[Update: There is some disagreement over whether Steven Silter molested his baby or became sexually aroused by his baby. Regardless, the judge found has found it necessary to\u00a0remove Sitler\u2019s wife from serving as a chaperone due to her failure to report \u201creport disclosures\u201d to the court. I have edited my post slightly to reflect the language used by\u00a0the court.]<\/strong><\/p>\n I am really really really not happy to be writing this post. As in,\u00a0seriously<\/em>\u00a0not happy. I\u2019ve mentioned before that several years back Doug Wilson<\/a> married a convicted pedophile to a young woman in his church, declaring the pedophile reformed and even asking God to bless them with children. But as\u00a0I and others wrote critically of Wilson\u2019s actions\u2014the marriage was for all intents and purposes arranged by him\u2014we never wanted to see a child harmed as a result. And yet, here we are.<\/p>\n Let me start with a quick summary of the situation.\u00a0In\u00a02005, Wilson asked the judge\u00a0for leniency in sentencing Steven Sitler for molesting young children, declaring him \u201cgenuinely repentant.\u201d Some years later, Wilson married Sitler\u00a0to one of his parishioners and asked God to bless them with children. Earlier this year,\u00a0Sitler\u2019s wife gave birth to a baby boy, and this month the court found\u00a0that \u201c(Sitler) has had contact with his child that resulted in actual sexual stimulation.\u201d If that\u2019s all you feel you need\u00a0to know\u2014and it may be\u2014you can stop reading here. I\u2019m going to provide more of the backstory, and while I won\u2019t be graphic, some readers may find it triggering.<\/p>\n In writing this piece, I relied primarily on this post<\/a> by the Wartburg Watch. I followed the links provided in that article and in some cases quote\u00a0directly on those pieces. Finally, I also drew on Wilson\u2019s recent statement in the matter<\/a>.<\/p>\n Who Is Doug Wilson?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Doug Wilson is an evangelical theologian. As my regular readers will know, Wilson holds some fairly extreme beliefs. He has\u00a0defended slavery<\/a>, described marital sex\u00a0with terms like \u201cconquer\u201d and \u201csurrender,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0advocated for\u00a0exiling gays<\/a>. Yet in spite of this, Wilson is no fringe theologian. As Dee of Warburg Watch notes:<\/p>\n Doug Wilson is a much beloved pastor whom\u00a0The Gospel Coalition<\/a>\u00a0has posted 52 times.\u00a0John Piper<\/a>\u00a0admires him.\u00a0Tim Challies\u00a0<\/a>is a fan. Wilson\u00a0is beloved of\u00a0R.C. Sproul and Al Mohler<\/a>. He is even quoted over at\u00a09Marks<\/a>.\u00a0Kevin DeYoung<\/a>\u00a0thinks Wilson\u00a0is wise.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Earlier this summer R. L. Stollar collected\u00a0a long list of prominent evangelical leaders<\/a>\u00a0who promoted a post in which he argued that supporting gay marriage is a \u201cfar more serious\u201d problem than was supporting slavery. Wilson\u2019s views may be extreme, but he is no fringe character within wider evangelical circles.<\/p>\n In addition to pastoring Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, Wilson runs New Saint Andrews College, a small Christian college\u00a0founded in 1994. I am familiar with the school partly through Wilson\u2019s magazine, Credenda Agenda, which I read growing up in an evangelical homeschool home, and partly because a fellow homeschooler I grew up knowing attended New Saint Andrews after\u00a0graduation.\u00a0Wilson also heads his own denomination and has created his own association of Christian schools.<\/p>\n Doug Wilson Asks for Leniency for Pedophile Steven Sitler<\/strong><\/p>\n Our saga begins\u00a0as follows<\/a>, as homeschool graduate Steven Sitler headed off to New Saint Andrews college to study under Doug Wilson:<\/p>\n Steven Sitler moved to Moscow in 2003 to attend Doug Wilson\u2019s college, New Saint Andrews.\u00a0<\/strong>\u00a0Like many students attending NSA, Steven Sitler boarded with a Christ Church family.\u00a0 Unbeknownst to anyone in Moscow, he brought with him a history of pedophilia.<\/p>\n He molested children in his Moscow boarding home until he was discovered in March 11, 2005.\u00a0<\/strong>\u00a0The parents of the victims notified Doug Wilson.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n Take a moment to note that Sitler did not voluntarily confess to child molesting. No.