"other site" last night. I am not sure how often you read there. I just wanted to tell you how sorry I am that you had to experience that, but how proud I am that you are able to have the faith to allow God to heal and restore you. i am also deeply disappointed in those engaged in defending TS. Your testimony makes their evil comments to you even more cruel and un-Christ-like. I will pray for them and their soul's salvation. They cannot believe that it is alright with God that they treat another one of His children in such a manner.
My constant thoughts and prayers are with you(and other victims), your healing and restoration, and your ministry. God bless you!
Thank you, Di. I appreciate it. I see where "truth" has said that there were only words between Tommy and I. Do these people even read before they post?
-
LOL! Di, I just noticed they removed your post where you said you were sorry about what happened to me. So what, is there now a rule that I can't be spoken of favorably at the other site? LOL! Cindy, you and your whole forum are nothing but a big joke. No wonder only about 6 people regularly participate.
-
Duane, I just read your statement at the ...........uuuuhhhhh......"other site" last night. I am not sure how often you read there. I just wanted to tell you how sorry I am that you had to experience that, but how proud I am that you are able to have the faith to allow God to heal and restore you. i am also deeply disappointed in those engaged in defending TS. Your testimony makes their evil comments to you even more cruel and un-Christ-like. I will pray for them and their soul's salvation. They cannot believe that it is alright with God that they treat another one of His children in such a manner.
My constant thoughts and prayers are with you(and other victims), your healing and restoration, and your ministry. God bless you!
Thank you, Di. I appreciate it. I see where "truth" has said that there were only words between Tommy and I. Do these people even read before they post?
Did Princessdi read before she posted, Duane?
She disagreed with "Truth" and claimed: " he abused his position of authority as a beloved and respected pastor to Duane to have homosexual sex"
I thought you claimed that never happened Duane? The statement she was replying to and thanking you for says:
"Tommy and I would meet at his house, the church, the original 3ABN building, and even one night on a back country road...There was a lot of inappropriate touching, but nothing further. He wanted much more out of it, but I couldn't let it happen."
I know I read where you said on topix that you weren't molested, and added that you never even mentioned anything sexual in your statement. I remember you saying that same thing on BSDA. In fact when you objected to posters saying that you had been sexually molested Princessdi apologized to you... I am sure I can get the quotes if you don't recall...
I am not getting this at all.
-
Duane, I just read your statement at the ...........uuuuhhhhh......"other site" last night. I am not sure how often you read there. I just wanted to tell you how sorry I am that you had to experience that, but how proud I am that you are able to have the faith to allow God to heal and restore you. i am also deeply disappointed in those engaged in defending TS. Your testimony makes their evil comments to you even more cruel and un-Christ-like. I will pray for them and their soul's salvation. They cannot believe that it is alright with God that they treat another one of His children in such a manner.
My constant thoughts and prayers are with you(and other victims), your healing and restoration, and your ministry. God bless you!
Thank you, Di. I appreciate it. I see where "truth" has said that there were only words between Tommy and I. Do these people even read before they post?
Did Princessdi read before she posted, Duane?
She disagreed with "Truth" and claimed: " he abused his position of authority as a beloved and respected pastor to Duane to have homosexual sex"
I thought you claimed that never happened Duane? The statement she was replying to and thanking you for says:
"Tommy and I would meet at his house, the church, the original 3ABN building, and even one night on a back country road...There was a lot of inappropriate touching, but nothing further. He wanted much more out of it, but I couldn't let it happen."
I know I read where you said on topix that you weren't molested, and added that you never even mentioned anything sexual in your statement. I remember you saying that same thing on BSDA. In fact when you objected to posters saying that you had been sexually molested Princessdi apologized to you... I am sure I can get the quotes if you don't recall...
I am not getting this at all.
You really are sick. You know that? No wonder your brain is so warped. Seriously what pleasure do you get out of defending the Sheltons? You are no better than a child molestor yourself, so go back to your trench.
-
A pastor told me he was certain 3ABN would stand much better with honesty and forthrightness that with all these attempts at covering up.
When a liar tells you he's not been telling you the right things you know he's started telling you the truth, and you will admire him for it. Covering things is an abomination to the Lord, and it will get back at you if you do not repent.
That's exactly right. And the truth is that Tommy wouldn't be sitting where he is right now if he had owned up to what he did years ago. The longer you wait to confess, the less admiration you get when you finally do.
Didn't he own up and confess and apologize to you, Duane? Didn't he offer to help you in any way he could? Didn't you forgive him, or rather say there was nothing to forgive? And didn't that have zero to do with child molestation as you were a member of his church from 12 years old on, and counseled by him as a minor and he never touched you inappropriately or spoke inappropriately to you in all those years? Unexplainable behavior from a man you accuse of being a dangerous pedophile now, and of being unable to own up to what he does wrong, isn't it?
Did you write the following?
In conclusion, I want to say that I do NOT hate Tommy Shelton, nor do I want to see him or his family destroyed. I grew up with the Shelton kids. They're almost like family to me. I hope that my coming forward doesn't end our friendships, although I'm sure it will never be the same from this point forward.
