Doug Wilson

Doug Wilson’s Failure to Safeguard Children


Mike Sloan and Beth Hart on Sex Abuse, Pedophiles, Church Response, Doug Wilson, Steven Sitler

This is a fantastic article written by Pastor Mike Sloan and his sister, Beth Sloan Hart. Mike is a PCA (Presbyterian Church in America) pastor, and Beth’s husband is also a PCA pastor. They are advocates for victims of sexual abuse and have written Faithful Protection: Developing Your Church’s Child Protection Plan and other articles and work to help the church understand more about sex abuse and how to respond appropriately. This article is cross posted by permission and was originally published here. I highly recommend bookmarking this article. We see so much confusion on what repentance looks like and how to treat a pedophile. There is much wisdom here, backed with Scripture.

Thank you, Mike and Beth!  ~ Julie Anne

Doug Wilson’s Failure to Safeguard Children

by Mike Sloan and Beth Hart



[Authors’ Note: Even before we wrote this article, ink has been spilled over the language “sexual stimulation” with regard to Sitler’s interaction with his baby. These words could be taken to imply molestation or rape, but not necessarily, and not in our opinion given the current evidence. It seems what was intended is that Sitler was himself sexually stimulated by thinking about his baby. And yet we stand by our labeling this “alleged sexual abuse”. It stands to reason that this was more than simply a fleeting temptation given the state’s response. It seems most likely they were an intentional indulgence by Sitler. So while this is not a criminal act in the state of Idaho, by a Christian moral standard this is horrific child sexual abuse, as Sitler was allegedly using thoughts of his own baby to gratify himself sexually. Using a baby as an object in this way is a disturbing act of abuse. Whatever the case this has no bearing on the truth that Sitler should be no where near any child, even his own.]

Doug Wilson’s leadership decisions directly led to the endangerment and alleged sexual abuse of a baby. In August, 2015, the baby’s father, a convicted sex offender and clinically diagnosed pedophile, Steven Sitler, failed a polygraph that revealed “heinous” violations of his probation with regard to his own infant child such that the Idaho Department of Correction ordered him to have no contact with the baby.

Wilson has come under criticism as he provided pastoral care for Sitler who is a member of Wilson’s church. Why should Wilson suffer criticism when Sitler is the offender? The criticism has merit because abuse happens through the actions of abusers as well as through the negligent actions of adults who do not properly safeguard children.

In three critical arenas, Doug Wilson acted irresponsibly, and his actions allowed a serial pedophile access to a vulnerable baby. This access led to preventable endangerment wherein Sitler used his baby for “sexual stimulation.” In the first arena, Wilson advocated for limited legal accountability for Sitler’s crimes when he was originally tried and convicted in 2005. In the second arena, Wilson officiated Sitler’s ill-advised wedding in 2011. In the third arena, Wilson’s public responses to Sitler’s most recent legal trouble reveal his teachings about pedophilia, accountability, child protection, and grace that create a culture where children are exposed instead of protected.

Despite Wilson’s dereliction of pastoral duty, the evangelical and Reformed church community remains silent on this issue of child sexual abuse. Silence in the face of child sexual abuse only helps to maintain the status quo, a status quo that led to a pedophile’s easy access to a vulnerable baby.

Arena #1: Wilson Advocates for “Measured and Limited” Legal Accountability

Two measures of genuine repentance for pedophiles is their awareness of the damage their actions cause and their ability to own full accountability for that destruction. Offenders typically only confess when they get caught, like Sitler. When pedophiles are caught (as opposed to them proactively seeking help before they have offended), they display an extreme lack of awareness about how their attitudes and actions bring incredible harm, and their repentance must be judged with great care and wisdom. Offenders are masters of deception and manipulation, often saying what people want to hear so that they attract attention and compassion toward themselves and away from their victims.

