Murder charges for fundie parents

[BravaAmica]

The Williams' are out on bail.

I'll bet their church paid it.

And I seriously hope I never, ever run into them around here. I would seriously go off on them and probably end up arrested myself.

[Austin]

I don't agree with the prosecutor saying that this case has nothing to do with religion. Yes, the Williams are evil people, but TTUAC seemed to have played a part, and has been mentioned in the arrest affidavit and in numerous media sources. I get what his concerns are, but children will just keep dying if the truth about TTUAC doesn't get out. Lydia Schatz's prosecutor had a real handle on this, and although he couldn't charge the Pearls with anything, it brought them negative publicity. And the Schatzes were convicted, so just because a religious element is admitted by the prosecution doesn't mean that a jury will allow the parents to excuse their actions because of religious views.

[BravaAmica]

I don't agree with the prosecutor saying that this case has nothing to do with religion. Yes, the Williams are evil people, but TTUAC seemed to have played a part, and has been mentioned in the arrest affidavit and in numerous media sources. I get what his concerns are, but children will just keep dying if the truth about TTUAC doesn't get out. Lydia Schatz's prosecutor had a real handle on this, and although he couldn't charge the Pearls with anything, it brought them negative publicity. And the Schatzes were convicted, so just because a religious element is admitted by the prosecution doesn't mean that a jury will allow the parents to excuse their actions because of religious views.

The prosecutor probably doesn't have any concrete evidence tying their religion with Hana's death. Also, Skagit County is very conservative so he or she may want to stick to the facts of their treatment of Hana so as not to piss off the potential jurors.

I was quite surprised at how conservative it is up there, it being so close to the liberal heaven that is Seattle. Many of the families home school (a greater proportion than other counties in the region from what I recall) and there are a LOT of conservative, evangelical churches.

(Side note: We were looking to move to Skagit County (it's close to my husband's job) and decided not to since it is super conservative. All the preschools except one were out of churches and the schools were not very good. I looked around at some neighborhoods- gorgeous cottages, well kept neighborhoods populated by some of the most evangelical, vocal Christians I've encountered since I moved out of the South.)

[Austin]

The prosecutor probably doesn't have any concrete evidence tying their religion with Hana's death. Also, Skagit County is very conservative so he or she may want to stick to the facts of their treatment of Hana so as not to piss off the potential jurors.

I was quite surprised at how conservative it is up there, it being so close to the liberal heaven that is Seattle. Many of the families home school (a greater proportion than other counties in the region from what I recall) and there are a LOT of conservative, evangelical churches.

(Side note: We were looking to move to Skagit County (it's close to my husband's job) and decided not to since it is super conservative. All the preschools except one were out of churches and the schools were not very good. I looked around at some neighborhoods- gorgeous cottages, well kept neighborhoods populated by some of the most evangelical, vocal Christians I've encountered since I moved out of the South.)

Yes, I get that he doesn't have direct evidence. The Schatz prosecutor didn't have that either, but he didn't deny outright that there was no religious overtones to the case. Clearly there were and he has said as much. I'm not saying he can use it as a piece of evidence in the actual case, but he doesn't have to say 'it has nothing to do with religion". That's just what the Pearls are counting on.

[Kitty]

This case is on the blog Bad Breeders. If Bad Breeders has heard about it, I have a feeling this will start showing up more and more in mainstream media.

[starfish]

I don't like the sound of that potential jury pool in Skagit County.

[BravaAmica]

I don't like the sound of that potential jury pool in Skagit County.

Yeah, there's not much to recommend Skagit County. It's gorgeous and fertile but that's about it.

[Lillybee]

I think that had the Schatz case went to trial instead of being plea bargained, DA Ramsey would have brought up the Pearl's book.

[chaotic life]

It was my understanding from a former-Fundie breakaway academic who investigated the Schatz case that Michael Pearl had been personally in communication with the Schatz over the course of Lydia's "training sessions." That apparently was insufficient to see him charged. This case has the smell of Elizabeth Krueger as well. I had a friend who watches these so-called gurus ask me to look into the link. Its been years since Elizabeth was trolling online message boards as "Thalia" and "encouraging" parents to beat their children to drum up an audience for her (then future) book. However, I do see why my friend invokes her name in this case.

