I certainly won't forget. The good I learned did not offset the bad, and that was why I left. August 8 holds a happier meaning for me...today is my daughter's birthday!
While lengthy, for anyone who loves the truth—for anyone who never wants to forget what this man really was and what this church really is—this is worth reading in its entirety.
::: A transcription of the transcripts...Closing Argument by the prosecution in Illinois vs. Lloyd R. Davis, July 10, 1992 :::
I decided not to place any additional emphasis on any of the text here. I'll let the reader decide for his or herself what is or is not significant.May it please this most Honorable Court, Mr. Chancey, Mr. Pleasant, Mr. Will, Mr. Briscoe.
Judge, before I begin, the People would thank the Court in what's been characterized as a fairly simple trial from the standpoint of the facts and for the Court's professionalism and diligence and accommodations that extended to both the People and the Defense. Your accommodations have been second to none. The People appreciate it and thank you for that.
Joe Bryan, Judge, told us in his testimony that he had a dream. And the dream that Joe Bryan had had to do with a beautiful plant. He said that his dream drew a parallel between a beautiful plant and the Christian Fellowship Church how on the outside it was extremely beautiful but upon looking inside that plant was rotten to the core just as Christian Fellowship Church is rotten to the core.
This case is not about sexual intercourse, it's not about the fact that the Defendant loves to have sex with 14 year old boys. This case is not about the fact that the Defendant loves to place his mouth on the penis of 14 year old boys. It's not about the fact that the Defendant loves to commit acts of masturbation with 14 year old boys. This case is about misplaced trust.
The fact is that persons, particularly persons who gravitated to the Christian Fellowship Church had a thirst. The thirst that they had, the thirst for knowledge of God and thirst for religion. They trusted the Defendant. All of the witnesses told us that. They saw him as a hope. They saw him as a prophet, a man who could predict the future. They saw him as a bishop and they saw him as a man of God. Alphonso Castillo's word, "A man of God."
These people had no desire that the person that they were turning to was a person with this kind of background. They didn't know that this Defendant, this self-professed bishop, this man who then had a business which he self-appointed as a church, a man who professes churches is and professes himself as a bishop and professes persons to be ministers in the church with the same ease and casualness that you and I would select a brand of chewing gum out of a vending machine.
You certainly know, Judge, that there are absolutely no credentials that you need to minister in the church. Certainly no credentials that you need to be a bishop of this church. You declare yourself a bishop, you call yourself a church and then you ask for your people to follow you. That's about this Defendant.
Defendant's a con man, Judge. And the misplaced trust that the persons had in this Defendant wouldn't be any more clear then misplaced trust that Alphonso Castillo had in this self-professed bishop.
Castillo told us that he was in fact born on June 24, 1974. He told us that in June or July of 1987 that he was working as a salesperson on Revoluction Avenue in Tijuana, Mexico. He told us how he was first approached by some members of the Christian Fellowship Church. He mentioned Scott Morehouse, he mentioned Chuck Thompson, and he mentioned at some point he also met the Defendant. And in fact had lunch with members of the church at one point.
He testified as to how they came to be friendly to him. They seemed to be sincere. In how he developed a trust in them. Developed a trust not only in Scott Morehouse who would eventually baptize him, but develop a trust in this self-professed bishop.
He eventually, Judge, lived at the church owned home on Ocean Avenue or Oceanview Avenue in San Diego. He then was enrolled in a school to which he went. And he in the summertime of 1988 at the Defendant's request, he was then flown up to Chicago.
Scott Morehouse talked about how the relationship between the Defendant and Castillo had thrived and how it had developed. What he told us was that wherever the Defendant and Castillo was, the Defendant wished to have Castillo with him.
He talked about how the times they would be in the corners of rooms speaking by themselves. He spoke about whenever they were eating dinner or eating a meal that the Defendant would have somebody vacate a chair or the Defendant would have another chair pulled up so that Castillo could sit next to him.
Morehouse was specific as to that relationship. He was specific as to – Alphonso Castillo was specific as to the relationship.