Moreover, regardless of anyone’s judgment about their repentance, people who have abused a child show they are capable of harming children and must never be allowed access to children again. Never. Full stop. Not once. No exceptions. Children are too vulnerable, and pedophilia is too serious a crime for exceptions. There are no measures too drastic in order to keep a child from the evil of sexual abuse. Repentant offenders will realize their danger and will insist on strict accountability, including no access to children. Sitler originally received a fair and just life sentence for his crimes.

In 2005, as Sitler was being sentenced, Wilson wrote the judge asking for leniency in the realm of civil penalties, arguing that he believed Sitler was genuinely repentant. Among Wilson’s evidence for this assertion was Sitler’s willingness to sit through a handful of sessions with Wilson, including the completion of assignments (which included reading books). Wilson also assessed that Sitler was “completely open and honest” with him and that Sitler was growing in his awareness of his problem. In other words, Sitler confessed to certain wrongs, and Wilson believed that this confession was the whole story, demonstrating Sitler’s change of heart.

Wilson, in the letter, does not explicitly factor into his assessment how Sitler was caught in his crimes. Sitler, nonetheless, has been deceiving people since he was a young man, serially abusing children (a court document filed by his defense references Sitler’s “volume of offenses over the years”). With training, Wilson would know that offenders typically only admit to as little of their crimes as possible. Offenders also know the language that pastors expect to hear. No doubt Wilson would agree that repentance is more than words, and yet, in this case, he seems to have accepted these few talks with Sitler as establishing enough repentance to advocate for “measured and limited” punishment. The Bible is clear that, at best, words are only the beginning of repentance, and that repentance is a heart change that must bear fruit over time in actions (Luke 3:8-14). In fact, a repentant pedophile would not argue for a limited punishment, but instead, accept the full legal consequences of the crimes.

Doug Wilson has no professional licensing or accreditation in treatment for sexual offenders. Wilson founded a church, denomination, college, and minister training school, but evaluating a pedophile’s repentance is beyond his expertise. The professional evaluation of Sitler is that he is a “high risk” offender. A few sessions of pastoral counseling with a high risk offender should not be used to judge the genuineness of repentance. Sitler’s subsequent violations of his probation and failed polygraphs demonstrate how Wilson prematurely judged Sitler.

With more training in the dynamics of abuse as well as a dose of humility, Sitler could still be in jail instead of free to harm children. With training in the dynamics of child sexual abuse or consultations with an expert, Wilson could have recognized that Sitler was not demonstrating actual repentance, a costly failure on Wilson’s part. Pastors have a responsibility to protect the sheep in their flocks from dangerous wolves (Ez 34; Acts 20). The current publicity surrounding abuse and abuse dynamics makes it impossible for pastors to claim the excuse of ignorance. This is not just a mistake or oversight, but a grave dereliction of pastoral responsibility.

In 2005, excellent resources were available to understand from experts how predators deceive and how we can see through their deception and manipulation. Anna Salter, in her book, Predators, shows that 93% of convicted offenders identify as religious. Sexual offenders are common in the Christian environment because in churches they typically find easy targets. Offenders groom not only their victims, but their churches to see them as caring people, masking their true agenda. Christians tend to just trust that the people around them are wonderful people (because most of the time they are!). At the same time, this environment is also a recipe for abuse if Christians are not trained and following best practices in child protection.

Without informed training, pastors will not recognize pedophiles’ false repentance. The fruit of Sitler’s repentance is absent. Within months, the bad fruit in his heart resurfaced, including violating his probation and, most disturbingly, demonstrating the classic offender attitude of hubris and entitlement: “Mr. Sitler continues to do things his way, and continues to make disclosures and still fails the polygraphs, to which leaves one to think of how much he is not disclosing (emphasis added).” Despite these latest reports of Sitler’s deception and “heinous” violations, Wilson still holds on to the notion that Sitler is repentant as of Saturday, September 5, defending himself and Sitler, saying, “since Steven’s conviction and conditional release from prison and jail, Steven, as a penitent Christian, has been welcome at Christ Church, and has worshiped regularly with us since that time.”

