Anyone who thinks former Kanakuk Kamp director Pete Newman and his lawyers were expecting two life sentences (plus 30 years) when they walked into a Taney County courtroom Thursday have not looked closely at the record of the psychologist hired by the defense team.
Newman received his life sentences Thursday after pleading guilty earlier this year to felony sex crimes involving underage boys who were under his charge at Kanakuk, a Christian sports camp based in Branson.
The sentencing was originally scheduled for April 30, but was postponed to June 9 so his chief witness, Dr. Joseph Plaud, could be in court. Dr. Plaud has a long record of recommending freedom or light sentences for sex offenders, including violent ones. In the hundreds of cases in which Dr. Plaud has testified he has never once said that a sex offender cannot be rehabilitated.
Published accounts indicate Dr. Plaud charges $200 per hour for "testing" the sex offenders he is paid to represent and over a five-year period the Boston-based psychologist has billed Massachusetts taxpayers for nearly half a million dollars serving as the go-to shrink for public defenders representing defendants in sex cases.
Plaud does not limit his expertise to Massachusetts, having testified across the country as a hired gun for defense lawyers.
And sometimes, as in the case of Pete Newman, Dr. Plaud's testimony seems to fly in the face of what is considered established fact in psychology.
On Thursday, Dr. Plaud testified that Newman could be salvaged, adding that Newman was not a pedophile, but was a "victim of repressed homosexual urges."
Someone should have asked the doctor if Newman's teenage victims had been girls would it have been because of repressed heterosexual urges.
Dr. Plaud said if Newman's homosexual urges could be controlled, he would never offend again.
Of course, considering some of the other offenders Dr. Plaud has vouched for, you have to take his testimony with a grain of salt.
In 2009, Plaud told the Boston Herald, "I have never testified that someone is sexually dangerous. The best statistics show that most sex offenders don't reoffend."
He never said where those statistics came from, but the statistics must not have included David Partridge, one of those who was released based on Dr. Plaud's testimony. Partridge went on to rape and threatened to kill a Fitchburg, Mass. woman. Dr. Plaud vouched for Partridge despite a record that included two violent rapes, one of a 13-year-old girl.
Another defendant who received the benefit of Dr. Plaud's testimony was Antonio Maderos. The judge disagreed with the doctor's assessment that Maderos would not reoffend even though Maderos' rap sheet included the 1989 rape of a 14-year-old girl, and then three sexual assaults after he was placed on probation.
And that wasn't all. Dr. Plaud still recommended Maderos for release even though after Maderos was once again placed on probation, he was charged with raping his 14-year-old son.
It must have been those repressed homosexual urges.
No matter what you think about Dr. Plaud's consistent efforts to free sex offenders, the one thing you must never do is to accurately describe him in court.
In a 2008 Schnectady, N. Y. case, Dr. Plaud testified against the civil commitment of career sex offender Christopher Houghton, who had sexually abused eight children by the time he turned 13. After being institutionalized until he was almost 20, Houghton was released and almost immediately sexually assaulted two teenage girls.
Dr. Plaud had an explanation for Houghton's criminal activities, according to an article in an October 2008 edition of the Schnectady Gazette. Substance abuse and other factors, the doctor said, had caused Houghton to have "a lapse of judgment."
His testimony was not persuasive and Houghton was committed, but that judgment was overturned in 2009 because the attorney for the state prejudiced the jury by referring to Dr. Plaud as "a hired gun."
Roger, that.
ReplyDeleteA few people have commented on the doctor's testimony, and I did read the information on his website...I think "hired gun" or "hack" are both good descriptions.
If anything, I feel that Plaud's testimony hurt Newman's position rather than helping him.
If it helped, then we applaud Plaud!
ReplyDeleteLeave it to the Newmans to pay for an idiot like Plaud rather than pay the families of the victims. They are something else. Ditto 7:41p.m. and by the way Amanda...don't you back down to anyone..you go girl..you happen to understand all of this!!! Ignore the lawyer, 20 year staffer, 10 year camper or whatever he said.
ReplyDeletePlaud appeared a little homosexual himself. Perhaps he "gets off" fighting for his own type.
