Friday, June 11, 2010

Psychologist: Camp counselor who molested boys wasn't pedophile; he just had homosexual urges

(The following is my latest Daily Kos post.)

I am surprised the news of the testimony in the small, filled to capacity Taney County, Missouri, courtroom, did not spread like wildfire.

But then again the case of Christian sports camp counselor Pete Newman, who sexually abused scores of teenage boys at Kanakuk Kamps, over a period of at least a dozen years, has remained strangely under the national media radar.

The southwest Missouri media was out in full force Thursday as Judge Mark Orr sentenced Newman, who has also been charged with sex crimes involving underage boys in Colorado and is under investigation for similar offenses in numerous other states, including Texas, Oklahoma, and Alabama, two consecutive life terms, plus 30 years.

Orr’s sentence came in spite of the testimony of hired gun psychologist Dr. Joseph Plaud of Boston, who said Newman was not a pedophile, but simply had sex with the boys because of his “repressed homosexual urges.”

Now when was the last time you heard a psychologist testify that a man had sex with underage girls because of repressed heterosexual urges?

Dr. Plaud emphatically stated that Pete Newman would not offend when he was released if something could be done to deal with those horrible homosexual urges.

And this is the best testimony the defense could come up with for $200 an hour? Of course, this is the same Dr. Plaud who has testified in hundreds of cases across the country over the past several years and has yet to say that a sex offender should actually stay behind bars.

And it is the same Dr. Plaud who gained considerable notoriety for using a machine attached to a man’s sex organ to determine what sexually arouses him. (The men were shown pictures of young girls or boys, but always tastefully done, so as not to violate pornography laws, Dr. Plaud says.)

As I wrote on my blog, The Turner Report, earlier today, Dr. Plaud successfully recommended freedom for one man with a long track record of violent sexual crimes, who then raped and threatened to kill an 18-year-old woman and unsuccessfully asked for the release of a Massachusetts man, who not only had sexually assaulted three young women while on probation for another sexual assault, but then had raped his 14-year-old son while on probation for those three assaults.

It was probably just the man’s homosexual urges.

By ignoring what should have been a national story concerning a Christian sports counselor who had been grooming and then sexually assaulting underage boys in several states over a period of several years, (Would this story have been swept under the carpet had it involved Catholic priests?) the media also missed an opportunity to examine the record of this “psychologist” who has been exporting his brand of junk science to the highest bidder across the United States.

And it is only through the media that people like Joseph Plaud can be accurately described. In a New York case, Plaud failed to keep one of his clients from being locked up, but that man was given a new trial because of an error made by the judge.

That error?

The judge allowed the prosecuting attorney to refer to Joseph Plaud as “a hired gun.”

Apparently, justice is not only blind, but it has no use for the truth

34 comments:

Anonymous said...

Randy,
Wasn't he sentenced to two life sentences (plus a few 30-year sentences)? Read than on some of your Wednesday posts. Didn't make national news because it's not all that uncommon (unfortunately), and justice was served in this case. Check out joplin dot craigslist dot org in the "casual encounters" section and see how many pete newmans there are in the Joplin and Springfield areas showing their secret and repressed urges in postings there every day. The world is full of sick, sick freaks -- even here in SWMO.

Randy said...

You are correct about the life sentences. What makes this case more noteworthy than others of the same kind is that Pete Newman was not only a director at Kanakuk, but he also committed these crimes in several states, and Newman was in much demand as a speaker for various churches and organizations across the U. S. I firmly believe the reason this was not covered is because the media has never been able to cover religious news, good or bad. It is much easier to point out problems with Catholic priests or with ministers who have been on television than it is to actually cover how religion usually takes place in the U. S. The media has always been uncomfortable covering any kind of news about religion.

Anonymous said...

Hu$h monie$ are $till my bet.

Anonymous said...

A couple of your posts say he received three life sentences -- including this post.

Randy said...

It is fixed. Sorry about that.

Anonymous said...

