Thursday, September 3, 2015

Excerpt passage from Government Corruption and Educational Fraud: The Toxic Legacy of the Obama Administration. (draft)

The following is an excerpt passage from Government Corruption and Educational Fraud: The Toxic Legacy of the Obama Administration.  

Currently being edited and revised, it contains over 550 pages documenting the educational fraud and corruption the government, two accreditors (The Association of Theological Schools and Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities) and a school called Western Seminary is involved in. It includes thousands of pages of exhibits as well as videos of various people, published both online and in print, and distributed widely.  (United States v. Smith, 776 F.2d 1104, 1114 (3d Cir. 1985) “[T]he public has a substantial interest in the integrity or lack of integrity of those who serve them in public office.”).

The Obama Administration has fought with public money to support the link of retaining education already paid for and graded as well as any additional education, regardless if taken at Western Seminary MUST cover up child molestation, section 504 fraud and other corruption at Western Seminary, collusion with the accreditors and corruption at the government level.

In spite of 42 million American survivors of child sexual abuse, and with the knowledge of Barack Obama, using public money the Obama Administration defend Western Seminary, the collusion with the accreditors and failures at the federal level as valid.


Put the following into perspective:

On October 7, 2011 the U.S. Department of Education swore under oath that it did not have the documentation to support its various conclusions or claims made in 2007-2008 during the Spellings tenure as U.S. Secretary of Education and during the genesis of the cover-up by the Department under her leadership.  In the most hurtful and powerful way, this also lined up with the conclusions made by the Department’s Inspector General Audit of the AAEU in 2003.

Ten months earlier in January 2011, current Secretary of Education Arne Duncan was confronted that Western Seminary had lied, backdated and falsified documents during an investigation in 2005.  Federal Student funds are linked to compliance with section 504 of the rehabilitation act of 1973.  Compliance includes not retaliating because someone filed a complaint.  (Barker v. Riverside County Office of Education, No. 07-56313 (9th Cir. Oct. 23, 2009) "The remedies, procedures, and rights set forth in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 . . . shall be available to any person aggrieved by any act or failure to act by any recipient of Federal assistance . . . .". that panel rejected the suggestion that a person under the statute must be disabled to have standing to raise its protections: "Section 504 and its anti-retaliation provision use the all inclusive phrases 'any person aggrieved' and 'any individual,' and no language further limits who 'any person aggrieved' or 'any individual' may be. In particular, the statutes do not include language requiring such individuals to have disabilities in order to have standing.”)  Just as Randy stated in 2005, Western Seminary was retaliating against him for questioning the treatment of Matt Tuck in 2001.  The settlement agreement clearly indicates no complaints are to be filed involving Matt ¶ 14.  Western Seminary demand everything else to be covered up and threaten both Randy and Carol if they said anything, they would have to pay tens of thousands of dollars to Western Seminary, Gary Tuck, Steve Korch and Lynn Ruark.

Western not only used the Settlement Agreement to coverup for the $25,000 under the table pay off to Steve Korch which Randy, Carol or Dresser did not know about at the time, but did so through the lead attorney's trust account (money laundering) so that there would be no trace of the transaction or the secret agreement between Western Seminary and Steve Korch.  It was not until FOIA's filed and received in 2010, that Randy and Carol would learn Western Seminary also used the conditions of the Settlement Agreement as a means to cover for Matt, due to their lying, backdated and falsified documents during the OCR investigation in 2005.

The Obama Administration defends the use of Settlement Agreements to cover up section 504 retaliation, 18 U.S. Code § 1001 and California Penal Code § 134 felonies involving government investigations, and a whole lot more at the direct detriment of Randy Chapel's family and life, because such support covers up the government's failures and corruption in these matters.

Fed up, Susan Allister filed for divorce on February 1, 2011.   Susan forced the divorce by linking it to the "win" of Western Seminary, who colluded with ATS, NWCCU and was being covered by the government against Randy and Carol.  Randy has not seen his son since Nov 2010 and according to Susan will not until he is an adult. (joelchapel.com, joelchapel.co.uk, forcing the creation of www.facebook.com/Joel.T.Chapel)


What has Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said, given he has known about this case since 2009?

“stunned,”    “rotten culture,”    and    "The answer here is very simple, you just have a culture of integrity and you have better security measures in place. But again what was so disappointing for me here was not an isolated individual or two, this was clearly systemic; … simply can't happen, that is absolutely inexcusable."

Those words are not about the government's ongoing failures costing Randy’s family and life, or the morbid acts of abuse and corruption of the two accreditors and Western Seminary.  This is in reference to the Atlanta Public Schools cheating scandal.  About former Superintendent Beverly Hall who was indicted as she “knew or should have known” what was going on.