ReplyDeleteyeah he prob loves being around all these freaks doing "evaluations" on 'em cause he's just like 'em
ReplyDeleteyeah he prob loves being around all these freaks doing "evaluations" on 'em cause he's just like 'em
ReplyDeleteIt is amazing how Internet blogs can bring out the worst in people. And I'm not talking about the expert in question. We really do not know enough about either the particulars of this case nor the expert to make conclusions that I am reading here. Poor "journalism" (where are the real sources -- a tabloid newspaper quote?) made worse by comments devoid of any real substance, just name calling. I hope that real newspapers never go away, because the tripe I am reading here is an embarrassment to analyzing important issues with the gravity needed. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.
ReplyDeleteThough 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:
ReplyDeletePopular 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.
5:40 A.M. You just completely described Pete Newman. He knew completely and exactly what he was doing!! And then to claim hemosexual tendencies to get a lighter sentence? Can people not see his continued manipulation of the boys and their families?? What is this compassion thing some people are talking about? I don't get it. He is where he needs to be for life!!
ReplyDeleteUmmm...5:04...Did you read the acutal charge against Newman? His actions were documented in painful detail. The full charge is available as a pdf file here:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.news-leader.com/assets/pdf/DO1468851118.PDF
I think that the public should absoultely have the right to weigh in on the "expert" testimony in light of Newman's crimes. And, we know much about Plaud via his website:
http://www.appliedbehavioralconsultants.com/
The only ones who should be ashamed of themselves are the ones who choose to remain uninformed.
Ditto 7:46!!!
ReplyDeleteDitto 7:46!!!
ReplyDeleteI do not normally post, but I agree that unless you know more details than what you get from the news, then it sheds more heat than light to condemn. It is also not Christian, but our religious beliefs seem to go out the window in these types of forums reading the comments. It must be hard to be a professional in this area who testifies for the defense. Such persons must have courage that I do not have. But I guess the commenters and Mr. Turner know more than those who spent hours with the sickly Mr. Newman. My aunt was in the courtroom that day and her impressions of Dr. Plaud were very different from what I have read here. She thought he articulated himself well, and explained Mr. Newman's conditions and problems. But I guess we do not care, Mr. Newman has been totally dehumanized and apparently should just be stoned. I do not believe that Jesus would make comments like this. Both molesters and the society that want to kill them will have to answer upon high one day. But one thing I do agree is that it is sad how quick we are to rush to judgment, even to the point of condemning others who did not molest anybody, but who are just trying to do their best in explaining why Mr. Newman did what he did.
ReplyDeleteI was in the courtroom too that day and Mr. Plaud was an actor that day and seemed to enjoy the limelight! He even laughed at himself a few times, which to me seemed highly inappropriate given the circumstances. To declare that Pete is not a pedophile flies in the face of everything he did...and to say that he had homosexual tendencies is a way to explain what he did is ridiculous!! It doesn't matter at this point WHY he did it!! His punishment is set and he can no longer hurt children...many of them who were still children. Mr. Plaud didn't have ALL the information and Pete certainly doesn't seem willing to give the authorities all the names of the boys he molested. Now that he is has nothing else to lose, maybe he will do the right thing and give up the names so that all the boys can get the help they need.
ReplyDeleteI am NOT trying to be a smart-alec, but to anon @ 2:15, but your definition of courage and mine are two different things. Dr. Plaud was a PAID witness who was hired because he would say FAVORABLE things about Newman. In this case, Plaud may have explained and articulated things rather well, but sadly his position was more than likely not helpful.
ReplyDeleteTo that, I might add that my characterization of Dr. Plaud comes from research and not from observations based on what he said Thursday. He himself has noted that he has never testified that any sex offender could not be rehabilitated. He accepts large fees to go across the country and testify in various cases and his observations have helped free people who have gone on to rape again. This was not meant as a knock against Pete Newman or anyone else, but as an accurate characterization of what Dr. Plaud's presence in the courtroom meant. My observation at the beginning of my post that Pete Newman's lawyer was expecting more out of Dr. Plaud's testimony is based on the lawyer's comments to the media that he was surprised by the severity of the sentence.
ReplyDelete2:15 - I get the impression you did not read Mr. Turners's blogpost. That maybe you are basing your comments on the other comments on this thread. Go back and read Mr. Turner's post, then do your own research regarding Dr. Plaud. You will then have the CONTEXT of the comments and a better understanding of their meaning.
ReplyDelete