Adoption is not for the faint of heart. Its absolutely NOT for those looking to rescue an orphan. You do NOT bring the teachings of punitive Fundie parenting gurus into parenting these children. Parenitng hurting children means being exposed to their pain. As a mother, you have to carry their pain at a point when you have not yet fully integrated your heart to theirs. If you bring punitive parenting methods into the equation, it will not only put a block in the way of that integration, but it will put the very life and safety of the child in jeopardy.

The reality is that hurting adoptees are going to be "rebellious." Yes, they are going to deliberately disobey, and far more often inadvertantly disobey. They need to see that you love them unconditionally no matter how hard or how often they test that love. They need to see by testing you, by deliberately pushing your buttons and seeing that you return love and safety, regardless of what they throw at your. Its their JOB to test you, to not trust you and to definitely not believe you love them and will protect them. As the parent, its your job to prove that belief WRONG--everytime they throw it at you, in every form they throw it. Maybe they will never believe the terror isn't coming. Maybe they are too scared and too hurt to overcome it. Its not your job to force them to trust. Its your job to remain trusthworthy and give them the chance to heal, at all costs.

If you utilize any of these punitive parenting paradigms, especially the adveserial concepts of parent against child, you create the problems you claim to loathe, and you pin the blame for the mess you have created on these children far too hurt and vunerable to fight off these accusations.

I know this far too well from personal experience. I have tremendous sympathy for an adoptive mother who feels unattached to her children via adoption, and who feels completely at the end of her rope. Feelings do not make you an abuser and are completely normal. I have absolutely NO sympathy nor room for grace for the mother who allows those feelings to guide her actions and damages her children worse by being unable to parent appropriately, regardless of what feelings swirl in her heart and head.

[Lillybee]

Your first paragraph has really freaked me out. I had no idea that there was a connection aside from the Pearl's book. I wish there was a way that the Pearl's could be held accountable. Could the Schatzs have taken the plea deal to protect the Pearls?

[hoipolloi]

Since the Schatzes have been sentenced, is it possible to access the court documents now, to see whether or how the Pearls & their filth are part of the case documents or other evidence?

[julie paradox]

Oh, Michael Pearl is so frustrating. Consider this, posted earlier in the thread:

Read and reread the following statement: You must meet all the social, emotional, intellectual and spiritual needs of your children before they are tempted. It is dangerous to allow a child who needs affirmation of his worth to be tempted. The temptation may offer fulfillment of that need. You cannot let a child face temptation who feels the need for companionship and approval. You cannot let a child face temptation who feels intellectually deprived of a rudimentary knowledge of sex. He will receive information from anyone who offers it.

You cannot let a vacuum of companionship and approval develop in your children’s lives. If you do, they will be willing at the first opportunity to lower their standards to gain the approval and acceptance necessary to be part of a social order. Further, if they don’t have good friends who are good, they will make good friends of the bad boys and girls that enter their circle of acquaintances.

If only they'd put as much effort into publicising that message as the plumbing line!

(Of course, he then spoils it slightly by the next bit: I have noticed in our own church, when visitors come with their young teenage kids, the discontent and rebellious among them will always locate one particular teenager among our own who is equally unhappy. A kid exuding darkness will walk into a room, survey it, and immediately be drawn to like spirits. It will happen every time. In five minutes you will see them standing off on their own, talking quietly. Either kid would be angry if you tried to monitor his social life, for they can only find kinship in unapproved darkness. - but even then, it's pushing for the parent to be involved in the child's happiness.)

[chaotic life]

I'm not at liberty to say who my friend is. However, she spoke directly to someone involved in investigating the Schatz case before she told me there were apparently numerous email exchanges between Michael Pearl and the Schatz parents while they were disciplining Lydia. I'm not aware that this was public knowledge, but I know my friend and I know her trustworthiness, as well as her involvement in trying to stop these horrific cases. Obviously, you can't trust the word of a stranger online, but I trust the word of my friend.

I know Lyn Paddock's trial did bring the Pearls into the mix. I think that unfortunately, prosecutors haven't yet found a way TO connect the Pearls to this stuff. I'm afraid that part of the problem is that you only get the chance after a child DIES, and then prosecutors are too busy trying to make sure that the parents who truly did kill their child gets found guilty that they are afraid to muddy the waters by going after the Pearls in another state as well.

