Bad Bad Teacher

2,935 Responses to “Jason Crary”

Pages: [294] 293 292 291 290 289 288 287 286 285 284 … 1 » Show All

1. 2935
   Tim Says:
   September 13th, 2009 at 2:39 pm

   Some:
   .
   I noticed that your posting does not mention the horrendous crimes of deliberately putting children at “risk” with known repeat child molesters as the administrators at Worthington Christian Schools (WCS) and Grace Brethren Church (GBC) have done deliberately and continuously for over 8 years when they got caught deceiving and defrauding we parents about it while working to cover-up their crimes.
   .
   We know this for fact as the statement below was secretly recorded in March 2006 (over a year and a half before the WCS/GBC administrators and their SZD attorney got caught) as several of the WCS/GBC administrators acknowledged between one another that there was indeed a “risk” to the students. Note too that they were also aware of the child molestation issues with Jason Crary as well as Bill Williams when this statement was made as reported in the Columbus Dispatch newspaper of Wednesday, October 17, 2007:
   .

   “We understand that if something happens between Dwayne and a student, we will be big-time liable,”
   executive pastor Jim Augspurger said on the recording.
   “That’s a risk we take. I think before God we did the right thing and it may not be the worldly, may not even be the most prudent thing, but it is something we have done,”
   he said.
   “We’ve wiped the slate clean. I understand the situation it puts us in.”

   .
   We have no doubt at all that a Baylor University study about the WCS/GBC administrators would conclude that:

   Only people who are “criminally insane” would actually believe “before God” that it is “the right thing” to:
   lead repeat child molesters into temptation to molest again with a huge supply of trusting children/parents,
   while deliberately putting thousands of children at “risk” with those repeat child molesters,
   while deceiving and defrauding the parents about it,
   while working to cover-up those crimes.

   .
   Note that all but one of those WCS/GBC administrators remain in power and remain as a serious threat to unsuspecting consumers and their children and remain as horrible examples to all past, present, and future students on how to treat your business customers and fellow man.
   .
   Despite the overwhelming evidence against the WCS/GBC administrators and their SZD attorney, WCS misappropriated more of the money intended to educate the students by paying for a bogus investigation that foolishly states that:
   “WCS has never attempted to cover up any improper acts”.

   .
   However as we all know, Brian Penn stated the following about the fact that GBC (and WCS) was covering up the fact that one of the child molesters had repeatedly molested a 13 year old student against her will and did not merely have an adulterous affair with a consenting adult:

   “I was a Lead Pastor here for eight years and a Director Of Junior High Youth Ministries in the past. This is a Watergate. The church covered it up. I was in the meetings. I’ve known all these years that it was a student. And I was told to get back to wiping noses and not to let it out.”
   

   .
   Instead of just posting stuff on here, you might consider joining us in standing up for the dignity of the students who were deliberately put at “risk” by the WCS/GBC administrators and for the dignity of God who never ever would approve of such a thing as the WCS/GBC administrators believed “before God”.
   .
   Unfortunately, the WCS teachers, staff, and parents who remain behind have demonstrated that they refuse to stand up for the dignity of God as they continue to cower down to their deceivers who deliberately put God’s “little ones” at “risk“.
   .
   Tim Ball
   Email: Tim026300@aol.com

2. 2934
   some Says:
   September 9th, 2009 at 6:41 pm

   Executive Summary

   BAYLOR UNIVERSITY STUDY
   The Prevalence of Clergy Sexual Misconduct with Adults: A Research Study Executive Summary
   Diana R. Garland*

   This research study involved two companion projects: (1) a national random survey to determine the prevalence of clergy sexual misconduct (CSM) with adults; and (2) a qualitative study of three groups of women and men: (a) those who self-identified as survivors who had been the objects of CSM, (b) family or friends of survivors, and (c) offenders who had themselves committed CSM. The goal of both projects was to define the scope and nature of CSM, so that effective prevention strategies can be proposed for the protection of religious leaders and congregants.

   General Statistics of the Research:

   • national, random survey conducted in 2008 with 3,559 respondents

   • phone interviews with 46 persons who had experienced clergy sexual misconduct as adults, representing 17 different Christian and Jewish religious affiliations

   • phone interviews with 15 persons who were second-hand victims of CSM (husbands, friends and other church staff members); and with 21 experts (non-offending religious leaders, researchers, and professionals who provide care for survivors and offenders)

   The Prevalence of CSM

   We used the 2008 General Social Survey (GSS) to estimate the prevalence of clergy sexual misconduct. This is an in-person survey of a nationally representative sample of noninstitutionalized English- or Spanish-speaking adults, conducted by National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago. The 2008 survey included 3559 respondents. Although the GSS is an in-person interview, the questions we developed specifically for this project were self-administered, making it easier for respondents to report potentially painful or embarrassing experiences.