People's Group Exhibit 25, as your Honor has seen, shows the airline tickets that had been purchased by the church at the Defendant's direction. Airline tickets that flew Alphonso Castillo to Chicago. The tickets that flew them, Alphonso Castillo and the Defendant, to Norfolk, Virginia. And the tickets that eventually sent Alphonso Castillo upon his arrival back to Chicago. Eventually sent him back to San Diego on September 12 in 1988.
Documentation that what Castillo says is in fact what happened. Castillo tells us that as the relationship developed and flourished that in fact he eventually was asked and approached to have sex in two different locations. The location of the People's Exhibit 10 being the Christian Fellowship Church on Belvidere Street. People's Exhibit 11 being the so-called national headquarters of this business known as the Christian Fellowship Church.
Alphonso talked about the approaches that the Defendant would make towards him. He told us on how the Defendant would grab his leg. He talked about the comments and the conversation that the Defendant would have with him.
The fact that the Defendant would state that masturbation is not a sin, that it prevents one from committing adultery and fornication. That homosexuality or love between men is not a sin, that it is not wrong. That it is only wrong if the two males having sex with one another hold lust or love in their hearts for the other.
They talked about the catch phrases the Defendant would use when he wanted sex. I'll get you in the tail. I'll get you. I'll get ya. Are you going to be able to put up with me? I'd like to stick it in you. How he'd say God forgive me after some of the acts, sexual acts that they would have together.
He would say how the Defendant would say puttin' it in or getting' off. Or stick it in. He talked about how at points when Alphonso was considering leaving the church that the Defendant would threaten him. He told him that he would go to hell. At one point he told Alphonso that he would die within two weeks. He would tell Alphonso that you are to obey you pastor or you will perish.
And at one point he told Alphonso and perhaps it was a 14 year old boy, one of the most emotional threats, he said to him as he closed his eyes, the Defendant said I pray to God that he takes you off of this earth.
Alphonso told us about the types of things the Defendant loved to use. How he loved to go into his desk drawer at the O'Plaine office and at the Belvidere office and get out this Vaseline in a pump type container in order to rub it on Alphonso's penis before sexual intercourse, before anal intercourse. How after these acts that the Defendant would take paper towels that would come also out of this desk drawer and wipe himself off with it.
And Alphonso also told us about a further hygiene technique that the Defendant would use. He would pull out a small vial and he would drop some drops out of that vial onto his penis so that he could cleanse himself after anal sex. Alphonso told us about the pillows that would be used and he told us about the fact that condoms were never used.
He told us about how the Defendant wore a wig. He had false teeth. He always wore white briefs. He was uncircumcised. He had gray pubic hair. He had a rash at times around his groin area. He had spots on his legs. And Alphonso stated that the Defendant had a wrinkled knee.
And Alphonso told us about all of the acts that occurred, not only the sexual acts with the Defendant but there is another desire that the Defendant has, a desire that the Defendant would have his playmates, his members of the congregation carry out. And that is he would direct, he fancies himself the director of orgies. Alphonso said at one point in testimony seven people in the room where Defendant would direct people. You have sex with him. You do this to him. You do this to him.
Which are the basis of the child pornography counts. The Defendant was acting. He was preparing these live presentations and live sex acts between individuals.
The credibility of Alphonso Castillo cannot be questioned. Consider two things.
Consider how he said what he said and what he said. You recall that when Alphonso both on direct and cross examination was testifying that at points he would turn to you, your Honor, and say your Honor, you remember in the O'Plaine office there's a big map on the wall and you remember there is a chair that faces the wall, that faces that map. He was intent on making sure that your Honor understood what had happened.
Mr. Will cross-examined Alphonso Castillo from 4 o'clock in the afternoon that Monday until 4 o'clock in the afternoon, Tuesday afternoon. One full day.