[persuaded]

It was my understanding from a former-Fundie breakaway academic who investigated the Schatz case that Michael Pearl had been personally in communication with the Schatz over the course of Lydia's "training sessions." That apparently was insufficient to see him charged. This case has the smell of Elizabeth Krueger as well. I had a friend who watches these so-called gurus ask me to look into the link. Its been years since Elizabeth was trolling online message boards as "Thalia" and "encouraging" parents to beat their children to drum up an audience for her (then future) book. However, I do see why my friend invokes her name in this case.

Adoption is not for the faint of heart. Its absolutely NOT for those looking to rescue an orphan. You do NOT bring the teachings of punitive Fundie parenting gurus into parenting these children. Parenitng hurting children means being exposed to their pain. As a mother, you have to carry their pain at a point when you have not yet fully integrated your heart to theirs. If you bring punitive parenting methods into the equation, it will not only put a block in the way of that integration, but it will put the very life and safety of the child in jeopardy.

The reality is that hurting adoptees are going to be "rebellious." Yes, they are going to deliberately disobey, and far more often inadvertantly disobey. They need to see that you love them unconditionally no matter how hard or how often they test that love. They need to see by testing you, by deliberately pushing your buttons and seeing that you return love and safety, regardless of what they throw at your. Its their JOB to test you, to not trust you and to definitely not believe you love them and will protect them. As the parent, its your job to prove that belief WRONG--everytime they throw it at you, in every form they throw it. Maybe they will never believe the terror isn't coming. Maybe they are too scared and too hurt to overcome it. Its not your job to force them to trust. Its your job to remain trusthworthy and give them the chance to heal, at all costs.

If you utilize any of these punitive parenting paradigms, especially the adveserial concepts of parent against child, you create the problems you claim to loathe, and you pin the blame for the mess you have created on these children far too hurt and vunerable to fight off these accusations.

I know this far too well from personal experience. I have tremendous sympathy for an adoptive mother who feels unattached to her children via adoption, and who feels completely at the end of her rope. Feelings do not make you an abuser and are completely normal. I have absolutely NO sympathy nor room for grace for the mother who allows those feelings to guide her actions and damages her children worse by being unable to parent appropriately, regardless of what feelings swirl in her heart and head.

Good stuff this.

[hoipolloi]

I'm not at liberty to say who my friend is. However, she spoke directly to someone involved in investigating the Schatz case before she told me there were apparently numerous email exchanges between Michael Pearl and the Schatz parents while they were disciplining Lydia. I'm not aware that this was public knowledge, but I know my friend and I know her trustworthiness, as well as her involvement in trying to stop these horrific cases.

This is dismaying to read. It seems then that short of documenting the Pearls actually wielding the rod themselves on these children, there may not be a way to charge them as accessories in any of these cases. Probably the most that could be done would be to subpoena them as witnesses or something.

[VeraAnne]

It's such a tough thing to prosecute because the call to action has to be direct. You can even vaguely talk about how you would kill a person in a given situation, but as long as you don't say "Kill Tom" you can't be prosecuted. So unless the Pearls said specifically "beat Lydia to the point of death, if necessary" I doubt that a conviction would hold up.

I'm a fan of the 1st amendment, but I think that the "call to violence" idea needs a bit of expansion.

[Austin]

I don't think they will ever be prosecuted. As so many others have noted, they have a first amendment right to publish whatever shit they want. I think we (meaning all the people who realize what an evil book TTUAC is and what evil people the Pearls are) need to continue and ramp up our efforts to educate others and just do everything we can to discredit the Pearls. That's why I was happy the Schatz prosecutor was honest about the Pearls' book's influence in that situation. Speaking out against a religious "philosophy" is touchy for a public official, especially if it is a Christian religious philosophy, and I appreciate that he did that.

It may be that the Pearls did not have quite as much influence on the Williams, or that the scope of that influence is yet to be determined, so it's possible we could still hear law enforcement or child protective services speak out against it, perhaps after it is adjudicated.

[hoipolloi]

I am relieved that nearly every news account I've read so far of Hanna Williams' murder does mention the Pearls and/or TTUAC.

ITA that we & others need to continue if not step up the campaign to educate the public about NGJ. In addition to the good work that many Christians have undertaken, the momentum started by AC360 in the mainstream needs to be maintained & increased.