I ask all who read this to please pray for all those who have been directly involved, our families, our churches and yes, for Tommy Shelton also. It is my opinion that he needs to be out of the ministry right now, but he also needs the Lord's leadership as he deals with past issues. Our God is a God of judgment, but He is also a God of forgiveness and restoration. I want that restoration for Tommy and everyone else who has been affected by this. Snide remarks and hateful comments won't solve anything or bring healing to anyone. Only God's touch can do that.
Thank you for your prayers and thoughts as we all try to put this behind us. God bless.
If so, except for noting that TS had been out of the ministry for awhile before you ever wrote this (of his own accord) they were wise words, and I wonder how you and others could have moved so far away from them since then...
-
Like I said 3D, go back to your trench. You are no better than a child molestor yourself. Your lame attempt of discrediting Duane is laughable.
A pastor told me he was certain 3ABN would stand much better with honesty and forthrightness that with all these attempts at covering up.
When a liar tells you he's not been telling you the right things you know he's started telling you the truth, and you will admire him for it. Covering things is an abomination to the Lord, and it will get back at you if you do not repent.
That's exactly right. And the truth is that Tommy wouldn't be sitting where he is right now if he had owned up to what he did years ago. The longer you wait to confess, the less admiration you get when you finally do.
Didn't he own up and confess and apologize to you, Duane? Didn't he offer to help you in any way he could? Didn't you forgive him, or rather say there was nothing to forgive? And didn't that have zero to do with child molestation as you were a member of his church from 12 years old, and counseled by him as a minor and he never touched you inappropriately or spoke inappropriate to you in all those years? Unexplainable behavior from a man you accuse of being a pedophile now, isn't it?
Did you write the following?
In conclusion, I want to say that I do NOT hate Tommy Shelton, nor do I want to see him or his family destroyed. I grew up with the Shelton kids. They're almost like family to me. I hope that my coming forward doesn't end our friendships, although I'm sure it will never be the same from this point forward.
I ask all who read this to please pray for all those who have been directly involved, our families, our churches and yes, for Tommy Shelton also. It is my opinion that he needs to be out of the ministry right now, but he also needs the Lord's leadership as he deals with past issues. Our God is a God of judgment, but He is also a God of forgiveness and restoration. I want that restoration for Tommy and everyone else who has been affected by this. Snide remarks and hateful comments won't solve anything or bring healing to anyone. Only God's touch can do that.
Thank you for your prayers and thoughts as we all try to put this behind us. God bless.
If so, except for noting that TS had been out of the ministry for awhile before you ever wrote this (of his own accord) they were wise words, and I wonder how you and others could have moved so far away from them since then...
-
Did Princessdi read before she posted, Duane?
How am I supposed to know that? You need to ask her.
She disagreed with "Truth" and claimed: " he abused his position of authority as a beloved and respected pastor to Duane to have homosexual sex"
I thought you claimed that never happened Duane? The statement she was replying to and thanking you for says:
"Tommy and I would meet at his house, the church, the original 3ABN building, and even one night on a back country road...There was a lot of inappropriate touching, but nothing further. He wanted much more out of it, but I couldn't let it happen."
I know I read where you said on topix that you weren't molested, and added that you never even mentioned anything sexual in your statement. I remember you saying that same thing on BSDA. In fact when you objected to posters saying that you had been sexually molested Princessdi apologized to you... I am sure I can get the quotes if you don't recall...
I am not getting this at all.
Not surprising at all. There's a lot you and your ilk don't "get." I'm not explaining anything to a coward.
-
Didn't he own up and confess and apologize to you, Duane? Didn't he offer to help you in any way he could? Didn't you forgive him, or rather say there was nothing to forgive? And didn't that have zero to do with child molestation as you were a member of his church from 12 years old on, and counseled by him as a minor and he never touched you inappropriately or spoke inappropriately to you in all those years? Unexplainable behavior from a man you accuse of being a dangerous pedophile now, and of being unable to own up to what he does wrong, isn't it?
I'm not the only victim. As far as what I said to Tommy, either post that stupid email or shut up about it.
Did you write the following?
In conclusion, I want to say that I do NOT hate Tommy Shelton, nor do I want to see him or his family destroyed. I grew up with the Shelton kids. They're almost like family to me. I hope that my coming forward doesn't end our friendships, although I'm sure it will never be the same from this point forward.
I ask all who read this to please pray for all those who have been directly involved, our families, our churches and yes, for Tommy Shelton also. It is my opinion that he needs to be out of the ministry right now, but he also needs the Lord's leadership as he deals with past issues. Our God is a God of judgment, but He is also a God of forgiveness and restoration. I want that restoration for Tommy and everyone else who has been affected by this. Snide remarks and hateful comments won't solve anything or bring healing to anyone. Only God's touch can do that.
Thank you for your prayers and thoughts as we all try to put this behind us. God bless.
If so, except for noting that TS had been out of the ministry for awhile before you ever wrote this (of his own accord) they were wise words, and I wonder how you and others could have moved so far away from them since then...
I haven't moved from any of it. If you're inferring that I have changed my mind since I want to see justice done, that's asenine. The bottom line is, Tommy has had over 30 years to get his problem taken care of. He chose not to, so now the legal system is going to do it for him. This is NOT my fault, nor is it the fault of any other of his victims. This is TOMMY SHELTON'S fault. HE did this, no one else. Period. End of report.