Wilson should never have advocated for leniency because there is no solid foundation to claim Sitler is repenting. Advocating for a “measured and limited” civil penalty does not protect children in the community or help pedophiles walk in repentance.

Arena #2: Wilson Officiates Sitler’s Wedding

Before Sitler’s wedding in 2011, the Idaho Department of Correction did not support this marriage, and Sitler’s probation officer testifiedin court that if Sitler’s marriage produced children, he should be forced to live separately from his children. Although the judge allowed the marriage to go forward, this was against the advice of the Idaho Department of Correction. The Department of Correction knew that having Sitler in the home with his own child would pose a danger to the child. The representative from the Department of Correction correctly pointed out that if Sitler lived in the same home as his future child, there would be times when Sitler was unchaperoned around the child because his wife would have to sleep. Wilson had the opportunity to intervene on behalf of any future little children’s safety. Instead, he officiated the wedding.

As a pastor, Doug Wilson had a moral obligation to go above and beyond the protection that the state can provide. Despite the judge’s ruling, Wilson must answer to Jesus through whom God will judge the world, and who speaks strongly against anyone who harms a child, saying, “whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea” (Matt 18:6). In these words, Jesus acknowledges the inherent danger of anyone who has abused a child and the urgent need to guard children against these abusers through physical and permanent separation between the abuser and any child. Jesus never minimizes the danger an abuser is to children or risks exposing children to harm.

Jesus shows the church what grace looks like when responding to child abuse: children take priority. Grace rescues the vulnerable and oppressed (Ps 82:1-4). The church must immediately and permanently remove access to children for anyone who has abused a child.The church must diligently guard potential victims by ensuring that people who harm children never have access to children again.Such actions display God’s grace and kindness. The gospel of grace leads Christians to defend sheep from wolves.

If an admitted and diagnosed serial pedophile like Sitler is walking in repentance, he would demonstrate that repentance by renouncing the possibility of having children and thus marriage. Instead, Sitler proposed on the second date to his future wife and, according to the Department of Corrections, Sitler said having children was very important to his religion. Wilson, as a spiritual authority in Sitler’s life, should have intervened to hold Sitler accountable to his repentance. The most loving and gracious action toward Sitler himself would have been to seek to stop the marriage so Sitler would not be put in the potential position of harming another child. Wilson had a moral obligation to intervene for future victims and Sitler, but he did not.

Arena #3: Wilson Responds Publicly

Wilson’s public responses have displayed no awareness of the damage his leadership has caused victims. In “An Open Letter from Christ Church on Steven Sitler,” Wilson places 100 percent of the blame for the situation upon Sitler’s shoulders. No doubt Sitler bears full responsibility for his actions, but Wilson played a key role in exposing children to a dangerous man. In the statement, Wilson denies the risk Sitler poses to his own child, and the part he has played in orchestrating the risk, saying, “Our ministry to Steven, in other words, has not been conducted at the expense of any children in our church community, or in a way that puts any of them at risk.” However, the church and Wilson have put Sitler’s baby at risk, so much so that Sitler has been ordered not to have any contact with his son until reliable chaperones can be secured. Then, moving forward, this child can only have contact with his father under a chaperone’s direct line of sight. This scenario is the very definition of high-risk as children cannot protect themselves from predators. Instead, they rely upon the adults in their lives to advocate for their safety. Wilson has been in a position to advocate for this baby’s safety but has not. It is also been noted that Wilson failed to inform his congregation in a timely fashion that Sitler was a danger to their children. Without raising any suspicion, Sitler could have easily gained access to their children because of Wilson’s failure to notify them. Wilson’s actions have put children at risk.

