Preacher Pleads Guilty To Sodomizing Boys For Over 10 Years, But Will Serve No Time

[DeSwiss]

Preacher pleads guilty to sodomizing boys; serving no time

Huntsville Times
Posted by David Holden
July 09, 2007 5:43 PM

An unordained preacher who pleaded guilty today to three felony charges of first-degree sodomy in the repeated sexual abuse of three of his adopted children will not serve any time in prison.

Circuit Judge Karen Hall sentenced Jerry Wayne Love to 15 years on each charge to be served one after the other. But she accepted prosecutors' recommendation and ordered Love to spend five years on probation and undergo treatment in a sex offender program.

Love, 51, of 3202 Overhill St., pleaded guilty to charges of sodomizing three young boys he and his wife adopted. In exchange, the prosecution dropped 10 counts of sodomy and three counts of sexual abuse against Love.

The case was scheduled for trial today. If he had been convicted by a jury, Love could have been sentenced up to life in prison on nine of the felony charges.

more: http://blog.al.com/breaking/2007/07/preacher_pleads_guilty_to_sodo.html

*** - Meanwhile, the three boys (now ages 13, 14 an 16) whom he sodomized over the course of 10+ years were sentenced to life with the knowledge that this creep basically got away with it....

[tonkatoy57]

1. Jerry Wayne Love

What is it with serial killers and career criminals and the middle name Wayne?

They better check the crawl space under that boy's house to see if there are any other adopted kids who weren't, uh, able to testify at his recent trial.

[DeSwiss]

4. What I'm also wondering about....

...is how is it that over the course of more than a decade, not a single social worker or case worker had a clue that something might be wrong in that house. Because the signs of child sexual abuse should be pretty clear to an experienced case worker.

And secondly, the court (in its infinite wisdom) has mandated that HE receive court-ordered counseling. But the article said nothing about what kind of therapy (if any), that the kids will receive.

The state of Alabama's negligence in this case seems rife with stupidity and miscues, not the least of which includes the sentence. But surely they aren't so stupid to (at last at this late date), now show some concern for the victims....

[pitohui]

18. you want to mandate court-ordered therapy for being a VICTIM?

that's fairly nasty, isn't it? have your body violated and then, courtesy of the state, have your mind violated as well?

, the court (in its infinite wisdom) has mandated that HE receive court-ordered counseling. But the article said nothing about what kind of therapy (if any), that the kids will receive

[DeSwiss]

29. Most statistical studies of child abusers has shown....

...that they themselves were abused. I don't see therapy and counseling to help these children cope with what they've endured as a "violation" as you term it.

Its been swept under the rug long enough. For TEN YEARS!!! Hell yes, they need therapy!!! And a lawsuit against the state isn't out of order either!!!

What would you tell them, give em' a slap on the butt and say: "walk it off????" Or maybe the state should send them to another preacher???

Jeeze.....

:shrug:

[pitohui]

48. i have no idea but i don't like strangers poking in my head

i've never believed that being forced to dredge up misery leads to anything productive

you ever noticed how talking things out, to clear the air, only gets you angrier and more upset?

it's like that

[SharonAnn]

31. Alabama has Child Advocacy Centers, funded by the state, don't they?

I think they were the pioneers in providing places where sexually abused children could receive counseling and support.

Here in Tennessee, a lot of the funding for these comes from the Victims of Crime Act funding by the state.

[DeSwiss]

34. Hello fellow Tennessean...

...I'm not familiar with the beginnings of child protective services. To my mind, if Alabama pioneered it, its probably because the incidence of child abuse is greater there. But what do I know?

As I said elsewhere, my wife works in this field for Metro and I've listened to horror story after horror story. And I've simply never had any patience for people who hurt children or women. Less than scum in my book.

In this case, for this to have gone on as long as it has, it means that he was sodomizing the oldest child (16) when he was 6. And the youngest (13) when he was 3. And when someone can show me proof that child abuse therapy works for the perpetrators, then maybe I'll change my tune. Until then, I say lock them up before they abuse again!

[Zookeeper]

2. And what's up with his wife standing by his side?

I hope the boys are able to believe this decision was made to spare them from having to testify. If they don't, how do they accept that their rapist got a slap on the wrist?

This is just sickening.

[DeSwiss]

5. She's standing by his side, no doubt....

...because to do otherwise means she's culpable.

The indications of child sexual abuse are usually pretty clear. When you're paying attention....

[Madspirit]

3. How on Earth could they get away with this?....n/t

[DeSwiss]

7. Well, for one....

...it IS Alabama. I know that's no excuse, but then, there it is.

[williesgirl]

6. The judge and prosecutor should be removed from office. Our jails are littered with small time drug

users and this rapist gets zero time?

[DeSwiss]

10. What is worse....

...often times those who were abused, become abusers. And the cycle never ends.