-
Didn't he own up and confess and apologize to you, Duane? Didn't he offer to help you in any way he could? Didn't you forgive him, or rather say there was nothing to forgive? And didn't that have zero to do with child molestation as you were a member of his church from 12 years old on, and counseled by him as a minor and he never touched you inappropriately or spoke inappropriately to you in all those years? Unexplainable behavior from a man you accuse of being a dangerous pedophile now, and of being unable to own up to what he does wrong, isn't it?
So what would you be implying here? That all a person or (child) needs to do is except "Help" and "forgiveness" given by or to a perpetrator to get by until the next victim? In your first statements underlined you admit the happening and in your next sentences you try to put words into posts concluding that DC actually states it did not really happen. I did not see any of his posts where he said it did not happen but was worried because all grew up together and had friendships. Your statements are confusing and it appears it is trying to intimidate the witness of posting something not said so far that I can read. With more then one victim, wouldn't you consider that to be a dangerous pedophile??
again you seem more then close to the situation.
-
Didn't he own up and confess and apologize to you, Duane? Didn't he offer to help you in any way he could? Didn't you forgive him, or rather say there was nothing to forgive? And didn't that have zero to do with child molestation as you were a member of his church from 12 years old on, and counseled by him as a minor and he never touched you inappropriately or spoke inappropriately to you in all those years? Unexplainable behavior from a man you accuse of being a dangerous pedophile now, and of being unable to own up to what he does wrong, isn't it?
So what would you be implying here? That all a person or (child) needs to do is except "Help" and "forgiveness" given by or to a perpetrator to get by until the next victim? In your first statements underlined you admit the happening and in your next sentences you try to put words into posts concluding that DC actually states it did not really happen. I did not see any of his posts where he said it did not happen but was worried because all grew up together and had friendships. Your statements are confusing and it appears it is trying to intimidate the witness of posting something not said so far that I can read. With more then one victim, wouldn't you consider that to be a dangerous pedophile??
again you seem more then close to the situation.
No, O clueless one, I am not saying anything or implying anything that you infer. I was referring to Duane's own conflicting statements. (You don't have to see them in order for he and I to know what they are, or for me to ask him about them.) He won't answer because he won't and can't, whether he knows who the person is or not, plain and simple, so has to call all cowards instead, or insult them in some other way.
Get this through your head. I am not trying to intimidate a witness because Duane isn't a witness, nor does his grievance against Tommy and the Sheltons have anything to do with child molestation or add anything to the "dangerous pedophile" allegations. The case in Virginia with the two alleged victims will be resolved in the courts without Duane for he has nothing to do with it. That court will decide guilt or innocence based on the evidence, and the testimony of those who are involved.(which does not include Duane Clem, nor anything he has to say) I have no problem with that. That is how it should be.
Duane keeps sticking his nose in as if it does have something to do with him, and his "snide and hateful comments" about all of the Sheltons and anyone who dare's to question him or who disagrees with him, are just as he said "not solving anything nor bringing healing to anyone", nor is it evident that he has personally put anything "behind him." He looks to be an absolute liar when he said "I do NOT hate Tommy Shelton, nor do I want to see him or his family destroyed." and has been working to do that ever since.
Justice can be served and the "pedophilia allegations" can be resolved, without catering to Duane's personal problems or anger and vindictiveness. The case in Virginia has NOTHING DO DO WITH DUANE CLEM. All he is doing is confusing people, and muddying the waters - princessdi for one, you for another...
That was my point and if I was trying to "imply" anything here that would be it. Stop drinking the kool-aid!
-
3D - The one thing I would agree with on your posts is that what you say is a lot of "DO DO"!
-
Stop drinking the kool-aid! Stop drinking the kool-aid!
To use caches of another to make a point says a lot about a person. The points you make will soon tell if valid. "A "clueless one can only determine what is posted" and the rest is documented and common sense. All (maybe) are on the table in the courts and hopefully "pew money" does not pay it out. Your positive view's sound a lot like Ian. and that would explain the "closeness" I am thinking for a "clueless one". Be carefull as I remember words and "phrases" used by individuals and how they use their adjectives, nouns, verbs & pronouns that make the distinction of differences or the same. If your points are not valid, what will you do next?? I for one wished and posted that "I wish all was not so"! but it appears to be --for the least said!
-
"Heat is in proportion to the want of true knowledge."
-
My statement should have stated..To use caches of another to make (negative) point...... but many are true statements of quotations of wisdom used for understanding.
-
No, O clueless one, I am not saying anything or implying anything that you infer. I was referring to Duane's own conflicting statements. (You don't have to see them in order for he and I to know what they are, or for me to ask him about them.) He won't answer because he won't and can't, whether he knows who the person is or not, plain and simple, so has to call all cowards instead, or insult them in some other way.
I have made NO conflicting statements. And again, I don't OWE you or anyone else any answers to anything. If I answer any specific questions, it will be in a courtroom, under oath. I am NOT afraid of doing that. Furthermore, I call you a coward because you ARE a coward. If you were an adult you would identify yourself before trying to niterrogate me.
Get this through your head. I am not trying to intimidate a witness because Duane isn't a witness, nor does his grievance against Tommy and the Sheltons have anything to do with child molestation or add anything to the "dangerous pedophile" allegations. The case in Virginia with the two alleged victims will be resolved in the courts without Duane for he has nothing to do with it. That court will decide guilt or innocence based on the evidence, and the testimony of those who are involved.(which does not include Duane Clem, nor anything he has to say) I have no problem with that. That is how it should be.