Wilson continues to defend himself by saying it is the church’s job to minister to sinners. Wilson writes, “the task of ministering to broken people is one of the central glories of the Christian church. For us, there are two causes of rejoicing in this. The first is that Christ came into the world for the sake of the screwed-up people.” However, not all sins have equal repercussions in this present world. A pedophile in the church is best described as a wolf in sheep’s clothing. People who sexually abuse children prey upon vulnerable lambs as wolves do. If the church treats pedophiles like any other Christian who struggles with any other sin, then it will sacrifice all its precious little lambs to the wolf. The church must not minister to wolves at the expense of the sheep. Children pay the cost when leaders do not respond appropriately to pedophiles. Pastors commonly mistake child sexual abuse as just another sin. Doing so removes the urgency from proactive child protection and demands a high cost in children’s lives.

Furthermore, Wilson’s responses are a failure of empathy. In the five public statements (statement 1, statement 2, statement 3,statement 4, statement 5) Wilson has issued in the past few days, never does he mention sorrow for this vulnerable baby who has been the victim of his pedophile father’s “heinous” behavior. Instead, Wilson’s public statements argue that he is one of the victims, saying, “This is because he [Sitler] provides an easy way for enemies of our ministry to attack us.” Instead of showing empathy for the victim, Wilson claims persecution. He sees himself as a victim. Such a posture is hurtful to true victims and discourages true victims from coming forward.

It needs to be investigated whether other victims have not come forward in the Sitler case or others, because Doug Wilson has blamed victims (for example here, here, and here), and supported offenders in court (see public testimony here). Also discouraging victims from coming forward is Wilson’s minimization of Sitler’s crimes as only one count of lewd conduct: “The twittermob has been circulating numerous untruths, among them that Steven Sitler is a child rapist. He was actually convicted of one count of Lewd Conduct with a Minor under 16 years of age (Idaho Code 18-1508).” This is an inexcusable minimization of child sexual abuse. You can read the awful reality of what constitutes Lewd Conduct with a Minor in Idaho here. You can also read an account of a victim’s family in court records describing how Sitler lured their two year old into an isolated situation and forced the toddler to kiss his erect penis.

Without proactive leadership on child protection, kids in any setting are vulnerable. Leaders must speak strongly on behalf of victims. Ecclesiastes 4:1 captures the dynamic well, “Again I saw all the oppressions that are done under the sun. And behold, the tears of the oppressed, and they had no one to comfort them! On the side of their oppressors there was power, and there was no one to comfort them.” Doug Wilson’s public statements defend himself; they fortress his power instead of humbling owning his errors, learning from experts in the field, and making changes for the future. When shepherds use their power to protect themselves, sheep are exposed.

Child sexual abuse hides in an environment of silence, shame, and fear. When leaders do not speak out and name these sins, offenders easily find victims, and most often children suffer in silence. Leadership must combat the silence, shame, and fear with vocal advocacy for safeguarding children and vocal support for victims.Wilson has failed to lead his people to this place of safety. Wilson helped create and lead this culture. He must own up to its failures and resolve to help change it.

A Plea to Leaders in the Reformed Community

As dismaying as Wilson’s actions have been, perhaps even more upsetting has been the silence from the Reformed corner of the evangelical church. There has been no outcry, no call of urgency for child protection, and no lamenting over yet another victim of preventable abuse. There are no voices taking up the cause of the voiceless (Prov 31:8-9). There are no rescuers to deliver the weak and afflicted from the hand of the wicked (Ps 82:1-4). There are no comforters for the oppressed. The oppressors have power, but victims have only their tears (Eccl 4:1). Victims in our churches are still waiting for those with power and influence in the Reformed corner of the church to come in on the side of the vulnerable and the oppressed.

Children would be spared the horrors of child sexual abuse if leaders would use their voice to call for child protection in our churches with urgency. Even though the powerful are not themselves at risk, are we willing to look beyond our own needs to the needs of others, even the little lambs that Jesus places at the center of his Kingdom (Phil 2:4; Mark 10:13-14)? Where are the voices of the leaders of Reformed churches and Reformed networks who can gain a hearing from Doug Wilson and influence thousands of other pastors in their denominations and circles of influence? Where are the voices from The Gospel Coalition? Crossway, why are you giving a voice to a man who will not use his voice for voiceless? Who is asking Wilson, “Where is your grieving heart for this baby and the other victims?What child protection training are you putting in place or experts are you consulting so this does not happen again?”