Removed from office? I like "thrown" from office. Literally.

[BlooInBloo]

8. By god I wish I was religious, so I could perform unspeakably evil acts, and...

... not get in any trouble. Religion RULES!

[DeSwiss]

11. Just make sure....

...you pick the right religion.

[happyslug]

27. Religion is NOT the reason for this abuse

The molester may have used it as a excuse or justification (as many Catholics priests have done) but the Bible attacks such molestation of Children and does it without limits as to the punishment.

People try to view evil as the opposite of Good, but in reality evil is the corruption of Good for even Christ says "Even the Devil knows Scripture" meaning just because you quote Scripture does not mean you are not the devil.

Back to my point, this man used his role as a preacher to get access to these boys so he could abuse them. This is what happen within the Catholic Church (and other religions). Such acts of evil occurs everywhere, the real issue is HOW TO PREVENT THEM. In this case it was closer look at the Preacher as a Human Being not as a religious person.

[DeSwiss]

33. While the post was directed at BlooInBloo...

...I'd like to answer this as well.

My answer: Nuts!

Because it depends on what part of the bible that you happen to be reading at the time. There's plenty of sanctioned child abuse in the bible. Even killing the disobedient ones. Further, the cloak of religion hides a multitude of sins that are never even considered simply by virtue of the cloth.

While it is true that this "individual" used being a preacher as cover, it does not excuse nor excise the history of how most religions have treated women and children as chattel over the centuries.

I'm sorry but it seems to me that many liberal Christians want to distance themselves from these Fundie nut cases. But they march under the same banner. Liberal Christians see Jesus' words of love, Fundies only see hate and judgment of others. Two things of which Jesus specifically said believers weren't to do.

So to say that religion played no role here is myopic at best and disingenuous at worst. IMHO

DeSwiss

[BlooInBloo]

44. Religion just drives the getaway car. Which is all I said.

[joeunderdog]

9. This should be seen no differently than penetrating girls.

But it isn't.

[DeSwiss]

12. From the looks of things....

...if they had been girls, I'm sure the judge would have tacked on an extra 5 years probation.

:sarcasm:

[DeSwiss]

13. And another thing....

...I missed this piece while reading the article initially:

"Assistant District Attorney Allison Palmer told Circuit Judge Karen Hall that Love had abused the boys multiple times over several years.

Fred Sharp, an investigator with the Huntsville Police Department, said he was contacted by school officials in 2003 after one of the boys told a counselor Love had molested him. Two younger boys came forward in 2006, Sharp said.

Love is a minister but is not ordained by any church or religious group, Sharp said.

Palmer said Love molested one of the boys after DHR had removed the child from Love's home."

So he was still at it even after the Dept of Human Resources had taken one child from the home because of the abuse.

WHY IN THE HELL DID THEY LEAVE THE OTHER TWO THERE?????

Fucking Alabama.....

:mad:

[pitohui]

20. things that make you go "hmmm"

so he supposedly molested the kid after the kid was already removed from the home? shades of mcmartin or other cases where the accused did all these impossible things

honestly? it sounds like to me that nobody except the prosecutor believes that anything really happened, but rather than take his chances in front of a jury (we all know about the high rates of false convictions these days thanks to the innocence project to want our trust our fate to a jury trial, if we are sane), then all concerned cut this deal

that would be my guess

Palmer said Love molested one of the boys after DHR had removed the child from Love's home."

[DeSwiss]

24. This was going on for quite a while....

...the article says:

Fred Sharp, an investigator with the Huntsville Police Department, said he was contacted by school officials in 2003 after one of the boys told a counselor Love had molested him. Two younger boys came forward in 2006,Sharp said.

So for FOUR YEARS after one child told his school counselor this went on unabated. FOUR YEARS after a government official was informed and no one did a damned thing!!!!

For FOUR YEARS, they knew.

Sick, sick, sick!

[entanglement]

14. Outrageous - This monster gets away with 5 years of probation?

Shame on the prosecutor and judge.

[happyslug]

26. Or you would prefer to punish the Victims also???

See my thread below about why this is the most common Punishment for such people.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

15. With apologies to Paul Krugman, I hereby introduce the term IOKIYAP. -nt

[Goblinmonger]

19. Just expand the P

to Politician, Priest, and Pastor. IOKIYAP³

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

22. Nonononono. Remember, INOKIYAD. Besides, "Preacher" encompasses Priest and Pastor.

Therefore, I think the exponent is not needed.

[churchofreality]

16. The Catholic church to hire him to be the next Pope

[MissB]

17. He and his wife don't deserve any children.

Bastards, the both of them.

[northernsoul]

21. I like how they printed his address

I'm sure the neighbors are just gonna be thrilled to be living by this guy.

[DeSwiss]

35. I saw that!

That address might show up again in the newspaper's police blotter before long. If I know my Alabamians like I think I do.