Duane keeps sticking his nose in as if it does have something to do with him, and his "snide and hateful comments" about all of the Sheltons and anyone who dare's to question him or who disagrees with him, are just as he said "not solving anything nor bringing healing to anyone", nor is it evident that he has personally put anything "behind him." He looks to be an absolute liar when he said "I do NOT hate Tommy Shelton, nor do I want to see him or his family destroyed." and has been working to do that ever since.
Justice can be served and the "pedophilia allegations" can be resolved, without catering to Duane's personal problems or anger and vindictiveness. The case in Virginia has NOTHING DO DO WITH DUANE CLEM. All he is doing is confusing people, and muddying the waters - princessdi for one, you for another...
That was my point and if I was trying to "imply" anything here that would be it. Stop drinking the kool-aid!
When and where have I tried to "insert myself into this." You and all the other defenders are the ones that keep bringing it up. Also, you have NO idea whether I will be testifying or not.. Stop trying to convince everyone you have inside information on this case. You don't. You're just a Johnny come lately who wants to try to spin this favorably for Tommy. Not gonna work this time.
-
3D-
I think you NEED to understand the difference between a Homosexual relationship and a situation where someone is molested. When TS used his position as a Preacher and Counselor( and that makes me sick to use those words) in the situation with Duane, it was NOT and I repeat NOT a homosexual relationship. A relationship implies that both parties enter willingly into it with no implication of force of any kind. If you don't know the difference, then maybe you need some counseling on relationships.
-
3D,
Isn't time for you to quit victimizing the victims? Tommy is a very sin sick individual. Any man who would sexually molest a member of his own family and members of the congregation that trusted him as a spiritual leader should have been stopped long ago. That certain members of the Shelton family knew what was happening and through their silence empowered him to continue abusing through his postion of authority and additionally put him in the postion to have access to children, share the blood of his sins on their own hands. Now through your defense of Tommy, by attacking Duane, you, too, are unable to cleanse your hands of the evil of Tommy's victimization of so many, including his own son.
Duane, my heart and prayers go out to you. There is nothing that can be done to change the past, but the continued abuse you receive from Tommy's cohorts in sin is inexcusable. Hold your head up and know that justice will be served. May the comfort of the Holy Spirit infuse your heart and lift your spirit. May you experience the peace that passes all understanding. And despite anything your accusers say, you were a young person whose trust was betrayed in the most heinous manner, by a "minister of God" who had surrendered his desires to the Devil and whose certain family members knowingly allowed his crimes to continue.
3D, I agree with mrst53 completely:
I think you NEED to understand the difference between a Homosexual relationship and a situation where someone is molested. When TS used his position as a Preacher and Counselor( and that makes me sick to use those words) in the situation with Duane, it was NOT and I repeat NOT a homosexual relationship. A relationship implies that both parties enter willingly into it with no implication of force of any kind. If you don't know the difference, then maybe you need some counseling on relationships.
-
Didn't he own up and confess and apologize to you, Duane? Didn't he offer to help you in any way he could? Didn't you forgive him, or rather say there was nothing to forgive? And didn't that have zero to do with child molestation as you were a member of his church from 12 years old on, and counseled by him as a minor and he never touched you inappropriately or spoke inappropriately to you in all those years? Unexplainable behavior from a man you accuse of being a dangerous pedophile now, and of being unable to own up to what he does wrong, isn't it?
So what would you be implying here? That all a person or (child) needs to do is except "Help" and "forgiveness" given by or to a perpetrator to get by until the next victim? In your first statements underlined you admit the happening and in your next sentences you try to put words into posts concluding that DC actually states it did not really happen. I did not see any of his posts where he said it did not happen but was worried because all grew up together and had friendships. Your statements are confusing and it appears it is trying to intimidate the witness of posting something not said so far that I can read. With more then one victim, wouldn't you consider that to be a dangerous pedophile??
again you seem more then close to the situation.
No, O clueless one, I am not saying anything or implying anything that you infer.
That was my point and if I was trying to "imply" anything here that would be it. Stop drinking the kool-aid!
Well according to Standard underlined English the above statements you are establishing facts or implying what you be live. Then you apply it to something that is not said --so that is implying again unproven facts. When one does this confusion bit I call it intimidating a victim when addressing the victim. But then your implying that TS is innocent. and again that is getting the cart before the horse wouldn't you say?? I mean with all witnesses appearing or documents in the courts for justice in near future.
Sooner or later you will have to come to the term of the word "guilty" and what side you protected. The perpetrator or the victimssssss. When you steel someones youth, and put into place horror for a lifetime that you cannot give back you are guilty of destroying no matter how "sorry"
You can't steel a car and say sorry, but I am keeping it to help get me another is going to work well in society. There is always always payday here or eternity. What a choice you have!
-
3D,
Isn't time for you to quit victimizing the victims? Tommy is a very sin sick individual. Any man who would sexually molest a member of his own family and members of the congregation that trusted him as a spiritual leader should have been stopped long ago. That certain members of the Shelton family knew what was happening and through their silence empowered him to continue abusing through his postion of authority and additionally put him in the postion to have access to children, share the blood of his sins on their own hands. Now through your defense of Tommy, by attacking Duane, you, too, are unable to cleanse your hands of the evil of Tommy's victimization of so many, including his own son.