God calls all of us to use our power to protect the weak and asks us, “Is this not what it means to know me?” (Ps 82:1-4; Jer 22:9). No matter how small the church we can choose to safeguard children. There is a silent epidemic of child sexual abuse in the church and those sitting in darkness are waiting for leaders with a voice to speak for them. How long will they wait?

51 thoughts on “Doug Wilson’s Failure to Safeguard Children”

  1. Didn’t Boz T say that in all his years as a prosecutor specializing in sex crimes against children, he had NEVER seen a church support the victim? That every one came down FIRM on the side of the perp?

    Anybody remember BACA — Bikers Against Child Abuse? They had to step up on the side of the victims because the churches wouldn’t.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. HUG: So you don’t get too discouraged, i recently had a successful child sexual abuse case (2 victims) where the church sided with the victims. Pastors and churches can respond in better ways if they have the educations/tools.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Velour: I think that is encouraging. Organisations, including churches, sometimes lack incentive to be vigilant, until it has a financial cost.


  4. Hi Keith,

    Yes, it’s encouraging that when the “court of last resort” in a state, in this case the Idaho Supreme Court hands down a ruling for child sexual abuse victims to sue, that things are going to (eventually) change.

    The Catholic Church, as you know, has had to make serious changes to protect children after decades of costly litigation, arrests, prosecutions, and convictions for child sexual abuse. The evangelical church has an epidemic of child sexual abuse cases according to insurance companies like Church Mutual and attorneys (like Richard Hammer at Church Law & Tax). It’s the No. 1 reason – sexual abuse of minors – that churches are sued every single year, for years on end.

    I am glad a church supported the victims in your case. I have heard of case after case where, like in this Idaho case, churches have taken the side of the sex offender and inflicted incredible damage and abuse on the victims and their families.

    I was ordered to be excommunicated and shunned at my former California church for standing my ground with my pastors/elders who brought their friend, a Megan’s List sex offender to church, gave him church membership, didn’t tell all adults and parents, gave him a position of leadership and trust, let him attend all church activities (including those with children present), said he was *safe* and his supervising law enforcement says he’s not, and invited him to volunteer at a 5-day sports camp for children, without telling all parents who entrusted their children to the church, including unbelievers!! Just nuts!!! (I saw the sex offender run his hands through my friends’ 4-year old son’s hair. My friends didn’t see it and didn’t know the man was a sex offender. The pastors/elders said it was *fine* and ordered me to never tell my friends. I told my friends after my excommunication/shunning. To protect their family, they packed up and moved hours away under the pretext of *being near family*. If they’d protected their son any other way, they would have been subjected to excommunication/shunning.)


  5. Velour: That is absolutely nuts! I think there are several categories that leaders of organisations fit into. Some that come to mind are 1) People who are simply uneducated in the ways that child abusers operate 2) People who want to believe the best about others who say they have repented (Pastors often fit this category) 3)People who really think it is not a big deal/are abusers themselves.

    I don’t know all the facts of your case, but allowing a child abuser to volunteer at church camp for children is horribly wrong, in my view. Further, i think a truly repentant abuser would not want to do this. What bothers me perhaps even more is the idea that the church membership in general was not informed. Foolhardy!


  6. Keith,

    The pastors/elders at my former church defended the sex offender and said he was a long-time friend, they’d known him for decades, and was a family friend. He was fine in their book. Ok, if he was fine how come they didn’t know about his secret life of sin and felony sex crimes? Obviously, there’s a lot they didn’t know about him.