Not once was Alphonso Castillo impeached with a prior inconsistent statement. Not once. When Mr. Will would question him, the Defendant strike that. Alphonso Castillo at times would correct Mr. Will because Mr. Will didn't – had perhaps phrased the question poorly and corrected Mr. Will. And in fact, told Mr. Will where he was mistaken in his questioning and then continued again to consistently explain the facts that occurred, the approaching that he suffered, the things and the aids that were used to carry out these acts.
Also consider from the credibility standpoint of Alphonso Castillo that at one point during his testimony he was asked about acts of anal intercourse of David Armstrong. Now if Alphonso Castillo was the young con man that the Defendant paints him to be, he easily could have said oh, yes, there are acts of the anal intercourse with David Armstrong, he put his penis in my anus, I put my penis in his anus.
But Alphonso understand because he says you know, I have been thinking about that and in fact those acts of anal intercourse to Armstrong occurred here in San Diego, they didn't occur here in Illinois therefore I can't say that.
If this is the young conniver that they say he is, he would have been willing to smear every – would have been able to say and would have said that all of these acts occurred here in Lake County Illinois.
Next Alphonso testifies to these two letters, one characterize threatening letter from Cesar Lopez. As he recounting the letter the last portion of the one letter it talked about Alphonso could get burned or Cesar could get burned. That would have been an opportunity orally to state that that term burn was another threat that was made against Alphonso. But that's not what he said.
Alphonso said that the term burn meant showing off. Somehow they were going to have a chance to perhaps play drums and show off as to their skills. Alphonso didn't jump on every opportunity to smear somebody. He told the truth. There was no question about it. You listen to what he said. You watch his demeanor on the stand. He told the truth. Without a question. He told the truth.
Now Defense has been running around talking about these two letters that Alphonso allegedly wrote. Defense Exhibit 2, Defense Exhibit 3 which corresponds to People Exhibit's 23 and 27.
It is suggested, it is outright said that Alphonso Castillo wrote these letters, it was his own decision, he wasn't told what to say. That he simply was coming in and dictating two supposed letters for God knows what reason to somebody who was typing as Alphonso spoke.
Now I have stated this before, it was stated in the direct testimony of Castillo and I would state it again without reading them, the topic or the address, the date, the name, the entire format of letter is exactly the same. To whom it may concern is exactly the same.
And the first paragraph where it states that I am Alphonso Castillo that I am writing this letter because I want to and no one is forcing me because I have heard people say wrong things about the church, word for word they are identical on both letters.
We are supposed to believe that this 14 year old young Hispanic boy, this 14 year old young impressionable gullible Hispanic boy is going to write letters prefacing in his first paragraph that he is making these statements up of his own free will, that there is no force or coercion used against him. And by the way the church is not a bunch of homosexuals.
I have stated this before: Can you imagine for the purpose of argument if a person was a member of a Catholic church and decided that they were no longer going to attend the church or that they were going to be Lutheran, Episcopal, or some other denomination, can you imagine a priest approaching that person and saying oh, by the way, before you leave sit down and write out a letter saying that we are not a bunch of homos. It is by definition ridiculous. It is absolutely absurd.
Next, the Defense talked about this audio tape that Alphonso made along with four or five other male individuals. And in that audio tape we hear Dan Lantis first of all start it off. Oh, Dan Lantis from the San Diego church starts the ball rolling. He says there is bad things being said about the church and we don't appreciate it. And I am going to give a statement along with these others.
It is uncoerced, I am doing this of my own free will. And by the way, we are not a bunch of homosexuals. And then the next four or five young men say the same thing.
When you listen to that tape I know you have – you compare that tape with those letters. The same common threads run through all of them. I am doing this of my own free will. I am not being coerced or forced to do this. The church does not have any homosexual activity. It's absurd.
I suggest that this 14 year old boy is coming up with these items out of the clear blue before there has ever been any criminal charges against this self-professed bishop, before there had ever been – after Prime Time on ABC network television.
However, before that point, before there is any allegations what the church is doing, they are getting together and putting Alphonso Castillo in with four or five other individuals.