Duane, my heart and prayers go out to you. There is nothing that can be done to change the past, but the continued abuse you receive from Tommy's cohorts in sin is inexcusable. Hold your head up and know that justice will be served. May the comfort of the Holy Spirit infuse your heart and lift your spirit. May you experience the peace that passes all understanding. And despite anything your accusers say, you were a young person whose trust was betrayed in the most heinous manner, by a "minister of God" who had surrendered his desires to the Devil and whose certain family members knowingly allowed his crimes to continue.
3D, I agree with mrst53 completely:
I think you NEED to understand the difference between a Homosexual relationship and a situation where someone is molested. When TS used his position as a Preacher and Counselor( and that makes me sick to use those words) in the situation with Duane, it was NOT and I repeat NOT a homosexual relationship. A relationship implies that both parties enter willingly into it with no implication of force of any kind. If you don't know the difference, then maybe you need some counseling on relationships.
Thank you all. yes, I have learned that there will always be those who make ridiculous or stupid comments, even those bordering on insanity. But, it doesn't make them true. 3d is spitting in the wind. One wonders if she's just upset that she can't get her husband out of the mess this time.
-
Well now, I knew this had to be someone very very close and sure enough. If it is whom I think I sure hope she definitely heard what type of character she really has and is herself-- just as guilty protecting. and I hope for sure she read all my posts conerning just what I said from the beginning and thought of a person standing by something like this when they knew it. Shame, shame, shame for not getting help long ago. Now she can join in the justice of it all.
and Duane, I do not call this boardering on insanity. It is insanity! They are all sick and do not even wonder about being in contact with any of it. This is enough for the sane to be quite angry. and the Sheltons have control of 3abn??? don't know all the ties there but somebodies better get sane before it flops right in their own laps.
-
3D would rather stand up for an alleged pedophile. 3D like I said you are a sick individual. I am pretty sure you have more important things to do like, um maybe spending time with the pedo. In my honest opinion, you seem scared. You all have nothing better to do except discredit victims now. Why? Because you all never dreamed Tommy would make it to trial. Well, now that he has, you all are so frightened. :ROFL: I am sure you can find better use of your time, 3d, beside standing up for a man who puts his hands in places he shouldn't.
-
3D-
Could you possibly be that close to either TS or DS that you are afraid of them? Molestors are often physical abusers of women too. Maybe that is why you defend TS so well. If you are, you need to get out of that relationship, no matter what they tell you.
-
Oh, this is gagging, a woman that jeopardizes others for...this??? This ain't love mam, this is cover up guilt for the next victim. Whewwww,
I understand more now about in Bibical days when God said, destroy all, lock stock and barrel. That was hard for me but I really do understand knowing the fact of family knowledge and damage of this. The whole family must be in denial of known actions as the "evil actions" lurk day after day after year after year. How can one be sane of that? I do not even want to think of what it has done to own children, as I feel they are also victims of no way out. Husband and wife are both guilty for victims inside and out. They all clanned in at Waco too. Now here they are, 3abn!
-
I would almost bet that 3D along with a few others, are on the payroll to come here and defend. Honestly, that has to be the reason. Because why would anyone with any sort of dignity or brains come and defend like they do?
Honestly, 3D,Cindy, and the rest of you over at that pitiful site, need to wake up. It really isn't worth it in the end. Just some words of advice. :wave:
-
Those that continually contend that TS is innocent, are either blindly taken in by him or DS, or are afraid of not defending him, in order to protect their jobs- maybe at 3abn?
-
I doubt they are being paid, and I doubt anyone is doing it to protect their jobs. I suspect they have loftier reasons than that.
-
I doubt they are . . .
There are times when doubts can be a blessing.
-
My name is Roger Clem. I have never posted anything on here before but I have to say that I am touched by the amount of people who stand behind all of the victims of TS. I had the better part of 15 years of my life ruined by this man because of what he did to me. The sickening part about it all is that when I confronted him about it and wrote the letter to him that many of you have seen, there have been several people that have tried to destroy my name because of it. I DID NOTHING WRONG. I was a victim of a man who was very good at manipulation. His wife is still one of his biggest defenders. I don't know how you could think that someone would want something like this to happen to them. Trust me , I would have much rather went on with my life the way it was before and not have to deal with this kind of stuff. I have battled depression for several years. The best thing that could possibly happen is for TS to admit to what he has done, and ask forgiveness for it. He needs to make things right with God before it is eternally too late. We all need to pray for everyone involved here, the victims and Tommy Shelton.
-
God bless you for your courage, Roger.
It is mind boggling to me just how far Tommy's defenders are willing to go to smear those who are concerned. But a righteous God will call them to account one day, and unless they repent in this life, render a verdict from which there will be no appeal.
And at some point, whether now or then who knows, the smeared will be vindicated by the Judge of all the earth. And when He vindicates, He does a super good job that no one anywhere can beat.
-
A few general statements:
NOTE: All of my comments are presented from a civil context and do not relate to a religious/spiritual context.
Homosexuality is not the same as pedophilia.
A homosexual is probably no more likely to be a pedophiliac than is a person who is not homosexual.
A homosexual who molests a child of the same gender does not make the molested child a homosexual.
The molested child is always a victim.