\u00a0He was caught<\/em>. This wasn\u2019t his first offense, either. To his credit, Wilson did encourage the family of the victim to notify the police. Wilson expelled Sitler from New Saint Andrews and sent him back to his hometown in Washington state a two hour drive away. In spite of his return home, Sitler\u2019s trial took place in Moscow, Idaho, and both he and the victim were represented<\/a> by lawyers from Christ Church.<\/p>\n The victim\u2019s family retained Christ Church member and attorney Gregory Dickison, who accompanied them to report the crime the morning after it occurred.\u00a0Steven Sitler\u2019s family retained Dean Wullenwaber, who is also a member of Christ Church.<\/strong>\u00a0In short, the aggrieved and the aggravator\u00a0 were handled within a small church community which Doug controlled. (Controlled, you ask? Of the eighteen Kirk elders, including Doug, twelve rely substantially on Christ Church and its associated industries for a paycheck. It would be wrong to think that loyalty can\u2019t be purchased.)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Sitler\u2019s lawyer, Dean Wullenwaber, was a member of Christ Church. Bear this in mind, because Wullenwaber will come up again. In addition to the note about Wilson\u2019s control of the Christ Church board of elders, I would add\u00a0that Christ Church is a congregation\u00a0that practices church discipline. This means that if Wilson believed Wullenwarber was acting contrary to biblical principles in his defense of Sitler, he could call him in for church discipline and even revoke his membership.<\/p>\n Even though he had sent him home, Wilson continued to meet with Sitler<\/a>:<\/p>\n Over time, Steven Sitler confessed his crimes to Doug Wilson \u2014 but we have no way of knowing if all his victims were named \u2014 in exchange for a guilty plea that included a single count of \u201cLewd and Lascivious Conduct With a Minor Under the Age of Sixteen.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>\u00a0According to his\u00a0letter to Latah County Superior Court Judge John Stegner, Wilson had a total of\u00a0 \u201cabout six counseling sessions\u201d with Sitler during the months between the discovery of his crimes and his guilty plea.<\/p>\n Nevertheless, after only six counseling sessions,\u00a0Wilson, who has received no formal training in the treatment or counseling of sex offenders, assured the judge that Steven Sitler\u00a0\u201cwas completely open and honest with me.\u201d\u00a0<\/i>\u00a0<\/strong>Indeed, based on Doug Wilson\u2019s appraisal of Steven Sitler, Wilson had\u00a0\u201cgood hope that Steven has genuinely repented.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0<\/i>The arrogance of a man who believes he can competently tackle any problem is the most compelling proof of Wilson\u2019s utter incompetence to address the horrendous nature and sheer numbers of Steven Sitler\u2019s crimes.\u00a0 Indeed, he claims in the letter that Sitler\u2019s crimes were rooted in\u00a0\u201cunderlying issues of his discontent.\u201d\u00a0<\/i><\/p>\n Court documents make clear that the only\u00a0known<\/i>\u00a0victims in this case are those whom Steven admitted to Doug.<\/strong>\u00a0. . . On September 26, 2005, Sitler was sentenced to life in prison, which included only a few months in a state non-violent offenders\u2019 prison camp and one year in the county jail.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Between March 2005, when Sitler was caught molesting a child, and September 2005, when he was sentenced, Wilson held\u00a0six counseling sessions with Sitler and concluded that Sitler was being \u201copen and honest\u201d with him and that Sitler had \u201cgenuinely repented.\u201d Actually, it went even\u00a0further than this<\/a>\u2014Wilson wrote to the judge asking for leniency:<\/p>\n On August 19th, 2005, three or four months before notifying his parishioners of Sitler\u2019s crimes, Doug Wilson wrote a letter on Christ Church letterhead to Judge John Stegner. In that letter, Wilson requested leniency for Steven Sitler, writing:<\/p>\n \u201cI would urge that the civil penalties applied would be measured and limited. I have a good hope that Steven has genuinely repented, and that he will continue to deal with this to become a productive and contributing member of society.\u201d<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Without any degree in counseling or psychology, Wilson assured the judge that he was confident that Sitler would be able to \u201cdeal with\u201d his problem and be a \u201cproductive and contributing member as society.\u201d We\u2019re talking about a man who had confessed to molesting\u00a0numerous young children<\/em>\u00a0over the course of several years,\u00a0and only confessed because he was caught<\/em>.