    I wonder if my former senior pastor could be an abuser. He was incredibly hostile to me and even demanded to know in the elders’ meeting (4 of them and 1 of me) why I was using the term *sex offender*. He was offended. Me: “There are criminal laws called sex offenses. Those found guilty of sex offenses are called *sex offenders* in law. It’s codified in law at the federal and state law. It’s not my term.”

    The senior pastor/elder told me in the meeting that if a father in the family decided that the sex offender could touch his children that his decision was final and the mother would have no say. Me: “Fathers AND Mothers are required by God and by law to protect their children. A mother is not off the criminal hook by abdicating her responsibility to her husband. If her children are harmed, she can be arrested and prosecuted for felony child abuse, if convicted face prison time, and Child Protective Services can take away her children and put them in the foster care system.”

    That pastor hated me. They pastors/elders called me and told me that I was to never contact the sex offenders’ supervising law enforcement agency again or the California Attorney General’s Office, which maintains my state’s Megan’s List of sex offenders. The pastors/elders told me their friend the sex offender was *coming off Megan’s List*. The law enforcement agency and the Attorney General’s called that story *all lies* and *total lies*.


  7. To help with the stress of these stories, here’s some beautiful music – a flash mob orchestra in Copenhagen.


  8. “Offenders are masters of deception and manipulation, often saying what people want to hear so that they attract attention and compassion toward themselves and away from their victims.”

    This needs to be on a plaque in every pastor’s office in this country. Then maybe less of them will be deceived. “Oops, for a moment there I was tempted to be more compassionate towards the predator than the victims. Thank God I quickly saw this plaque and realized I was being deceived!”


  9. From Katie Botkin’s recent post linked above: “So, given all of this: is Wilson the kind of demigod who actually never does anything wrong, or is he the kind of demigod who deflects his wrongdoing, bad decisions and poor pastoral choices onto other people and other situations?”

    Ding, ding, ding! She nails it!

    All of his word spewing is a way to deflect the issue at hand. He is a master word spinner. And, he seems incapable of admitting that he made mistakes in this situation.


  10. Thank you for this wonderfully written piece. Katie Botkin’s post is also very refreshing.

    I have spent the past few months completely baffled that many in conservative/Evangelical circles believe that denying someone access to abuse victims is tantamount to denying the power of the gospel. Listening to these voices, it is clear that many in the Church are idolizing proof-texted scriptures and doctrines rather than the Word, Jesus. So glad I’m out of church as they do it.

    Thank you for creating a safe space, Julie Anne and those who post regularly. Reading here always feels like a nice long exhale.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. Thank you, Jael 🙂 I like this: Reading here always feels like a nice long exhale.

    It’s the community that creates this environment. I’m grateful, too, because I have needed them this week!


  12. @Keith:

    Velour: I think that is encouraging. Organisations, including churches, sometimes lack incentive to be vigilant, until it has a financial cost.

    After all the Proof Texts and Bible Verses, MONEY TALKS.


  13. @Jael:

    I have spent the past few months completely baffled that many in conservative/Evangelical circles believe that denying someone access to abuse victims is tantamount to denying the power of the gospel.

    What is this? The Gospel According to Lester The Molester?

    P.S. Jael? Got any tent stakes ready?


  14. “Offenders are masters of deception and manipulation, often saying what people want to hear so that they attract attention and compassion toward themselves and away from their victims.”

    Or as this one Rabbi from Tarsus put it:
    “For Satan Himself can transform himself to appear as an Angel of Light.”

    Successful Sociopaths are masters of camouflage, and groom third party allies and minions as well as victims and prey. Like they carry around a Charm Person spell or Stupid Ray to shine on people. We only hear about the dumb ones who got caught.


  15. Thank you again, Julie Anne.

    HUG, I’m part of a pacifist denomination, but I certainly felt like sharpening some tent stakes this week. Figuratively, perhaps?

    Velour, that cartoon always makes me laugh. And I love that she is considered “most blessed among women,” not for being busy at home, or being a Proverbs 31 Woman, but for offing someone in the midst of extending hospitality, and turning the sexual entitlements of the age on their [literal this time] head.