That molested child may very well experience emotional problems, and perhaps PTSD, for years afterwards.
Children can never give consent.
Nothing the child did caused the assault.
The child is in no way responsible.
Depending on the State in which the assault occurred, the victim may have civil and/or criminal recourse against the professional.
What about sex between a member of a helping profession (counselor, physician, psychiatrist, psychologist, counselor, etc.) and a person who is of the legal age (adult)to give consent and in a professional relationship with that person:
The major professional organizations consider such relationships to be professionally wrong.
The professional often obtains power over the person due to transference and counter transference.
The professional is expected to control the relationship in a manner that does not lead to sex and terminates the professional relationship if it cannot be so controlled.
The adult is the victim.
The adult is not responsible.
The sex is wrong regardless of the genders of the two people.
Depending on the State in which the assault occurred, the victim may have civil and/or criminal recourse against the professional.
The victim will often need emotional help.
-
A comment on my post above:
In my professional life, I have worked with adults who have been molested and with people who have molested children. My comments come out of that context.
In all (no exception) every adult whom I have worked with who had sexually molested a child, either justified it or blamed the child.
The clasic example of this was a highly educated person, earning a very good salery who knocked on a house door one day. The 4 year old female who came to the door was naked. As he said to me: What would you expect. I am a male. She was a naked female. IOW the 4 YO female was responsible!
-
A homosexual is probably no more likely to be a pedophiliac than is a person who is not homosexual.
Gregory, could you comment on this article? http://www.afajournal.org/archives/23060000011.asp (http://www.afajournal.org/archives/23060000011.asp) Specifically:
Citing a study (Freund and Watson, 1992) which was reported in the Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, NARTH found that homosexual males were “three times more likely than straight men to engage in adult-child sexual relations.”
Cameron’s own research shows even higher rates of homosexual molestation. In the Nebraska Medical Journal Cameron said that when data from both genders are combined, homosexuals are at least 8-12 times more likely to molest children than are heterosexuals.
-
No, I cannot comment on it. I have no personal knowlege of those articles to be able to make an intelligent comment about them.
It of course could be that I am wrong.
In any case my major point is this: One should not equate homosesuality with pedophelia. Just because one is a homosexual does not mean that that person would be a pedopheliac. That is my major point.
-
Bob Pickle has asked me to comment on an article written by Ed Vitagliano in the American Family Association Journal. O.K. I will bite and make a few comments on the article.
1) The article seems to be more a Literature Review written in the style of the popular media rather than that of a peer-reviewed journal. As such it can have some value. I am simply pointing out that it does not pretend to be original scientific research.
2) Bob asks me to comment on research by Freund & Watson (1992) and Cameron. I cannot make an intelligent comment on this without reading the original article. However, the citation appears to come from a credible journal. But, I do not know the sample size, the limiting characteristics of the sample and a number of other pieces of information that would be needed to comment.
3) I believe that Cameron has made some valid points, if cited accurately, in his criticism of certain published research.
4) I strongly agree with the following statement:
Furthermore, research also shows a strong link between the sexual abuse of a child and that child’s later pedophilia as an adult. At the Connecticut Correctional Institution, for example, clinical psychologist A. Nicholas Groth, director of the sex offender program, said 85% of the pedophiles were themselves sexually assaulted as youths.
Whatever the number (I do not know if 85% is correct.) it should be noted that it is not 100% IOW it must be understood that some people molested by a pedophile do not go on in life to molest other children.
5) I have issues with the following statement:
This casts certain parts of the homosexual agenda in a more sinister light – such as the drive to lower the legal age of sexual consent and to expunge sodomy laws from the books. It might also cause parents to wonder why homosexual activists are tireless in their efforts to use the courts as a crowbar to pry open the doors of the Boy Scouts to homosexual troop leaders.
First: While that is the agenda of the NAMBLA, their agenda should not be associated with homosexuals.
Secondly: Sodomy laws, as commonly written, can be applied against heterosexuals who practice marital sex. As such, many heterosexuals wish to expunge sodomy laws from the books.
5) Vitagliano states: ". . . most homosexuals do not abuse children." I agree.
6) He also states: ". . . there are some elements of the homosexual movement which openly endorse pedophilia." Probably true. Do we tar every person with the brush of the few? Just as there are some homosexuals who are pedophiliac so also there are heterosexuals who are pedophilic.
7) He also says: ". . . children can be recruited into the homosexual lifestyle, . . ." My comments: He fails to differentiate between recruited and forced into. What one may be forced into as a child does not dictate what one does as an adult. There are many who would say that a child who has been abused (and forced into, so to speak, a homosexual life style) does not make that person a homosexual.
Just a few short comments--pro, con and in between.
-
Just as spousal abusers always blame their victims.........."You/She/He made me do it. They made me angry., etc. Classic.
A comment on my post above:
In my professional life, I have worked with adults who have been molested and with people who have molested children. My comments come out of that context.
In all (no exception) every adult whom I have worked with who had sexually molested a child, either justified it or blamed the child.
The clasic example of this was a highly educated person, earning a very good salery who knocked on a house door one day. The 4 year old female who came to the door was naked. As he said to me: What would you expect. I am a male. She was a naked female. IOW the 4 YO female was responsible!
-
I don't see what all the psychology talk has to do with this subject.
-
I don't see what all the psychology talk has to do with this subject.
Ditto!
