Posted on 07/02/2008 6:31:56 PM PDT by Coleus
MORGANTON, N.C. -- A 67-year-old Burke County man is accused of molesting a 5-year-old girl. Russell Junior Hartman was arrested Tuesday and charged with two counts of taking indecent liberties with a child.
Hartman is a trustee at First Advent Christian Church in Morganton. Deputies said he was also very active in the church’s youth group. Deputies said the girl he is accused of molesting was not a church member. The victim told officers Hartman molested her several times.
Hartman was brought in for questioning Tuesday and was then charged afterward. He was put in jail under a $40,000 bond. He has a first appearance in Burke County District Court Wednesday at 9 a.m.
Deputies said the case is still under investigation. They think there could be more victims. Anyone with information that could help the investigation is asked to call the Burke County Sheriff’s Department at 828-438-5500.
.
Oh ... I can’t type my thoughts or I’d be kicked off FR!
TOTALLY DIGUSTED is putting it nicely.
A trustee of a church is a lay person who is a member of the board of trustees, a legal group that holds title to the property. It is no different than any other trustee of any other corporation.
I assume we’ll be hearing about janitors next.
I hereby title thee the Willie Green of Protestant Sex Scandals.
“Deputies said he was also very active in the church’s youth group.”
At risk of offending some quarters, this is a big red flag.
“In 1981, I did not understand (the sexual molestation of a child) to be a crime. I considered it to be a moral infraction of (a priest's) own life, and it was an offense against a child.” “I was — I felt no obligation (to report allegations of sexual molestation to the authorities) inasmuch as I was unaware of any obligation ...”
In 1981, I was in graduate school, pursuing a doctoral degree in clinical psychology in a program of high repute.
The concept of requiring therapists, priests, counselors, etc., to report child molestation was a new one, and quite controversial. I remember that my professors were quite opposed to this new requirement (not yet universally adopted, by the way, in all jurisdictions). They believed that it was wrong to criminalize the behavior, that it was highly treatable, and that putting people in jail for it wouldn't solve any problems. They were upset by the requirement to violate client-patient confidentiality.
Myself, and all the students in my class disagreed with our professors.
But we were the insurgents, the ones with the unorthodox idea, the ones who were going up against the established protocols of the field.
Thus, that people believed what this archbishop says he believed in 1981 was not at all controversial at the time. In retrospect, it seems archaic, bizarre, and plain old wrong.
Nonetheless, it was the orthodoxy prior to the late 1970s and early 1980s.
sitetest
I was in seminary in 1981 and we knew of a requirement to report. We also knew it was a crime. Whatever else it might be classified as, it is rape.
Everyone I knew in 1981 realized that rape was a crime.
and what did the hierarchy, if there is one, of Christ church, methodist, Presbyterian, etc. say back in 1981, I know today many protestant ministers perform gay marriage ceremonies and are pro-abortion.
Hi Coleus.
As I said above, I was in seminary in 1981, and there wasn’t a one of us didn’t realize that raping children was a criminal thing to do.
“I was in seminary in 1981 and we knew of a requirement to report.”
In 1981, the necessity of reporting was not universal, and was still new in many jurisdictions.
“Whatever else it might be classified as, it is rape.”
Statutory rape, always. But for better or worse, right or wrong, many people don't view statutory rape the same way that they view forcible rape.
As well, even to this day, a priest who hears the sacramental confession of someone who confesses to child molestation may not report that crime to the authorities. Or to anyone at all. We don't know how many priests informed their bishops of their misdeeds under the seal of the confessional.
sitetest
Having sex with a child has never been statuatory. It’s been actual. Statuatory implies 2 willing participants, but one illegally aged.
As well, in many states, homosexual sodomy (which is the crime that the Catholic Church dealt with overwhelmingly), when performed with a minor, was not considered statutory rape, but rather a less serious crime of indecent liberties. I remember when the laws were changed in my own state, when people learned generally that minor could be abused sexually, but if straight male-female intercourse wasn't involved, the perpetrator couldn't be charged with rape.
sitetest
In that most cases in the Catholic Church were of men having sex with adolescent boys, the issue was usually precisely one of age of consent, rather than issues of actual consent, which were often blurry.