Though there is no hard and fast profile of a pedophile, here are some general characteristics(according to the Mental Health Matters website) Describes Pete Newman very well. Let's not forget and protect children in the future:

Popular with both children and adults.
Appears to be trustworthy and respectable. Has good standing in the community.
Prefers the company of children. Feels more comfortable with children than adults. Is mainly attracted to prepubescent boys and girls. Can be heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual.
"Grooms" children with quality time, video games, parties, candy, toys, gifts, money.
Singles out children who seem troubled and in need of attention or affection.
Rarely forces or coerces a child into sexual contact. Usually through trust and friendship. Physical contact is gradual, from touching, to picking up, to holding on lap, to kissing, etc.
Derives gratification in a number of ways. For some, looking is enough. For others, taking pictures or watching children undress is enough. Still others require more contact.
Finds different ways and places to be alone with children.
Are primarily (but not always) male, masculine, better-educated, more religious than average, in their thirties, and choose jobs allowing them greater access to children.
Are usually family men, have no criminal record, and deny that they abuse children, even after caught, convicted, incarcerated, and court-ordered into a sex offender program. If married, the marriage is often troubled by sexual dysfunction, and serves as a smokescreen for the pedophile's true preferences and practices.
Are often, but not always, themselves victims of some form of childhood sexual abuse.
Even if the pedophile has no children, his home is usually child-friendly, with toys, books, video games, computers, bikes, swing sets, skateboards, rec room, pool, snacks - things to attract children to his home and keep them coming back. Usually the items reflect the preferred age of his victims.
Some pedophiles recognize that their behavior is criminal, immoral, and unacceptable by society, and operate in secrecy. Pedo means "child" in Greek. Phile is a derivative of Greek, Latin, and French, meaning "love."

The Exclusive type of pedophile is attracted to children only. The Non-Exclusive is attracted to both children and adults.

A pedophile will not stop on his own, and will not turn himself in, because he does not take responsibility for his behavior and denies that he's doing anything harmful. He will abuse until he's caught.

A child not always recognizes when he or she is being abused, manipulated, or groomed by a pedophile. Unless the pedophile is a sexual sadist, he does not have to threaten a child into silence. The trust, gifts, secrecy, and "relationship" are enough. In some cases, the abuser will coerce the child into silence by saying that if anyone finds out, he would go to jail, or the child would, and maybe the child's parents. In other cases, threats to harm the child, pets, and family are used.

Pedophiles can be "treated" but never cured, because their sexual preference has always been, and always will be, children. Their urges will always be present. Therefore, treatment focuses on changing, curbing, or re-directing the acting-out behaviors of pedophiles. Known pedophiles, if not incarcerated, should be closely monitored for the rest of their lives.

Knowing the profile of a pedophile, does this mean that the little league coach who has a great rapport with kids and treats them to pizza at his house is suspect? Or that the teacher who throws pool parties is? Of course not. The majority of people who like and work with children are not pedophiles. It does mean that we should be observant of all the adults in our children's lives, whether they wear a white collar, a blue collar, or a clerical collar.

Amanda Tackett said...

Anon 5:39...would you please email me at thewifeyone@aol.com. I really appreciate the information you posted, it's a valuable public service for parents to have this information!

Anonymous said...

Amanda..I am happy to email you...the link to what I posted is:

mental-health-matters.com

Anonymous said...

I must be missing something. From reading the newspaper accounts of the Newman trial, the doctor was brought in by the defense to explain the psychology behind Mr. Newman's terrible acts, not excuse them, explain them. And I think you are mixing up pedophilia (which is young kids) with what Mr. Newman did. And I think you got it completely wrong in what the expert said to begin with. According to the newspaper account the expert said that it was the fact that he had repressed homosexuality (or something like that) that led him to do what he did given his religious upbringing where homosexuality is considered sinful. It wasn't homosexuality per se that led Mr. Newman to do it. The implication that you attack the expert on seems to me to be that homosexuals are pedophiles. That is a great disservice to the truth, Mr. Turner. I guess I see why you no longer worker for real newspapers.

Anonymous said...

Pete Newman's is a pedophile. He may also be homosexual and if he is, so what! Heterosexual or homosexual...He is a pedophile.

He is in prison for two life terms plus 30 years for having sexual encounters with children too young to be having sex, especially with a man more than twice their age.

Not only is this immoral it is against the law. I don't care WHY he did it and obviously, neither did the judge. Really, that is not the point. He did it. He broke the law. He will serve the time.

5:26
Do you have children? If so, do you have a child in the range of age of the victims Mr. Newman chose to act out his sexual desires? I can tell you this...an eleven to fifteen year old child is just that, a child... and to try and say they are not, and are old enough to be "courted" by a 30 year old man is just ridiculous...even disgusting.

You are thinking and believing as a pedophile does.

Anonymous said...

Expert witnesses hired by the defense, or even the prosecution, are there to provide an "expert opinion" which supports the defense, or prosecution's, case. They are paid for their testimony.