Why? Well, we know why. Because Alphonso Castillo was being sexually abused by the Defendant. That's why, they were trying to get their evidence together just for things like this. For trials and allegations and people who might at some point come to grips with themselves. Remove themselves from the spell, if you will, of this Defendant and in fact to go forward to the authorities as Alphonso did, as Cesar did, as Jesse Escabar did and tell the truth about what had happened.
As to this civil suit, Mr. Briscoe in the opening statements says, Judge, there will be 2.2 thousand reasons if Alphonso Castillo's making up these charges suggesting that the amount of the suit dollar figure wise is sole motivation of Alphonso Castillo.
I have three responses to that. First of all, if Alphonso is solely in this for the money, why didn't he sue immediately as soon as he had spoken to people about taking the church for money?
If Alphonso is so young, if he is such this – this advanced planner that the Defense tells us he is, why didn't he wait until after the criminal case in order to sue L.R. Davis?
And you will recall that in fact it was his uncle provided the idea and the phone calls to arrange this civil suit, not Alphonso Castillo, but his uncle.
And I would lastly remind the Court that you will recall on cross-examination when Mr. Will was crossing as to this civil suit Alphonso at one point – and again the words of an honest victim, certainly not a conniver – said look, if you think that this is about money, it's not. I would dismiss this suit right now if you think that this case is about money.
This case is not about money. It's about a fraud. This fraud.
As to the other acts evidence, Judge, I would submit to the Court that not only would this be admissible in order to show a common scheme and the other know propensity related reasons to put this evidence but that the Defense suggesting that there is conspiracy also makes this evidence relevant as well.
Without getting into every other act witness, suffice it to say that Gerald Adams, Joe Bryan, Julius Gruber, Scott Morehouse, Ed O'Claire, Howard Ross, Randall Sorenson, Rick Sorenson, and Bill Decker all corroborate what Alphonso Castillo says.
They corroborate him as to the threats that they would get if they left the church, as to the kissing, fondling, and patting and hugging. The fact that the Defendant for some unknown, a reason that we have grown to know during the course of this trial, loves to have many of his victims kneel on a chair and put his hands on the back of the chair. It appears through the testimony that this makes it easier once the Defendant greases up these young – it makes it easier. Easier access for the Defendant to put this penis of his into the anus of these young people now kneeling and exposed to the Defendant.
You have told us about his terms, the catch phrases that he would use. His homosexuality speech, his masturbation speech. Some told us about his hygiene. Some told us almost all folds. Pillows, the lotions, the towels. Three told us about his rashes other than Castillo.
Remember Gerald Adams talked about how this rash was not there all of the time. He recalls that this came quickly and after two or three weeks it would go away which I anticipate the Defense is going to say not all the witnesses saw the rash. Well, there is an explanation for that because it wasn't always there.
These individuals, Judge, had no motive to lie. Most of those people didn't even know each other. Now the Defense blames a conspiracy and briefly they told us in their opening statement that Scott Morehouse is intelligent and that he was the driving force of the church. Power and to take over the Christian Fellowship Church.
And the evidence does not support that. And in fact as trial went on, suddenly we saw the cause now shift away from Scott Morehouse and suddenly shift to a woman by the name of Cecelia Fergosa. She was the woman who owned the building in Mexico that appears the church was renting or using. And for some unknown reason certainly a reason that hadn't been established by any testimony, for some unknown reason she suddenly develops this hatred, this unexplained despising of L.R. Davis
She tells supposedly Alphonso Castillo, Lopez and Escabar that they can get money out of him. There is no discussion how they are going to get money out of the church. No. Where money comes from. No.
Adams, Bryan, Gruber, Morehouse, O'Claire, Ross, Sorenson brothers, and Decker, certainly they weren't – certainly they weren't privy to orchestrate Alphonso Castillo. In fact, she doesn't tell them – give them any specifics about what to say in these rape allegations.