The draft passage from the book:

In the State of California, a person under the age of 18 is considered a child.  Claiming that the child consented is not a defense.  This is clearly noted in the Criminal Jury Instructions written by the Judicial Council of California. In both No. 1102. Sexual Penetration With Person Under 18 (Penal Code Section 289(h))  (pp. 818-820) and No. 1122. Annoying or Molesting a Child (Penal Code Section 647.6(a)–(c))  (pp. 840-843) People v. Kemp (1934) 139 Cal.App. 48, 51 [34 P.2d 502] is referenced if a defense claims that the other person may have consented.  In Kemp, the defendant was convicted of rape and incest on his niece.  Four counts were charged as rape and four counts as incest.  At the time the niece was sixteen for two of the occasions and seventeen for the other two.  In particular, the niece gave birth to a child, which died a couple of months after birth.  During the time the niece was living with the defendant (March, 1932 - December, 1932 and June, 1933 - October, 1933) the niece and uncle had repeated acts of sexual intercourse.

According to instruction notes for No. 1102, “Except as provided in Section 288, any person who participates in an act of sexual penetration with another person who is under 18 years of age shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison or in a county jail for a period of not more than one year.” Penal Code Section 289(h)).”  The instruction notes go on to define various possible claims and defenses, such as:

1. Foreign Object, Substance, Instrument, or Device Defined. Pen. Code,
§ 289(k)(2); People v. Wilcox (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 715, 717 [223 Cal.Rptr. 170] [a finger is a “foreign object”].

2. Sexual Penetration Defined. Pen. Code, § 289(k)(1); see People v. Quintana (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 1362, 1371 [108 Cal.Rptr.2d 235] [penetration of genital opening refers to penetration of labia majora, not the vagina].

3. Unknown Object Defined. Pen. Code, § 289(k)(3). “Unknown object" shall include any foreign object, substance, instrument, or device, or any part of the body, including a penis, when it is not known whether penetration was by a penis or by a foreign object, substance, instrument, or device, or by any other part of the body.”

4. Sexual Abuse Defined. People v. White (1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 193, 205–206 [224 Cal.Rptr. 467].

In the case of instruction notes for No. 1122, “(a) (1) Every person who annoys or molests any child under 18 years of age shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both the fine and imprisonment. (a)(2) Every person who, motivated by an unnatural or abnormal sexual interest in children, engages in conduct with an adult whom he or she believes to be a child under 18 years of age, which conduct, if directed toward a child under 18 years of age, would be a violation of this section, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000), by imprisonment in a county jail for up to one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment. (b) Every person who violates this section after having entered, without consent, an inhabited dwelling house, or trailer coach as defined in Section 635 of the Vehicle Code, or the inhabited portion of any other building, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison, or in a county jail not exceeding one year, and by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000). (c) (1) Every person who violates this section shall be punished upon the second and each subsequent conviction by imprisonment in the state prison. (c)(2) Every person who violates this section after a previous felony conviction under Section 261, 264.1, 269, 285, 286, 288a, 288.5, or 289, any of which involved a minor under 16 years of age, or a previous felony conviction under this section, a conviction under Section 288, or a felony conviction under Section 311.4 involving a minor under 14 years of age shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, four, or six years.”

Just as was the case in No. 1102, the instruction notes go on to define various possible claims and defenses, such as:

1. Child annoyance or molestation may be committed by either a single act or a repetitive course of conduct. 

2. Sixteen year old cannot consent. See People v. Kemp (1934) 139 Cal.App. 48, 51 [34 P.2d 502].  See also People v. Cardenas (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 927, 937, fn. 7 [26 Cal.Rptr.2d 567] [dicta, in context of lewd act].

3. “Annoy” and “molest” are synonymous and generally refer to conduct designed to disturb, irritate, offend, injure, or at least tend to injure, another person. (People v. Lopez (1998) 19 Cal.4th 282, 289 [79 Cal.Rptr.2d 195, 965 P.2d 713]; People v. Carskaddon (1957) 49 Cal.2d 423, 426 [318 P.2d 4].) “Annoy means to disturb or irritate, especially by continued or repeated acts . . . . [¶] ‘[M]olest’ [means] . . . ‘to interfere with or meddle with unwarrantably so as to injure or disturb.’ ” (People v. Pallares (1952) 112 Cal.App.2d Supp. 895, 901 [246 P.2d 173].) A photographer can “annoy” a minor by taking the minor’s photograph in a public place in an offensive and irritating manner. (See Ecker v. Raging Waters Group, Inc. (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 1320, 1325 [105 Cal.Rptr.2d 320].) A lewd act is not required. (People v. Thompson (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 459, 465–466 [253 Cal.Rptr. 564].)