It is up to the judge, or jury, to determined the validity of such testimony and make a ruling or decision based on that testimony...and also take into consideration the fact these experts are paid.

In this case, I believe the judge determined the expert testimony had no bearing on the fact Mr. Newman broke the law, was caught and pleaded guilty. Remember, Mr. Newman's guilt was not in question as he already admitted guilt. In his statement to the court, he admits he was wrong and he lied before being caught and after being caught to cover up what he KNEW was wrong.

He actually said he didn't even understand what the experts were saying...that it did not make sense to him.

If anything, I think the defense's expert witness, Dr. Plaud, contributed to the judge's severe, but just, punishment. It was a ridiculous and desperate attempt by the defense to get a lighter sentence. It did not work...thank God!

Anonymous said...

Mr. Turner: did you have access to any of the actual documentation in this case? Did you have access or read the reports of the experts in the case? Did you actually contact the experts and ask questions? Did you attend the sentencing hearing and hear the actual testimony of the experts? If the answers to any of these questions are yes, then OK. But if the answers to these questions are no, I think you are throwing a lot of mud around in trying to promote yourself. After all, it's easy to gain popularity by damning others, especially given the horrific nature of the case itself. And I think it is really terrible to attack others with prejudice. When did any lawyer or expert in the Newman case say that he needed to be treated for homosexuality, or that being a homosexual made him a pedophile? I do not see reports of that anywhere in our news or television reports in this case. I think you are trying to stir up trouble. And you call yourself a teacher? You are more like a rabble rouser than a teacher.

Anonymous said...

The expert did not say being a homosexual made him a pedophile. Dr. Plaud said he WAS NOT a pedophile, but just a homosexual who acted out his homosexual desires with boys between the ages of 11 and 15.

I am sorry Dr. Plaud, he is a pedophile under Missouri state law and God's law.

Randy...I am sooo glad you are a "rabble rouser!" Exactly what that is I am not sure...but, if that is what you are...I want to be one too! Someone who is not afraid to point out all sides of a story to create debate. Hopefully, healthy debate which leads to understanding and knowledge!

Keep up the fantastic work, Randy!!

Anonymous said...

To the 6:23 commentor:

Did you read the testimony of Dr. Plaud? Were you in the courtroom to hear his testimony? Have you done research on Dr. Plaud and his past? Did you contact Dr. Plaud and talk with him about his testimony?

Just curious

Anonymous said...

5:26

The fact you do not believe a grown man having sex with young children (and yes, 11 to 15 year old boys are young children) is pedophelia is very, very scary.

Who are you? You need to be watched.

Anonymous said...

5:26 Yes, you are missing something....you are missing a lot. I agree that you are one to be watched.

Anonymous said...

I was in attendance that day in court. I among most I guess was very pleased with the sentence Mr. Newman received. But you have totally mischaracterized Dr. Plaud's testimony. He was not advocating anything, not excusing anything, he was giving the results of his testing and what they meant, which to be frank made good sense. He helped me to understand the difference between what pedophilia is and what Mr. Newman did. The Dr. did not in any way blame what Mr. Newman did on homosexuality. I see that absence of real information does not excuse either you, Mr. Turner, nor many of the commentators here who were not in attendance that day in court from considering themselves as experts and judges. An earlier commentator called you a rabble rouser, Mr. Turner. Now that is one comment that is right on the mark. I know that everyone has their pitchforks and torches out (great Christian community we have here, eh?). But stirring up people's fears and prejudices, Mr. Neman, is no way to report on serious issues. I hope you do not do the same with the impressionable children you are charged with teaching yourself. What you stated about this case was so far from the truth I hope that you find it in your heart (and conscience) to make a public apology to the expert you have libeled.

Randy said...

I am amazed that anyone writing on this topic can be concerned about my impact on impressionable children. As for any "libel" of Dr. Plaud, that simply did not happen. Dr. Plaud's record speaks for itself.

Anonymous said...

Randy, you are just another Glenn Beck. Your writing speaks for itself. Now why is it that you no longer have a real media job? Character assassination is so easy to do when you self-important bloggers see fit to demagogue. You should rename your blog "The Turner Diaries." That title surely fits.

Randy said...

I find it interesting that in the space of one paragraph, you associate me with Glenn Beck and a well-known racist book, The Turner Diaries, make aspersions about why I am no longer in the media and you call me a demagogue?

Anonymous said...