She talks about what they should say in fact acts of oral sex, that they had been raped at the church, but no other specifics other than that. There is no discussion even how Cecelia Fergosa is going to benefit if she is so in hate with this Defendant yet she is telling people to do things where in fact she isn't even going to benefit according to the testimony.
The Defense claims that these newspaper articles that had been seen by different witnesses or allegedly seen by different witness in fact helped the witnesses put together their common story about what had happened. Well, most of these witnesses didn't see these articles.
One, for instance, Rick Sorenson had seen one or two of the articles. But even if they had seen every one of these articles and during evidence in Defense Group Exhibit No. 5, there is no details in it. There is no details about chairs, lotion, towels. Nothing.
Defense claims that the witnesses want to conspire to gain power from the Christian Fellowship Church. Well, consider this: Gerald Adams is either a mortician or assistant mortician. Julius Gruber deals in stereo components and putting stereo units in cars. Scott Morehouse worked or works for a lumber company. Howard Ross is a banker. Randal Sorenson works for public service. Bill Decker works for Chrysler. And Rick Sorenson, Ed O'Claire and Joy Bryan are involved in absolutely no church related activities.
All of them said on direct examination and cross examination they weren't in this for money, for power, to start their own church. Nothing. Again, no evidence to support this conspiracy.
Only way the Defense tries to bootstrap in the conspiracy theory is through Cesar Lopez, a State's witness, a victim in the indictment. And Jesse Escabar.
Cesar Lopez in his statements to Chumbley of Immigration, to Chula Vista Police Department, to Mark Pleasant, to Art Walker and to myself as we stood in the parking lot in Tijuana, Mexico a year and a half ago in fact were all consistent.
The video that is in evidence and the written statements, signed written statements which were signed on November 23, 1991 were all in evidence. And I would remind the Judge again, as I know I do not have to, that these are substantive evidence, substantive evidence of guilt. Not simply impeachment to show prior inconsistent statement, but evidence to convict this Defendant.
The statements are detailed. They are consistent. And they could only come from somebody who had experienced what Cesar Lopez had experienced. Your Honor correctly mentioned during your ruling on the motion for directed verdict – and I re-reviewed the tape after that motion for directed verdict – and your Honor correctly pointed out about some intangibles that were in the Cesar Lopez taped statement that can't hide and you can't hide about.
It might be able to try to carry on a story which later get tripped up and carry out a story about how things happen. But there is something that most people unless they are very good actors cannot hide. That is demeanor.
You stated earlier and correctly as to the embarrassment Cesar Lopez had felt, the true embarrassment that he felt on tape as he was being asked to describe his ass. He also stated about his embarrassment and inability to explain or talk about the penis. He couldn't even come up with the words or say the word that he would use for penis.
Now, he then recanted his statements. You recall that when he recanted he didn't recant to Wayne Chumbley of Immigration or Chula Vista Police Department or Pleasant or Walker of myself. In fact, he went after going back with the church and then recanted on tape for the church.
He states now in his recantation they got these details because of the articles that he had read. Well, as I stated before, these articles had none of the details which he and Alphonso and others testified to.
He states that Cecelia Fergosa is the basis for many of the details. Well, you heard the testimony, the disjointed lying testimony of the recantations of Lopez and Escabar about what she has said. She gave somebody absolutely no detail to them and then is there further question you recall on redirect by Mr. Chancey of Lopez and on cross-examination of Escabar by myself that they can't even keep the testimony straight two minutes apart.
They both stated Cecelia talked about how claims of rape at the church and acts of oral intercourse and then essentially they said that's it – that's all she told us.
Then they are asked whether talks of the masturbation, homosexuality, chairs, lotions, to some of those responses they would say oh, yes, she would go into that too. They couldn't keep their stories straight.
Only one time consistent talk about how they had been abused by the Defendant. Further recall individual by the name of Jose Luis, L-U-I-S, had stated to Lopez watch where you walk in relation to the allegations he was making against the church.
Now Lopez goes on the stand and he tells us he was just going told you will lie against the church and you will get to church to agree with that.
That's not what he being said it where he was being threatened other allegations he made against the church.