And I do, cause I married one! :)

[dsc]

23. shame on the prosecutor and the judge

Those boys will live with this forever. All I can say is that I sincerely hope that at the very least this treatment works. Also this man should never, not ever, be permitted to be around any more kids. Not his own and no adopted kids.

[happyslug]

25. Something like 90% of such cases are Within families.

It is a sad fact, but well known, most molestation cases involve family members (mostly fathers and other male relatives). The real tragedy is HOW DO YOU MAKE SURE THE VICTIMS ARE NOT PUNISHED WORSE THEN THE MOLESTER?

Let me explain, if the Father is the molester and he is convicted he gets a bed to sleep in and three hot meals a day (i.e Prison or jail). What about the Children? They lose they main source of financial Support. This forces them to lose their home and to leave more frugal do to the lost of income (ie. their father is in Jail). Furthermore the father's family will miss his financial support and thus withdraw whatever financial support the children have from their extended family. Thus the Children will suffer greater punishment than the father, just do to the fact their are dependent on him for support and/or care.

Thus how do we make sure the Children and NOT punished worse then the father? The only solution (For the state REFUSES to provide assistance more then what is required by regular Welfare) is for th father to be released from Jail so he can earn a living and those earnings be taken by the state to pay for the children's care. To do that, the Father has to be left out of Jail to earn a living.

Now I seriously doubt anyone will hire this man as a non-main line church preacher, but among such non-main line Protestant preachers, Preaching is a Second Job, their primary job is something else. What ever is that Second job this man an return to AND EARN A LIVING. Once he is earning pay, that pay can be attached to pay for these kids care.

I Use to do Children and Youth Work and the few cases I did involving sexual abuse the Judge (most of my cases were neglect cases) had to solve the above problem. If you jail the molester, his children (i.e. his victims) are punished HARDER do to the lack of Financial Support (The father would be in jail and unable to support the children). Thus how do you make sure the Victims ARE not punished worse then the molester? You basically put the molester on probation and tell him to get a job. From the proceeds of that job, support is issued so the children/victims get the support their needs (mostly Financial).

If you dis-agree with this that is fine, but how would you make sure the victims are NOT punished worse then the Molester?

[DeSwiss]

28. Your positions are sound, but still....

...these children were adopted by this family, apparently with little or no investigation by the state of Alabama. They are most likely now, and will continue to be placed back with the state Dept. of Human Resources after such a terrific blunder of placing them there in the first place. My wife also works in child and adult protective services and I understand the thinking, if not always agreeing with it. But not all cases are the same. How much abuse is necessary before someone goes to jail? Why even have laws that include jail time if we're not going to apply it in appropriate cases? Is not this case appropriate?

We say that to put the child in a position of testifying against a "parent" is worse than allowing the perpetrators of this evil to skip away -- as in this case. I disagree. I would think that the oldest child (16) might also agree. And I would think that the trauma these children have already endured could hardly be topped by testifying against this bastard. In fact, it could be the beginning of kind of closure for them in knowing that not only is he being punished, but that they had a hand in it by standing up to him.

I'm afraid I can't agree with probation in such an egregious case. Over ten years of abuse??? The last four years of which the authorities knew about and still did nothing. If anything, the probation plea allows those who are also responsible in government to also escape punishment as much as this piece of human excrement. IMHO

DeSwiss

[happyslug]

49. I think he should be punished more, but I have to look at the costs

And what I mean is the COST to the Children/Victims. Is it better for them to get only $215 a month (The TANF grant for a Family of Three In Alabama) or should they be entitled to more? If more the only source is the Father, the State will NOT provide more than what is the TANF Grant. Even at Minimum wage they would get at least $400 a month under most states support guidelines (and depending on his income it might be more).

My point is the Judge has to look to make sure her punishment of the Father does not lead to the Children being punished worse. In most Jail cases, the Children will have to live off the $215 per month TANF grant limit, if the Father has income it will be MORE THAN $215 per month.

The real problem is the LOW PAYMENT OF TANF IN ALABAMA AND MOST OTHER STATES. If the TANF Grant was higher, the Judge could sent the father to Jail for the Jailing would NOT punish them worse then the father. If TANF was higher, then the children would NOT suffer an economic lost because their father is in Jail. In such a situation Jail would be easer for the Judge to enter against the Father, but TANF is $215 for Three and the only people who can change that is Congress or the Alabama legislature.

[walldude]

41. So if a guy murders his wife, we should keep him out of jail

so he can support his kids? Sorry I don't buy this. The guy fucking raped 3 little kids that he adopted. He needs to be in jail for life and the fucking church can pay for the family's living expenses. You really think this guy is going to be able to get a good enough job that he can support his family? Who's going to hire him? Sorry but with all due respect this guy should never see the light of day again. He adopted 3 kids who desperately needed homes and love so he could rape and abuse them. If patterns are correct he probably created 3 more abusers to put into the world. This guy is a fucking maggot. Let him rot.