-
This is true. We are a bit off topic, but sometimes threads waunder a bit, right? ;D
-
This is true. We are a bit off topic, but sometimes threads waunder a bit, right? ;D
I just get weary of all the stuff out of psychology books when most of it is written by people who have no clue what they're talking baout when it comes to sexual abuse. I don't care how much studying a person does, how many books they read or how many lectures they hear, unless you have been abused you don't know anything about it.
-
I think there are some among us who simply like to pontificate for the sole purpose of trying to impress readers with their vast array of irrelevant knowledge.
-
I think there are some among us who simply like to pontificate for the sole purpose of trying to impress readers with their vast array of irrelevant knowledge.
Amen!
-
Duane, can we also add someone who works in the field, so to speak? My family has been in foster care/adoption for as long as I have been alive. We have seen a great many things in the children who have passed through our home(s). One little one had been abused by her own birth parents everyway conceivable by the time she was three and came to live with my parents.
I quite understand your feelings.
I just get weary of all the stuff out of psychology books when most of it is written by people who have no clue what they're talking baout when it comes to sexual abuse. I don't care how much studying a person does, how many books they read or how many lectures they hear, unless you have been abused you don't know anything about it.
-
Tommy Shelton has been indicted on 6 felonies. :amen:
That should have been 60 felonies!!! Wonder if they subpoenaed the son and his medical
records???
Gailon Arthur Joy, a Radical, Right-Wing, Tea-Party Fundamentalist per the declaration of Dr. Lawrence Geraty
AUReporter
-
Recordings of a program where I questioned a well-known lawyer on this subject is still being broadcast on radio in our country. Although he remarked that greater research is needed he pointed to the main differences in the two systems. Either one has its weaknesses and its strength.
This lawyer was well acquainted with the American system with 24 people appointed to be members of the jury and where each side can ask 6 to withdraw. The remaining 12 will decide if the person is guilty or not. The trouble is that these can be swayed in either direction by eloquent oratory. Then it is not longer the law of the land that rules, but the feelings of the few selected individuals.
He thought the term Napoleonic system is a misnomer. The Nordic European juridical system is based on long traditions where ours is mainly based on the Danish. But this system is based on the laws of the country rather than the whims and feelings of a small select group. We have jury members as well, but it is the judge, knowing the laws, who makes the final decision. These judges are appointed and not elected so they are not swayed by political interests. Here the case of a felon declared innocent by a lower court can be appealed by the prosecution if that is felt justified.
Is there guaranteed full justice for all by either system? Probably not.
Two of the major legal systems in the world are English Common Law which generally forms the basis of the legal system in the United States. In much of Continental Europe and in Latin America their legal systems are substantially based upon the Napoleonic Code.
NOTE: The legal system of the State of LA has a substantial basis in the Napoleonic Code. There laws are modified by the U.S. Constitution when that becomes a factor.
Under English Common Law, guilt and/or innocence is generally determined in a legal proceeding or trial and the person is considered innocent prior to a determination of the court that the individual is guilty. Of course, trials do not generally take place prior to a determination (A Grand Jury is one method used to bring to trial.) that the evidence is sufficient to raise a question of innocence and it is appropriate to bring the person to trial to determine if the person is guilty and to apply the appropriate judgment in the event guilt is determined.
The Napoleonic Code differs from English Common Law in many ways—although it does have its positive points. Wikipedia makes this statement in part: “ . . . the Napoleonic Code was criticized for de facto presumption of guilt, particularly in common law countries.”
The above is a very simplistic statement on the subject. Let me ask: Would rather live in a country with a legal system based upon English Common Law, or in one based upon the Napoleonic Code?
-
Johan said:
This lawyer was well acquainted with the American system with 24 people appointed to be members of the jury and where each side can ask 6 to withdraw. The remaining 12 will decide if the person is guilty or not. The trouble is that these can be swayed in either direction by eloquent oratory. Then it is not longer the law of the land that rules, but the feelings of the few selected individuals.
The above statement is a generalized simplistic statement which is somewhat inaccurate as are most generalizations that are simplistic, includiing such that I sometimes make. :)
Just prior to the jury going into deliberations the judge gives them final instructions as to the law (no eloquent oratory here) and gives them specific instructions as to how the jury is to reach its verdict in accord with the law. NOTE: If the jury fails to follow the law the presiding judge and/or an appealate court may throw out the decision of the jury and order a new trial.
While the laws in relation trials often are based up local State law (with the exception of Federal trials) I am not aware of any place where 24 peple are appointed to a jury and after that appointment each side can exclude 6 leaving a jury of 12. In a typical jury all exclusions are made prior to the establishment of the jury. Exclusions for cause are unlimited and clearly may exceed 12. Preemptory challenges are lilmited. The number allowed will depend upon State law and the type of trial. E.g. In one State the number of preemptory challenges ranges from 3 to 15 based upon the type of a trial. Further, in some types of trail,in some places, a jury may consist of less than 12 people--e.g. 9.
All in all, the lawyer that Johan cited is wrong in much of what was stated, at least wrong in part.
-
Johan said:
This lawyer was well acquainted with the American system with 24 people appointed to be members of the jury and where each side can ask 6 to withdraw. The remaining 12 will decide if the person is guilty or not. The trouble is that these can be swayed in either direction by eloquent oratory. Then it is not longer the law of the land that rules, but the feelings of the few selected individuals.