As to the letters you see against the two letters in evidence from Lopez and Castillo, one of them threatening Castillo that he will go to jail. You recall in someone letter Lopez waited for three to three and a half hours for Castillo to return. He was working at the direction of the church.
You're supposed to believe that Lopez' testimony, Castillo's testimony just happens to match with the other acts witnesses, happens to be a tremendous and for this bishop and unfortunate coincidence. And that is manifesting nonsense as well.
Jesse Escabar testifies. Jesse Escabar gave a taped statement to Chumbley which you have in evidence and you have the American translation as well.
He also spoke to the San Diego DA's office. And you heard in testimony spoke to myself in Tijuana as well. Always did he stay consistent and always was he believable. His demeanor and what he said was believable.
I think it's interesting to know that in his recantation he claims at one point though his testimony could never remain consistent throughout. He claims at one point that Cecelia Fergosa had told him of the use of the chair, of lotion, of those types of things. He said specifically remember that.
But when he specifically asked about those things on that taped statement, he said they didn't occur. Well, if he was in this business to try to smear this bishop, why in fact didn't he recall that Cecelia mentioned the chairs and lotions and state yes, the chairs were used, lotions are used. He denied it on that tape.
Next he didn't go to the authorities.
Escabar cannot claim that he was so scared that he did want to go to the authorities. How do we know that? Well, he walked into this courtroom in America, he took an oath to tell the truth and he took that stand. He can't understand to clear was what drove him to only go to church and give his video tape. It's fear and fact was non-commitment.
When he gave his taped statement there was an interesting fact that we learned on cross-examination. The church was involved in that tape. There was a church member who had the video tape set up. At least set up when he got there. It was set up on a tripod and a church member was the one operating that tape machine. Church cannot claim that they had no hand in this recantation because the church member was there filming it.
For you to find this Defendant not guilty, you would have to say that there has been a conspiracy. No, there has been none established. And that Castillo and Lopez are liars. And that in itself would be an absurdity.
Judge, just briefly as I draw near the conclusion, let me state this: That the Defense put on a number of witnesses. All church members clearly all having a financial interest in the church and financial interest with the bishop.
And in fact we have a number of them including Debbie Paine, his daughter. Pete Paine his son-in-law. Pam Davis Thomas. In fact his daughter who has a husband and Ed Thomas who's the pastor of the Norfolk church.
We have Peter Paine, pastor of the Lake County church here. We have Pete and Thomas, both vice president of the church. In other words sons-in-law, both vice president of the church. In fact, they get all of their money through the church, their salaries, their cars, their residences, their food, the threads they have on their back, all from the church have that as the bias that they and the rest of these witnesses have to determine how credible they are.
The credibility they would have and they would have to see that this bishop goes unconvicted because he should be convicted, though, Paine could become general pastor of the church should he be convicted. Church falls apart or at least in their minds, I am convicted the church falls apart.
Chuck Thomas corroborates the cushion and the facts that it's kept in the closet.
Marty Sellers who in facts talks about oh, the people weren't scripted used the word scripted. Also, lies told as to what to say on the tape though I say that recalls also his interest in the case.
I stated earlier Castillo happens to be one of the persons who's on that state clearly because he was a victim of sexual abuse and the Defendant.
Also I mentioned Debbie Paine a while ago recalling that he – for Bill Decker. Debbie Paine....
[Pages 2097 and 2098 of the transcripts missing]
....in fact this is not a case of sexual anal, oral intercourse with 14, 16 year old boys, but in fact this is a case of misplaced trust. Unfortunately Lopez and Castillo misplaced their trust in a fraud and in a [??] a man who they saw as a bishop.
Certainly young men, they had no idea that he had pronounced himself a bishop. They had no idea that this business Christian Fellowship Incorporated in fact was a self-appointed church.
We can't blame the victim, victims for not knowing know opportunity [???]. Develops churches is and professed is himself to be bishop shops but in fact it is a misplaced trust. Their testimony. Their statements. Their continue help that they were involved and our situation of the misplaced trust.