[DeSwiss]

43. My sentiments exactly. n/t

[happyslug]

45. So you agree with providing the Molester 3 hot meal and a Cot A day

But DENY that to his victims? Remember the STATE has no obligation to step into any case (The State CAN, but is NOT required to. When the State does step in, it is suppose to HELP the Victim, but by removing the victims main source of Income how are you supporting the Victims? When you Jail someone that person's ability to support his family ends. It is PART of the punishment of the Molester. The problem is the Victims are the ones who are NOT promised a Home and three meals a day out of the mess. How do you punish the Molester WITHOUT punishing the Victims? In cases where the parties are NOT in the same household it is easy, you Jail the Molester. The problem is, as in this case, if you jail the molester who is left ot support the Victims? The answer is no one (and the state will only provide Welfare, which can be no more than $215 per month for a family of three.

How do you make sure the Father is punished LESS than the Children? I have to assume the father can provide MORE THAN $215 a month FOR BOTH CHILDREN AND HIS WIFE. Thus if he is JAILEd, the Children will be worse off than if he is free to work. Sorry, this is NOT unusual, but remember if he is child all the children will get is $215 A MONTH. At minimum wage the father will earn OVER $800 a month (4 weeks 40 hours per week $5 per hour, total $800 a Month, the Father should earn more than this but this is Minimum Wage). Given that wage attachment can be as high as 60% of one's wages for Child Support, it can be expected that the children would receive at least $400 a month in Child support IF THE FATHER IS OUT OF JAIL (If his income is higher, the amount of support will be higher).

Thus the dilemma, if you jail the father the children ONLY get $215 a month, while if the father is free they get at least $400 a month. Sorry, Jailing the Father HURTS the Victims in this case more then it hurts the molester. That is a sad fact of most such cases and why most molesters do NOT serve any jail time.

Ahttp://www.childrensdefense.org/site/DocServer/all_states-3.pdf?docID=1323

As for abuse children Alabama has over 9900 neglected children and over 69,000

More facts about Alabama:
http://www.childrensdefense.org/site/DocServer/all_states-3.pdf?docID=1323

[happyslug]

46. You miss the point that he is NOT attached to any actual denomination.

Which means the "Church" he belongs to probably owns only its own Church, and probably just four walls and a Steeple (may not even have an furnace, it is in Alabama where you could have services all year long without having to heat the actual Church). My point is the Church involved probably does NOT have the assets to maintain the church building let alone pay anything to anyone (Quite Common with Baptist and other non-traditional Non Main line Protestant Churches).

Furthermore, it is NOT clear if he is even a Minister to any church, You can be a "Reverend" and/or a "Minster" in many non-main line Protestant denominations without even belonging to an Actual Church (This is quite common, I have known several "Reverends" who received their documentation that they are "Reverend" while in Prison for Murder, Again Non Catholic, Non-Mainline Protestant Churches, but permitted in some of the Baptist and related non-main line Protestant Churches). You do not hear of these as often as Catholic violations for the simple reason lawyers do NOT go after them (For the simple reason the lawyer see no way to get paid, i.e. to little money in the hands of the people who permitted this to happen, unlike the wealth in the Catholic and main-line Protestant Churches).

Giving the article on this case, I suspect he is a Minster but attached to no particular Church. Therefore no Church can be sued. Thus any support the children can look to is from the Father. Again my point, the courts are trying to make sure the Molester is punished more the the Victim by the Courts, something probation may provide but jail clearly can not.

[SoCalDem]

30. Looks like he got himself some Scooter Libby Justice.. Bigtime.

:puke:

[DeSwiss]

36. And without even a fine. n/t

[MrSlayer]

32. Hopefully someone will do what needs to be done.

And hopefully they will serve no time for it.

[DeSwiss]

37. Dare I pray???

[Vinca]

38. This guy needs some Lorena Bobbitt therapy. nt

[DeSwiss]

39. I agree with the sentiment, if not the act...

...of "Bobbitting" this individual. Especially after seeing this part:

Love and his wife ducked out of the courtroom and down a stairway after the sentencing. He did not offer any statement to the victims or show any remorse in the courtroom.

So he didn't even say he was sorry. What a jewel....

[dysfunctional press]

40. well...it IS alabama...'nuff said.

nt

[DeSwiss]

42. I went there for the first time in 1965....

...and some of the apartheid signs we're still up and we had to find a "colored" place to eat and use the bathroom. I was a displaced northern boy completely out of my element.

And I haven't been the same since.

[anitar1]

47. Must be an upright Christian family and he has

repented already.
and after all these kids were only "adopted" An probably for the very purpose that he adopted them. Hope he suffers a long cancerous condition .