This blog features observations from Randy Turner, a former teacher, newspaper reporter and editor. Send news items or comments to rturner229@hotmail.com
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
KSPR video: Newman speaks at sentencing hearing
8 comments:
Anonymous
said...
It was stated by kathee Baird in her blog that Pete's psychologist testified that he was aware of a situation at Kanakuk in 2003 where Newman signed a probationary agreement acknowledging sexual improprieties with young boys. If it was testified to in court guess there is no more denying it people. I have read on these blogs for weeks now while parents who have come forward and said camp knew something was not right and they had "counseled" him about it have been ripped to shreds for coming forward and not kneeling at the alter of Kanakuk. It does not get clearer than sexual improprieties with young boys. How could they keep him on staff, not to mention PROMOTE him to director where he had even more freedom with kids?!? Would someone like to explain that one since Kamp leadership won't address the issue??? It makes me sick that 2 YEARS after they had him sign a probationary agreement he was able to drive off camp property with my 11 year old son...ALONE...How does that happen?? Now that there has been some justice for these brave young men and their families, it is time for Kanakuk to answer the hard questions. Whose idea was it to continue to give him access to kids???How do you come to the decision to keep someone on staff who you have to counsel for sexual improprieties with kids??Does it come into the decision making at some point that the protection of innocent kids is more important than the bottom line...It sounds like from this news report kanakuk is still mincing words over what they know and when. They let kim go for "sexual contact" so what exactly were the "sexual improprieties" he was put on probation for? They need to release that information so parents can have a complete picture and make an informed decision about sending their kids back.
Why was he kept on staff if he was exhibiting "questionable contact" with boys back then??? Kakanuk leaderhip needs to come clean about this and stop playing with words if they ever expect to be trusted and respected again.
I think there is a difference between "Sexual Contact" and "Sexual Improprieties" in that one involved contact and the other did not involve contact. Perhaps Pete was placed on probation for something like not covering up after a shower or something along those lines. At any rate, it is very alarming to think the "impropriety" did not sound the appropriate alarms. But remember Pete had everyone at camp snowed as well... I can see how he could have explained this away and how he could have been believed by those who questioned him at the time. He is a master at deception and false appearances. If they had believed Pete had any type of problem, they would have acted entirely differently. Sad to think God exposed Pete in a small way back then, but he masterfully got out of it. Frustrating.
Kanakuk is responsible for the abuse of probably hundreds of boys because of Pete Newman and their knowledge of whatever happened in 2003. The draw that he had for kids to come to Kanakuk equals money for Kanakuk, and it looks like money won out for Joe White. His witness for Christ and the trust that families put in him has damaged the families and boys spiritually and mentally for life. Kanakuk definitely is ALSO to blame; no doubt.
4:49 regurgitated this same thing on several threads.... I think I will do the same.
Kanakuk is damned if they say anything and damned if they dont. If they give any hint of responsibility in the situation then any blood thirsty lawyer will start a class action suit and recruit any person that Pete looked cross-eyed at as a victim. (I say that with no disrespect to the victims and family members.) Unfortunately the transparency that everyone is demanding will come along with a blank check, 70% made in the name of a lawyer.
If they remain silent then rumors become fact, assumption of motivations are made, and the mind readers become prophets.
Some are suggesting that they should confess a cover-up and let God work it all out... However this is the same God that allowed Pete to do all of the things he did. Faith and wisdom work well together.
No one is suggesting they "confess" anything,...just tell the truth finally. If it so happens that it was a "cover up" so be it. Families are struggling to make life decisions for fragile teenagers regarding whether to continue to allow this place to be a part of their lives, or not. Is asking them to be honest too much to ask? We have children who were deeply affected by this, are STILL deeply affected by this and some of us actually try to teach our children that you do not lie and cover up your mistakes. That there is accountability for your actions. Why is Kanakuk exempt from that to some of you people. And if you will read all these blogs it is not just me at 4:49 stating these opinions, there are lots of parents waiting for answers.
I disagree. Several times I have read direct statements to the leadership of camp asking them to "confess" both in a Biblical sense as well as what you are asking.... You are asking for a confession of what you feel is the truth. But what if they already have told the truth? To my knowledge Kanakuk leadership has been very cooperative with Jeff Merrel, the county prosecutor. And if they had not been cooperative a case of this magnitude would allow Mr Merrel the latitude to subpoena what ever he needed. Additionally if the county prosecutor felt the leadership of camp had any criminal responsibility in this case as so many people are suggesting then he would have brought charges against them. As it would be criminal for him to not do so.
Reguardless you miss the point of my post... damned if they say anything damned if they dont. At this point the rumors have been accepted as truth. So If they dont say what you want them too then you will call them a liar and say they are covering things up.
Until there is a judicial process for the truth to be told I hardly blame camp for keeping silent.
I am not asking that they tell what "I think" is the truth...I want the actual truth as to what exactly they knew and when. And remember, these "Rumors" have now been confirmed by sworn testimony that was given by his own defense expert witness. All I want is for them to address that. I don't know if what they did was criminal or not. Criminal is not the scale I want to use in determining if I can trust them with my children again. Negligent for not removing someone for impropercontact with kids that led to this magnitude of abuse would be reason enough. Complete lack of knowledge of child sexual abuse and predators would be enough. In my heart and for many kids sake I truly hope they did not have concrete signs that they ignored that led to this...but I guess we will never know because they wont address it unless they leave so many questions hanging out there for so long it probably will eventually push someone into a civil suit for answers and protection of future campers .