And so, Judge, I ask this Court to consider my argument, to consider all of the evidence and testimony that you heard, the tape, the photograph, the letter, this church constitution which was in evidence that show that not only was Davis the president and general pastor of this corporation, but in the beginning his wife herself was the treasurer. And how now the Defendant and this [??] relationship.
Church [???] in fact has Peter Paine vice president son-in-law. Frank Thomas advice present son-in-law including Rick Hahn present during the trial.
Consider all that evidence, Judge. And without question I say this with every bit of energy that I can muster, these gentlemen are telling the truth. These young men. This Defendant is guilty and that I ask that he be found guilty on each and every count, too.
Jeffrey Pavletic, Pages 2071-2100
To Ed Thomas:
There's a lot of good material here for your "Sexual Sin" series. Also, you should start a new series of sermons on "Misplaced Trust." For once, feed your flock with the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
And one more thing. Cancel Founders Day once and for all.
Just like your founder was cancelled.
Last edited by onetime; 08-08-2010 at 05:16 PM. Reason: Yours for a better world
I certainly won't forget. The good I learned did not offset the bad, and that was why I left. August 8 holds a happier meaning for me...today is my daughter's birthday!
Last edited by John Cady; 08-08-2010 at 09:16 PM. Reason: My children will never have to endure what I did...thank you Jesus
Last edited by onetime; 08-09-2010 at 04:03 AM. Reason: They're burnt toast
I think it's canceled this year. Praise God!
--God is Love--
This past Monday, my daughter turned 2. I received videos and photos of the event (her mother and I are currently separated). All I could think about was how much I miss my kids; I did get to talk to her over the phone, and she was very happy to hear from her dad.
L.R. Davis never even crossed my mind. I am glad this date has a happier event in place.
Peter and Li’l Eddie may have finally wised up by not openly honoring their father-in-law on the day of his birth, but until they publicly denounce him and acknowledge their role in covering up his crimes over the years, I want everyone at CFCMI to remember what a dirty, filthy, abusive criminal LR Davis really was.
Last edited by onetime; 08-08-2012 at 11:43 PM. Reason: LR Davis was WORSE than Jerry Sandusky. And Peter and Li’l Eddie covered for LR
I agree with Onetime. Not mentioning Davis isn't enough. They must make a complete, honest admission of everything that was covered up since CFCMI was founded in 1974, and possibly even the investigation when Davis was in the UPCI as well. His sin tainted every aspect of ministry; untold numbers of people were hurt. Once full disclosure is made, a complete overhaul is necessary to chart a new course. This is only for the brave of heart, though.
We will see.
Last edited by John Cady; 08-09-2012 at 02:52 AM. Reason: On a happier note, my daughter turned 3 today...she had a wonderful birthday party :)
Here is the latest International Board photo:
- Ed Thomas is looking really rough. One can tell he is in physical pain from his recent round of medical problems. Looks like he lost some weight too. His trademark mustache is now gone.
- Dan Lantis is still affiliated with them, even though he was jettisoned back to San Diego. Got to wonder why...
- The sideshow attractions are there: Rick Hahn, Jim Ottoson, and former Valour College "chancellors" Dick Brand and Chief Eunuch Bruce Wilson.
- Parrish Lee, Pat Taylor, and Jay Hunnemuller are on the board too.
- Hubert Ulysse is still there as well.
- Pete Paine still has his cheesy grin...living in denial all these years will do that.
- Hazel never looks happy in any of her pictures...living in denial for all these years will do that.
Compared to previous photos that have been removed because of too many ex-members, the board comprises a larger percentage of the existing congregation.
They are GUILTY of allowing LR Davis to sodomize children.
They knew what was going on behind closed doors, but did NOTHING to prevent a filthy child molester from continuing to abuse more victims.
All because of money. So disgusting.
Last edited by turningjapanese; 08-09-2012 at 06:48 PM. Reason: what pigs.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)