  16. Apparently DW isn’t too happy about the latest post on the Bayly blog. He just left a comment giving them a good scolding for disagreeing with him.


  17. I should append as well that I have no opinion on any legal proceedings going on there. I’m concerned that Wilson is still showing his incapacity to carry out his pastoral duties.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. I’m persistently appalled by the notion that the primary role of a woman in marriage is to service the lust of her patriarch. I can’t even. It’s really disturbing.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. Thank you for validating all of the women who have been forced by their ideological teachings to remain silent on this important issue. This particular issue is so disturbing because the woman is no longer a person to be cherished and loved. She eventually loses who she really is because her only identity is in her husband.


  20. I read Wilson’s comment on the Bayly blog than Tim linked to. First of all, how can someone say so little with so many words?

    Wilson says,

    “Somebody said in the thread above that Steven Sitler re-offended. But there is no reason for saying this. He has not re-offended. . . The disagreement before the judge is over whether certain possible indicators are worrisome enough to more strictly define or restrict the terms of Steven’s probation. It is not whether he should go to prison again for a re-offense.

    I guess that remains to be seen. The last hearing was to consolidate the terms of Sitler’s probation. Number 23 on the consolidated list says,

    The Defendant will answer all questions asked of him during the polygraph examinations truthfully. If any answer reveals deception it shall be a violation of Defendant’s Terms and Conditions of Probation.

    Sitler hasn’t done well on his recent polygraph tests. Since they are sealed, we don’t know the results. I wonder if he could be sent back to prison over the result of his polygraphs. That’s just speculation on my part.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. Then there’s this beauty from Wilson’s comment in Tim’s link:

    But in the Steven Sitler case, I don’t think you all have your facts right. I believe that you all, if you were confronted with an identical case, would do something very much like what we have done. You are saying you wouldn’t, but I don’t think that is true.


    Liked by 2 people

  22. I as a mother of 2 am beyond mad to think that I should have no say so if my husband deemed it ok for a pedophile to touch them. When my daughter was in middle school, the band teacher sort of liked the girls. He told my daughter once that he watched her leaving the school grounds to make sure she got home ok. Now how weird was that. He would ask the girls to wear their skirts to school instead of pants that the uniform code required. He would pull girls out of classes to help him do things. I put a stop to this.I first pulled my daughter out of band, then made sure he wasn’t coming back as a teacher the next year. . I threatened to go to every news station in my state and to the governor’s office if need be. This was not going to be happen to my child. I was a true mama bear when my kids were young and hubby supported me. No one was going to harm our children if we had anything to say about it.


  23. @tHarley,

    Welcome! Good for your for being a protective Mama Bear of your cubs!

    My former NeoCal church (in CA) was a nightmare. Men (including sex offenders were first class citizens), women were second class citizens, and children were third class citizens. So glad to be outta there. Insufferable teachings and ideas. The elders actually called me at home and told me that I was to never contact law enforcement about their friend the sex offender and that I was *to obey* my elders and *to submit* to *their authority*.


  24. Good for you tHarley! Like you, I had a mama bear incident in dealing with a teacher last year. I wish we could have had the same outcome.


  25. I don’t know about Idaho but in my state when someone violates the terms of their probation, the judge has the option of sending them back to prison to serve up to their full term. A failed polygraph test wouldn’t be enough for a probation violation, but it would certainly prompt an investigation. CPS may turn up more evidence. There may already be a probation violation based on his failure to report certain things to his authorized therapists. His probation officer complained that Sitler had reported important information only to his private therapist. If that is part of the conditions of his probation then he is in trouble.

    The prosecutor certainly wants him out of the house because unlike Wilson, he is worried about the safety of the child and said so emphatically.


Thanks for participating in the SSB community. Please be sure to leave a name/pseudonym (not "Anonymous"). Thx :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s