8 comments:
It was stated by kathee Baird in her blog that Pete's psychologist testified that he was aware of a situation at Kanakuk in 2003 where Newman signed a probationary agreement acknowledging sexual improprieties with young boys. If it was testified to in court guess there is no more denying it people. I have read on these blogs for weeks now while parents who have come forward and said camp knew something was not right and they had "counseled" him about it have been ripped to shreds for coming forward and not kneeling at the alter of Kanakuk. It does not get clearer than sexual improprieties with young boys. How could they keep him on staff, not to mention PROMOTE him to director where he had even more freedom with kids?!? Would someone like to explain that one since Kamp leadership won't address the issue??? It makes me sick that 2 YEARS after they had him sign a probationary agreement he was able to drive off camp property with my 11 year old son...ALONE...How does that happen?? Now that there has been some justice for these brave young men and their families, it is time for Kanakuk to answer the hard questions. Whose idea was it to continue to give him access to kids???How do you come to the decision to keep someone on staff who you have to counsel for sexual improprieties with kids??Does it come into the decision making at some point that the protection of innocent kids is more important than the bottom line...It sounds like from this news report kanakuk is still mincing words over what they know and when. They let kim go for "sexual contact" so what exactly were the "sexual improprieties" he was put on probation for? They need to release that information so parents can have a complete picture and make an informed decision about sending their kids back.
Why was he kept on staff if he was exhibiting "questionable contact" with boys back then??? Kakanuk leaderhip needs to come clean about this and stop playing with words if they ever expect to be trusted and respected again.
I think there is a difference between "Sexual Contact" and "Sexual Improprieties" in that one involved contact and the other did not involve contact. Perhaps Pete was placed on probation for something like not covering up after a shower or something along those lines. At any rate, it is very alarming to think the "impropriety" did not sound the appropriate alarms. But remember Pete had everyone at camp snowed as well... I can see how he could have explained this away and how he could have been believed by those who questioned him at the time. He is a master at deception and false appearances. If they had believed Pete had any type of problem, they would have acted entirely differently. Sad to think God exposed Pete in a small way back then, but he masterfully got out of it. Frustrating.
Kanakuk is responsible for the abuse of probably hundreds of boys because of Pete Newman and their knowledge of whatever happened in 2003. The draw that he had for kids to come to Kanakuk equals money for Kanakuk, and it looks like money won out for Joe White. His witness for Christ and the trust that families put in him has damaged the families and boys spiritually and mentally for life.
Kanakuk definitely is ALSO to blame; no doubt.
4:49 regurgitated this same thing on several threads.... I think I will do the same.
Kanakuk is damned if they say anything and damned if they dont. If they give any hint of responsibility in the situation then any blood thirsty lawyer will start a class action suit and recruit any person that Pete looked cross-eyed at as a victim. (I say that with no disrespect to the victims and family members.) Unfortunately the transparency that everyone is demanding will come along with a blank check, 70% made in the name of a lawyer.
If they remain silent then rumors become fact, assumption of motivations are made, and the mind readers become prophets.
Some are suggesting that they should confess a cover-up and let God work it all out... However this is the same God that allowed Pete to do all of the things he did. Faith and wisdom work well together.
9:40
No one is suggesting they "confess" anything,...just tell the truth finally. If it so happens that it was a "cover up" so be it. Families are struggling to make life decisions for fragile teenagers regarding whether to continue to allow this place to be a part of their lives, or not. Is asking them to be honest too much to ask? We have children who were deeply affected by this, are STILL deeply affected by this and some of us actually try to teach our children that you do not lie and cover up your mistakes. That there is accountability for your actions. Why is Kanakuk exempt from that to some of you people. And if you will read all these blogs it is not just me at 4:49 stating these opinions, there are lots of parents waiting for answers.
I disagree. Several times I have read direct statements to the leadership of camp asking them to "confess" both in a Biblical sense as well as what you are asking.... You are asking for a confession of what you feel is the truth. But what if they already have told the truth? To my knowledge Kanakuk leadership has been very cooperative with Jeff Merrel, the county prosecutor. And if they had not been cooperative a case of this magnitude would allow Mr Merrel the latitude to subpoena what ever he needed. Additionally if the county prosecutor felt the leadership of camp had any criminal responsibility in this case as so many people are suggesting then he would have brought charges against them. As it would be criminal for him to not do so.
Reguardless you miss the point of my post... damned if they say anything damned if they dont. At this point the rumors have been accepted as truth. So If they dont say what you want them too then you will call them a liar and say they are covering things up.
Until there is a judicial process for the truth to be told I hardly blame camp for keeping silent.
I am not asking that they tell what "I think" is the truth...I want the actual truth as to what exactly they knew and when. And remember, these "Rumors" have now been confirmed by sworn testimony that was given by his own defense expert witness. All I want is for them to address that. I don't know if what they did was criminal or not. Criminal is not the scale I want to use in determining if I can trust them with my children again. Negligent for not removing someone for impropercontact with kids that led to this magnitude of abuse would be reason enough. Complete lack of knowledge of child sexual abuse and predators would be enough. In my heart and for many kids sake I truly hope they did not have concrete signs that they ignored that led to this...but I guess we will never know because they wont address it unless they leave so many questions hanging out there for so long it probably will eventually push someone into a civil suit for answers and protection of future campers .
Post a Comment