4. Annoy and Molest Defined; Objective Standard. People v. Lopez (1998) 19 Cal.4th 282, 289–290 [79 Cal.Rptr.2d 195, 965 P.2d 713]; People v. Kongs (1994) 30 Cal.App.4th 1741, 1749–1750 [37 Cal.Rptr.2d 327]; People v. Pallares (1952) 112 Cal.App.2d Supp. 895, 901–902 [246 P.2d 173].  Penal Code 647.6 does not require any touching whatsoever. Words alone may constitute annoying or molesting a child.

5. Lewd Act Not Required. People v. Thompson (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 459, 465–466 [253 Cal.Rptr. 564].

6. Need Not Actually Be Annoyed. People v. Lopez (1998) 19 Cal.4th 282, 290 [79 Cal.Rptr.2d 195, 965 P.2d 713].

7. Actual Touching Not Required. People v. Memro (1995) 11 Cal.4th 786, 871 [47 Cal.Rptr.2d 219, 905 P.2d 1305]; People v. Lopez (1998) 19 Cal.4th 282, 289 [79 Cal.Rptr.2d 195, 965 P.2d 713].

Steve Korch and his various Religious supporters in 1975, have claimed that it was only one child or that he did not commit the acts again or whatever claim he can muddle through.  Somehow making this better, but that is not what the law or the court says.  In People v. Shaw (2009) 77 Cal.App.4th 92, 99 Cal.Rptr.3d 112 ("The statute does not merely protect children as a class; it protects "any child" in the State of California from being annoyed or molested by an adult motivated by an unnatural or abnormal sexual interest... To hold that a defendant might lawfully annoy or molest a child motivated by an abnormal sexual interest toward that child alone is not only ludicrous, but defeats the express statutory purpose of protecting any child in this state against sexual offenses.").  In fact, there is nothing in the statute or any case law directly on point that requires the defendant to have singled out any particular child (or group of children) in advance for his actions.

In other words, regardless if it was an one time act, several acts over several weeks which is the case, one child, more children that have not come forward; regardless if he penetrated Jane Doe with his penis, placed it next to her vagina, thrusted his fingers inside back and forth, simply used his fingers, mouth, touched her in any way or even just annoyed her, Steve Korch molested a child.


#014

A 16 year old is considered a child in the state of California



In 1975 Steve Korch molested a child. 

Steve Korch child molestation 16 year old People v. Kemp (1934) 139 Cal. App. 48, 51 [34 P.2d 502] A 16 year old is considered a child in the state of California and is unable to consent (People v. Kemp (1934) 139 Cal. App. 48, 51 [34 P.2d 502]). He used his mouth, fingers and penis, which violates the law (See Foreign Object, Substance, Instrument, or Device Defined. Pen. Code § 289(k)(2); People v. Wilcox (1986) 177 Cal. App. 3d 715, 717 [223 Cal. Rptr. 170] [a finger is a “foreign object”]; Unknown Object Defined. Pen. Code § 289(k)(3). “Unknown object" shall include any foreign object, substance, instrument, or device, or any part of the body, including a penis, when it is not known whether penetration was by a penis or by a foreign object, substance, instrument, or device, or by any other part of the body.”). Penetration is not required. (Pen. Code § 289(k)(1); see People v. Quintana (2001) 89 Cal. App. 4th 1362, 1371 [108 Cal. Rptr. 2d 235]).


Since 1975, he and his Religious supporters have done everything they can to cover for Steve Korch. This includes his employer Western Seminary. So bent on covering for Steve Korch and all the other corruption they were involved in, Western Seminary et al., went out of their way to damage and destroy Randy and his family at all costs. They were able to get the school's accreditors The Association of Theological Schools in the United States and Canada and the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities to collude with them. Because of the ongoing failures of the U.S. Department of Education, the government supported and defended the corruption and fraud with public money, since by doing this, it covered up the corruption and fraud at the federal level.

There is every indication that Steve Korch is a dangerous, sociopath with complete lack of conscience for the damage he causes. Likewise, the Religious (Western Seminary et al. ATS et al.) will do everything possible to cover up their ongoing corruption and fraud, in order to "appear" moral and ethical to others. At the core, the Religious view children as disposable pleasures, act as if they are above the law and view others as dispensable as they perpetrate “pious contempt.”

Joel's father is working on a book that outlines everything: the corruption, the fraud... the whole thing with videos, testimony and documentation. Western Seminary et al., ATS et al., NWCCU et al., Margaret Spellings (2007-2008) and the Obama Administration (2009- ) have done everything possible to silence Randy, psychologically torturing and emotionally water boarding to break him. Randy (and Carol Nye-Wilson) live under the threat that Western Seminary et al., can sue for silence and money so that nothing comes to light -- this supported and defended with tax money by the Obama Administration.