   Clergy sexual misconduct was defined in this study as:

   Minister, priests, rabbis, or other clergypersons or religious leaders who make sexual advances or propositions to persons in the congregations they serve who are not their spouses or significant others.

   Of those surveyed:

   • More than 3% of women who had attended a congregation in the past month reported that they had been the object of CSM at some time in their adult lives;

   • 92% of these sexual advances had been made in secret, not in open dating relationships; and

   • 67% of the offenders were married to someone else at the time of the advance.

   • In the average American congregation of 400 persons, with women representing, on average, 60% of the congregation, there are, on average of 7 women who have experienced clergy sexual misconduct.

   • Of the entire sample, 8% report having known about CSM occurring in a congregation they have attended. Therefore, in the average American congregation of 400 congregants, there are, on average, 32 persons who have experienced CSM in their community of faith.

   Of course, CSM does not occur evenly across congregations, but these statistics demonstrate the widespread nature of CSM and refutes the commonly held belief that it is a case of a few charismatic and powerful leaders preying on vulnerable followers. In the nonrandom qualitative study that occurred concurrently with the survey, survivors hailed from 17 different Christian and Jewish affiliations: Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, Seventh Day Adventist, Disciples of Christ, Latter Day Saints, Apostolic, Calvary Chapel, Christian Science, Church of Christ, Episcopal, Friends (Quaker), Mennonite, Evangelical, Nondenominational (Christian), and Reformed Judaism.

   How CSM Happens

   In the second phase of the project, we analyzed phone interviews with 46 persons who as adults had experienced a sexual encounter or relationship with a religious leader. We also interviewed 15 others who had experienced the effects of those sexual encounters (husbands, friends and other staff members in the congregation), as well as two offending leaders. We identified subjects for this study using networks of professionals, web sites, and media stories about the project. Most of the offenders of the interview subjects were male, but two were female. Considering that most religious leaders are male, it is significant that we found both male and female offenders, and offenders who committed heterosexual, gay and lesbian sexual misbehavior.

   We used the software package Atlas-Ti to code the interview transcripts and then to identify six common themes that describe the social characteristics of the congregations in which clergy sexual misconduct (CSM) occurs. Those themes include:

   1. Family members, friends, and victims ignored warning signs. Religious leaders acted inappropriately in public as well as private settings, but in a culture that has no cognitive categories for understanding or explaining clergy misconduct as anything other than an “affair,” observers mistrusted their own judgment, perhaps considering themselves “hypersensitive,” particularly since the behavior was committed by a trusted leader. First indicators of CSM were thus ignored.

   2. Niceness culture: American culture expects persons to be “nice” to one another, particularly those we know and respect, and particularly in a congregation. “Nice” means not being confrontational, giving the other the “benefit of the doubt,” and overlooking social indiscretions in order to avoid embarrassment. Even when family members, friends, and victims knew about or suspected CSM or behavior leading to CSM, they did not speak about their observations.

   3. Ease of private communication: E-mail and cell phones have replaced mailed letters and phone calls to the family household. An intimate relationship between leader and congregant can develop via e-mail and cell phones with complete invisibility to family and community.

   4. No oversight: Religious leaders often answer to no one about their daily activities and are free to move about the community and to maintain an office that is isolated from observation.

   5. Multiple roles: Religious leaders engage in multiple roles with congregants in addition to their role as leader, including counselor and personal friend. They obtain knowledge about congregants’ personal lives and struggles that can make the congregant vulnerable and dependent.

   6. Trust in the sanctuary: Congregations are considered sanctuaries-safe places-where normal attentiveness to self-protection is not considered necessary. Because of this perceived sanctuary, congregants share life experiences and private information with religious leaders that they would not share with others.

   Prevention Strategies

   The project proposes four strategies for lowering the incidence of CSM:

   (1) Educate the public about CSM as “misconduct” and “abuse of power,” not a consensual affair between persons of equal power. Give the public language and permission to identify what they experience as inappropriate conduct and important early warnings that can enable prevention or early intervention.

   (2) Provide religious education based on the scriptures about the role of power, and its use and abuse, in the workplace, the community of faith, and the family. Power and its use and abuse are not unique to religious congregations. Supervisors, teachers, community leaders, and parents need to understand and handle power appropriately, according to their religious faith. (Study series from Baylor School of Social Work on Christianity and the Abuse of Power is forthcoming.)

   (3) Provide a code of ethics and clear role expectations for leaders that protect them from multiple and conflicting roles and provide them with appropriate oversight and support.