8:31

Mr. Newman is a pedophile. What he did, his actions, is the definition of pedophilia. You are so far off base.

Dr. Plaud was hired by the defense to try and help get Mr. Newman the lightest sentence possible. The only way that could possibly happen was to try and convince the judge Mr. Newman is not a pedophile. He did not succeed in convincing the judge nor, I am sure 99% of those in the courtroom and others following this case.

Dr. Plaud was not an unbiased expert witness. His allegiance was with those writing his very generous paycheck...the defense.

Anonymous said...

David Newman, you stood up in court and said that you KNEW your twin brother's heart. I believe you do. But a good question would be: Have you JUST BEGUN to know your twin-brother's heart? It took you 34 years? Come on! If you do know it now, then you knew it all along. Your family should have intervened if you knew him so well. You are a pastor. Be careful.

Anonymous said...

I have spent the last couple of hours doing some internet research on Dr. Plaud and other cases where he testified in court as an expert witness.

So far I have found about a dozen cases in which he testified. Each time he was an expert witness on behalf of the defense and each of these cases was a trial or sentencing involving a sexual offender.

The sexual offenders were all different sorts. Some pedophiles, some rapists, some exhibitionists...but, one thing they all had in common was they had an expert witness who testified they shouldn't be incarcerated or weren't as bad as the prosecution was saying.

I find it hard to believe that not one of the sex offenders were actually guilty of what they were arrested for. According to Dr. Plaud, each of these sexual offenders had plausible reason to behave as they did and should not be jailed or should receive a minimum sentence. EVERY ONE of them. Really? I don't think so.

Dr. Plaud's profession is Expert Witness for the Defense of Sexual Offenders. That is how he makes his living. He is paid...very well...each time he takes the stand. And, by the way, I can not find one case...and I will keep looking...that has him testifying for the prosecution.

Anonymous said...

The very fact that they put Dr. Plaud up there as a "witness" demonstrates how helpless, hopeless, and desperate they were to find anyone to side with them. They had no case and they knew it. If they did, they would have called in credible people, respected people, smart people to fight for Newman.

Speaking of this, where were all the "friends" of Pete Newman? Does he not have any but the Buttons left? Where were they? We didn't hear any but the one old friend of Pete's. Gary Smalley, since you never thought he was dangerous, why didn't you come tell us all why he should get a short sentence? In fact, don't you know a thing or two about Pete's past?

Anonymous said...

What role did Gary Smalley play in all of this?

Anonymous said...

7:40 you should ask him. Ask him about his advice to camp when GS evaluated him after the initial "naked" complaints way back when. Ask him about his doctorate. Ask him about his interaction with Pete since all this broke. Ask him.

Anonymous said...

I don't know Gary Smalley, and honestly, I'd never heard of him before, so I don't know how to ask him. If he's anything like the "leaders" at Kanakuk, I doubt he would tell me anything. Can you just tell us what the deal is so that we can KNOW which ppl associated with this camp are decent? I'm very torn about sending my kids back.

Anonymous said...

Google him.

Anonymous said...

I looked up Gary Smalley and it doesn't appear that he's a Psychiatrist, or even an psychologist, or a PhD, or an MD........And yet he's supposed to be an expert in personalities?

I'm sure he's a good man, but if this is the guy who evaluated/counseled Pete to determine his "safety" around kids, then it looks like they got what they paid for.

Anonymous said...

They/ Kanakuk didn't just get what they paid for... We, Kanakuk families got what they paid (probably not even paid) for. The more that I think about this and put the pieces together, I believe that we still do not know everything , probably never will, and would be even more physically Ill if we did. Our children were knowingly put in harms way.

Anonymous said...

Check into it and see if Joe White and Gary Smalley are good friends.

Kathee Baird said...

When Judge Orr asked if any corrections to documents needed to be made before sentencing, Carver said that Smalley had NOT interviewed Newman for the crime he pled guilty to--and that his age needed to be corrected in paperwork. A reliable source told me that Kanakuk brought Smalley in to counsel Newman for the 2003 incident.

I'm sure that White and Smalley are friends....Branson isn't that big.

Here is a link to his background:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Smalley

Anonymous said...

I was on staff at Kanakuk the summer of 1986. Gary Smalley and John Trent both spoke at different training events as well as closing events. I recall Joe introducing them as friends.

Anonymous said...

I have not looked recently but right after the story broke there was a video on the Kanakuk website that featured Gary Smalley singing the praises of Kanakuk and speaking in support of them.