If you or someone you know has been molested. There are people who will help you and will be there to support you.

No one should be caused to suffer alone. When we stand together, we break the silence these lowest forms of humans demand. Please watch the TLC special, and support efforts to educate children about childhood sexual abuse.



#013


Tuesday, September 1, 2015

An Open Letter to Steve Korch, Gary Tuck and Western Seminary, et al.

An Open Letter to Steve Korch, Gary Tuck and Western Seminary, et al.

You have caused catastrophic and irreparable damage to my family and me.

I have never known a day that either of you, Steve Korch or Gary Tuck, cared about the damage you cause to others. However, your reign of terror will soon end. My book with evidence about your scandalous acts will soon be published and widely distributed.

When Israel’s King David committed adultery with another man’s wife and murdered her husband by proxy, the prophet Nathan declared, “By this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme…” 2 Samuel 12:14. The same is true when people calling themselves Christians rob God of his glory by living secret and scandalous lives, like your corrupt demands and deeds to harm us that have never glorified God.

It would be impossible to find any human being who has not lied, cheated, stolen, hated, fornicated, or committed any other sin. It's not surprising that “Christians leaders” like you are among the worst offenders, practicing a cultish distortion of Christianity as a means to an end, rather than serving true Christian principles that you claim to uphold.

Your contract served mammon rather than Christ by extortion threats attempting to control our souls. Your purpose was to cover up child molestations, Section 504 fraud, and many law violations that you tied to me receiving two theological master degrees. As slaves of sin, you were willing to do anything to conceal your vile acts, even if it meant destroying others or using 3rd parties as proxy.

You tried to replicate inside me your own lack of conscience. You forced on me your corrupt demands and deeds that exemplify the evil living in your seared souls.

The evidence does not demonstrate servants of God operate Western Seminary. Instead, agents of evil appear to be in control. With the name of God on your lips you live a covert lifestyle of evil, while you feign God as your source.

It is not surprising that searches on your various names come up with the word, hypocrite as well. “Trustworthy and accessible training for gospel-centered transformation” is a business gimmick to attract the unsuspecting and gullible. The evidence shows that tag is not true or practiced in the secret lifestyles of those running Western Seminary.

You are aware of the saying, “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new” in 2 Corinthians 5:17. This declaration underscores that God transforms us from the inside out. Anyone can be taught a system of doctrine or ethics, but only true believers are renovated from the inside out and they produce godly fruit. “Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit” Matthew 7:17.

Pastor Bard Marshall warned, “Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account” – Heb 4:13 NIV. Western Seminary's time has arrived, just like Josh Duggar. Your double-life of preaching about God, while lusting to harm my family and me will now be exposed for all the world to see.

In no uncertain terms, you are fools to think you can have a lifestyle that is secret and still maintain hope of eternal life. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. Your malicious demands to conceal your foul deeds you perpetrated against my family and me will be made known to the public.

What distresses my friends, extended family and on-lookers watching this unfold, is that the destruction of my family – Joel, Susan and me-- is a byproduct of your secret sinful demands to cover up your sin, and to manipulate others to conceal it for you.

I simply want nothing to do with your corruption and fraud. I have no interest in being upright like Gary Tuck likes others to think of him while he secretly covers up his deceit for his son. I have no interest in referring to “grace,” “forgiveness,” and “redemption” in nearly every sentence like Steve Korch as a facade to cover up secret evil.

I have no interest to be seen as stupendously upright like Bert Downs and Randal Roberts portray of themselves, while lying in secret to harm others. I am unwilling to say and do anything for secret evil agendas and friends at the expense of truth and righteousness like Rob Wiggins or Lynn Ruark. I am not interested in being like you or linked to you, or to perpetuate your need to deceptively cover up who you really are as pretenders. I have no interest being labeled a mature Christian if I must emulate any of you.

You are not real. You are fake, phony, and above all, part of a sham.

Everyone fails, including Christians. But those who are truly being conformed to the image of Christ don’t spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in insurance money to employ over a dozen attorneys, get their accreditors or weak-minded government friends to cover up material evidence and to silence people about unlawful and unethical acts.

You will be judged for your mindless Religious rhetoric -- impotent redemption claims and God dishonoring acts. A day is coming when you will pay for what you have done on this earth to willfully harm my now ex-wife, our son, my parents and me and that day is coming soon.
Your hidden sins will find you out, and God’s wrath will burn against you. You will pay for what you have done.

#012