Also, remember that the issue of consent was drawn more strictly years ago. I remember when rape laws were interpreted that if an adult victim didn't actively fight back, it was difficult to win a conviction at trial. It was in part for this reason that many victims of what we would now call rape didn't want to come forward, and many folks in the mental health field advised victims not to come forward and press for prosecution.
Remember that rape shield laws are a fairly recent legal innovation, and that prior to them, the history and general character of the victim were completely "fair game" in court for the defense to go after.
A lot has changed over the last 30 years in terms of attitudes toward rape and sexual assault, laws concerning these topics, the overall legal and social environment concerning them, and the standard beliefs of the mental health field toward how to deal both with victims and perpetrators.
I vividly remember the days when it was thought that sending a perpetrator to a rehab clinic for 30 days would fix the problem right up. Why do I remember it? Because one of the leading clinics in the nation was located in the county in which I lived. Folks who taught me at graduate school, some of the folks I went to school with, did work there.
I've also read any number of case histories where the police WERE notified, and the police asked that the local bishop handle the problem within the Church, when DAs were loathe to become involved, and judges often didn't want to touch these cases, either. In many other cases, victims absolutely didn't want to go to the authorities, but wanted money for therapy, damages, etc. The Church often willingly provided these funds. Now they're characterized as hush money, and in some cases, the payments probably were just that. But in many cases, they were an attempt on the part of both parties to come to a just settlement.
They were all wrong. THEY WERE ALL WRONG. Bishops, priests, law enforcement, judges, doctors, mental health professionals. ALL OF THEM. THEY WERE ALL WRONG.
But, to superimpose the cultural, social, professional, and legal climate of the present day on the society of 30 years ago is an anachronism.
sitetest
Did you believe at that time that child sexual molestation was a crime?
Me? 21 year-old me, who had no real background in my field, who was new to the whole thing, who didn't have 10 or 20 or 30 years of preconceived notions about the topic to affect my thoughts?
Sure! Sure I did! I already told you that I and my classmates OPPOSED the orthodoxy of our professors.
But it was an ESTABLISHED ORTHODOXY that we opposed.
What had gone before was just what I've described. The tide was changing in 1981, and largely for the better.
But my 40 and 50 and 60 year-old professors were horrified at mandatory reporting requirements. And many 40 and 50 and 60 year-old police officers, prosecutors, judges, therapists, doctors, and others ALSO thought that the best way to handle these cases was quietly, through the local bishop, with therapy at the 30-day wonder clinic. That was the environment, the climate of the previous era.
I remember, too, that the argument was that by making literally a federal case out of these instances of abuse, the victims would be harmed. That it was better for the victims to minimize the abuse, to get on with their lives, so that it wouldn't affect them too terribly much in the future.
Guess what?
THEY WERE ALL WRONG. ALL OF THEM.
But as I said, it is an anachronism to superimpose what we believe now, the cultural climate and norms that we accept today, on this earlier time. The archbishop's words are not extraordinary, unusual, or unrepresentative of what many folks believed at the time.
sitetest
“In 1981, I did not understand (the sexual molestation of a child) to be a crime. I considered it to be a moral infraction of (a priest’s) own life, and it was an offense against a child.” “I was — I felt no obligation (to report allegations of sexual molestation to the authorities) inasmuch as I was unaware of any obligation ...”
In 1981 (and all thru the 70s) I was a Truant Officer for a very large school district. It was mandatory to report such things. The first agency I would contact was the PD or SO for a Juvenile Officer to meet me on sight and then called CPS for a social worker. They wasted no time in getting there!
What a truant officer (or a teacher or a police officer) may have been obligated to report may have been different from what a psychologist or other certified psychotherapist was obligated to report, at different times in different jurisdictions. Truant officers, teachers, police officers, etc., owe no obligation of confidentiality toward adults who may be suspected of child molestation. On the other hand, psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, other sorts of psychotherapists, and clergy traditionally have an obligation of confidentiality to patients/clients/congregants.
This is why this was so controversial when the issue was addressed to us.
And even today, a priest who hears the confession of a molestor (and a bishop is a priest) may NOT report the contents of the confession to the authorities.
As well, even though the law may have required one thing in some places at some times, in many cases police, prosecutors, etc., looked the other way, and tried to arrange for matters to be handled privately.
sitetest
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.