   (4) Provide model legal legislation that defines sexual contact with congregants as illegal, not just immoral. See Helge and Toben, “Sexual Misconduct of Clergypersons with Congregants or Parishioners – Civil and Criminal Liabilities and Responsibilities.”

   Visit the study web site at http://www.baylor.edu/clergysexualmisconduct/ to obtain that document.

   * The co-investigators of this study are Diana R. Garland, LCSW, Ph.D., Dean and Professor of Social Work, Baylor University; and Mark Chaves, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology, Religion, and Divinity, Duke University. The study is reported in two forthcoming articles. Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion will publish Chaves and Garland, “The Prevalence of Clergy Sexual Advances towards Adults in their Congregations”; and the journal Social Work and Christianity will publish Garland and Argueta, “How Clergy Sexual Misconduct Happens: A Qualitative Study of First-Hand Accounts.”

3. 2933
   Tim Says:
   August 9th, 2009 at 3:48 pm

   Hello Curious:
   .
   I agree completely with the advice from the lawyers I conversed with and I will continue to see to it that the crimes committed by the WCS/GBC administrators and their SZD attorney against God and his “little ones”, we parents, the volunteers, etcetera for Conspiracy of Criminal Negligence, Deception, Fraud, and Cover Ups are addressed by the criminal justice system.
   .
   The evidence is in their very own words and is very clear.
   Only people who are “criminally insane” would actually believe “before God” that it is “the right thing” to:
   lead repeat child molesters into temptation to molest again with a huge supply of trusting children/parents,
   while deliberately putting thousands of children at “risk” with those repeat child molesters,
   while deceiving and defrauding the parents about it,
   while working to cover-up those crimes.
   .
   As we are now seeing first hand, some lawyers really are under the impression that just because their playground is the court system, they believe that they can use it and abuse it to intimidate and manipulate those of us who they deliberately deceive and defraud in regard to the safety and upbringing of our children.
   The really sad (criminal?) part about it is that we hard-working taxpayers have to pay for that system that lawyers toy with by filing invalid and frivolous claims and that system is already overloaded with valid and serious cases.
   .
   Maybe Bernie Madoff should have hired SZD for his crimes of Deception and Fraud?
   Then, Bernie Madoff and his attorney(s) also could have simply claimed “Telecommunications Harassment” against those victims for asking questions about Madoff’s crimes against them and then his attorney(s) could have had those victims thrown in prison for years and fined thousands of dollars too.
   .
   The difference with Madoff and WCS/GBC/SZD though is that Madoff was not also guilty of “Criminal Negligence” etcetera.
   .
   I too am curious. When a lawyer abuses the court system by filing invalid and frivolous claims against victims in an attempt to intimidate and manipulate those victims, is that too considered lawyer misconduct?
   .
   Keep in mind that, according to the Supreme Court of Ohio, there is no statute of limitations on lawyer misconduct.
   .
   Take care,
   Tim
   P.S. Curious, I am curious, do I know you?
   You wouldn’t happen to be trying to “entrap” me too, are you?

4. 2932
   curious Says:
   August 8th, 2009 at 10:49 pm

   Tim,

   in your statement : “After discussing the issue with several lawyers weeks ago, I agree with those who say that this issue really does need to go through the criminal (not civil) justice system to be addressed properly”

   Does this mean that you are going to take this to a criminal court or is that simply the advice you were given?

5. 2931
   Tim Says:
   July 30th, 2009 at 6:45 am

   Hello PROVE IT:
   .
   Thank you for the information. The school and church are showing their true colors and desperation to silence those who they commit crimes against.
   .
   After discussing the issue with several lawyers weeks ago, I agree with those who say that this issue really does need to go through the criminal (not civil) justice system to be addressed properly.
   .
   Stay tuned as we continue to stick up for the dignity of the students and the dignity of God who NEVER EVER approves of leading repeat child molesters into temptation to molest again
   (i.e. THROW THE REPEAT CHILD MOLESTERS UNDER THE BUS),
   and then deliberately put thousands of children at “risk” with those repeat child molesters
   (i.e. THROW THE STUDENTS UNDER THE BUS WITH THE REPEAT CHILD MOLESTERS),
   and then deceive and defraud the parents about it
   (i.e. THROW THE PARENTS OVERBOARD)
   and then work to “cover it up”.
   AND then severely disrupt the business of a parent (their customer) and aggravate the harms they caused by trying to have that parent thrown into prison for simply asking questions about the crimes they committed against him and his family and literally thousands of other families.
   .
   Imagine what THAT is teaching the students on how to treat your business customers and how to conduct yourself in your personal life.
   .
   Tim

Pages: [294] 293 292 291 290 289 288 287 286 285 284 … 1 » Show All