The above statement is a generalized simplistic statement which is somewhat inaccurate as are most generalizations that are simplistic, includiing such that I sometimes make. :)
Just prior to the jury going into deliberations the judge gives them final instructions as to the law (no eloquent oratory here) and gives them specific instructions as to how the jury is to reach its verdict in accord with the law. NOTE: If the jury fails to follow the law the presiding judge and/or an appealate court may throw out the decision of the jury and order a new trial.
While the laws in relation trials often are based up local State law (with the exception of Federal trials) I am not aware of any place where 24 peple are appointed to a jury and after that appointment each side can exclude 6 leaving a jury of 12. In a typical jury all exclusions are made prior to the establishment of the jury. Exclusions for cause are unlimited and clearly may exceed 12. Preemptory challenges are lilmited. The number allowed will depend upon State law and the type of trial. E.g. In one State the number of preemptory challenges ranges from 3 to 15 based upon the type of a trial. Further, in some types of trail,in some places, a jury may consist of less than 12 people--e.g. 9.
All in all, the lawyer that Johan cited is wrong in much of what was stated, at least wrong in part.
Was he also wrong in what was said about the procedures in our country? Could he have been at a place where 24 were assigned to jury duty?
Did Abraham Lincoln have no influence on the jury when he was a lawyer in Illinois? I have read lots of interesting stories about Abraham Lincoln. Are they not true?
Did I ever say the judge used oratory? How about Abraham Lincoln? He was not a judge in the cases that I recall.
Is the jury following only the law in all trials? Do they have no other choice than the verdict they come to?
-
Johnn asked:
Was he also wrong in what was said about the procedures in our country? Could he have been at a place where 24 were assigned to jury duty?
Did Abraham Lincoln have no influence on the jury when he was a lawyer in Illinois? I have read lots of interesting stories about Abraham Lincoln. Are they not true?
Did I ever say the judge used oratory? How about Abraham Lincoln? He was not a judge in the cases that I recall.
Is the jury following only the law in all trials? Do they have no other choice than the verdict they come to?
1) I have no idea as to whether or not he was wrong about your country. I have no knowledge on this and I express no opinion.
2) Of course Lincoln influenced the jury. That is the function of the lawyer for each side--to influence the jury. However, the judge brings the jury back to the law, and gives the jury very specific instructions as to what to consider and how to decide the case. If the jury finds in violations of the law, either the judge or the appealate court can throw out the jury decision and order a new trial.
3) No, you never said that the judge used oratory. Neither did I.
4) The jury typically has many choices that are not dictated by law. Often there are other decisions that the jury could make. That is why going to trial can be unpredictable.;
-
Johann asked:
Could he have been at a place where 24 were assigned to jury duty?
I doubt that there is anyplace in the U.S. where this would be the norm. But, anything is possible.
Here is what might happen: In enpanneling a jury the judge selects a stated number who are immediately part of the jury. In addition, the judge selects a number of additional people who become alternate members of the jury. They attend the trial, listen to the arguements, view the evidence and are subject to the same rules as the members of the jury. In the event that a member of the jury becomes unable to fulfill their duties, or is discharged for any reason, the judge selects one of the alternate members to fill the vacant place.
I can immagine that in the case of a complicated trial that was expected to last for months prior to going to the jury for a decision that the judge might select 12, or even more, alternate jurors. But, this would not be typical.
-
Gregory, is it true that a jury can judge the law as well? That they can choose to acquit someone even if the law says otherwise?
I read somewhere recently about this.
It's an important question for Seventh-day Adventists given our views on future Sunday laws. Must a jury convict of breaking the Sabbath by working on Sunday if the law of the land forbids Sunday desecration. I think it was A. T. Jones who wrote that the jury can judge the law if they so choose.
But what I read recently said that folks who feel that way are often excluded from serving on a jury, and that they can be kicked off even after starting to serve.
-
Bob, your question is complex and it has a couple of aspects:
1) As you likely know, there it a movement in the U.S. that says the power rests with the jury and it can ignore the instructions of the judge. It advises people who serve on juries to ignore such if the person believes it to be wrong.
NOTE: Either the judge or an appealate court can overturn the decision of the jury if that decision violates the law. That it clear.
2) The law has a narrow focus, often times. Often a jury will be required to make a decision, in order to convict, that is not governed by the law. In such cases the decision of the jury will likely prevail.
E.g. The law does not always determine whether or not an individual committed a crime. A jury that decides that the individual was vacationing in Hawaii will not convict that person of personally robbing a bank in California at the time they decided that person was in Hawaii.
-
:help: :help: :help: :caution: :caution: :praying:
-
Bob,
IMO, you would do better to ask Gailon these questions.
Gregory, is it true that a jury can judge the law as well? That they can choose to acquit someone even if the law says otherwise?
I read somewhere recently about this.
It's an important question for Seventh-day Adventists given our views on future Sunday laws. Must a jury convict of breaking the Sabbath by working on Sunday if the law of the land forbids Sunday desecration. I think it was A. T. Jones who wrote that the jury can judge the law if they so choose.
But what I read recently said that folks who feel that way are often excluded from serving on a jury, and that they can be kicked off even after starting to serve.
-
GJ, is a lawyer? I didn't know that! You learn something new everyday!