<\/p>\n In a statement\u00a0he released yesterday<\/a>, Wilson defended his letter as follows:<\/p>\n On a related front, others have said that I advocated for leniency for Steven after his conviction and during the sentencing phase. In the course of the letter I wrote to the judge (in 2005), I simply reported on the nature of my counsel to Steven after he was caught.<\/strong> In the middle of that report, I said, \u201cIt is important to note that I have not offered him any spiritual panacea or \u2018quick fix,\u2019 and I believe Steven understands the importance of his need to resist these temptations over the long haul.\u201d In addition, at the conclusion of my letter, with regard to the legal consequences of his behavior, I told the judge that I was \u201cgrateful that he [would] be sentenced for his behavior,\u201d and was also grateful that there would be \u201chard consequences for him in real time.\u201d At the same time, I urged that the civil penalties be \u201cmeasured and limited.\u201d By \u201cmeasured and limited,\u201d I meant principled, defined and deliberate. I did\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>not<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0mean trivial, light, or lenient.<\/strong> I was not requesting a slap on the wrist. If you put together what I actually said, you will see that what I expressed to the judge was my desire for\u00a0<\/span>hard consequences<\/em>\u00a0for Steven that were\u00a0<\/span>measured and limited<\/em>. My hope is that the judge read the letter more carefully than others have since done.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Wilson appears to be redefining the word\u00a0\u201climited\u201d to not mean \u201climited.\u201d Smooth<\/em>. Wilson also explains away the fact that he told the judge he believed Sitler was genuinely repentant\u00a0and that he could become a productive member of society by insisting that he simply reported what he saw. Wilson completely ignores the reality that he made these statements with no background whatsoever in counseling or psychology. Wilson has a BA in classical studies and an MA in philosophy. He was not equipped to counsel a pedophile, much less accurately report on a\u00a0pedophile\u2019s mental state and potential for reform. Wilson should be acknowledging this and apologizing for his hubris in thinking he was qualified to do so, but he is not. Instead, he is doubling down and insisting that he did nothing wrong.<\/p>\n As a contrast to Wilson\u2019s 2005 letter to Judge Stegner, you may be interested to read\u00a0this letter<\/a>\u00a0written by the parents of one of Sitler\u2019s victims.<\/p>\n It is perhaps worth mentioning that in Wilson\u2019s 1999 book, Fidelity, he calls for the death penalty for pedophiles, writing that\u00a0\u201cwhen we are dealing with young children who are abused by adults (pederasty, child porn, etc.) the penalty for those guilty of the crime should be death.\u201d How did Wilson go from calling for the death penalty for child molesters to writing to a judge asking him to give a confessed pedophile a \u201climited\u201d penalty? Did the rules suddenly change when it was someone he knew?<\/p>\n Asking\u00a0for leniency for Sitler wasn\u2019t Wilson\u2019s only shortcoming\u00a0in this case<\/a>. He also failed to notify the\u00a0other parishioners of the situation for a full eight months.<\/p>\n Doug Wilson elected not to share this horrendous crime with his parishioners \u201cfor fear of violating the privacy of the family of the victim.\u201d\u00a0. . . Two months after Steven Sitler received his sentence Wilson delivered the news (through another elder at Christ Church) during the \u201cheads of households\u201d meeting that a pedophile had been at work in their community.\u00a0\u00a0Wilson waited eight months to inform his congregation that a serial pedophile had lived amongst them.<\/strong>\u00a0 Moreover, when he finally decided to notify the flock, he failed to alert anyone to the possibility that unknown predation may have occurred, i.e.\u00a0that there may be other victims.<\/i>\u00a0Rather, he framed it to leave the impression that this matter simply concerned a sex offender returning to the covenant community \u2014 and\u00a0not<\/i>\u00a0the damage he wrought and the constant danger he posed.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n When all of this came to light in 2006, there was a public outcry, both in the community and beyond it. Wilson responded\u00a0in a blog post<\/a>, arguing that charges that he had failed to warn those in his church were false. As proof he pointed to meetings in November 2005 and December 2005 when he notified the church of the situation. In his desire to assure the public that he\u00a0had<\/em>\u00a0notified members of his church, he only confirmed that he had\u00a0waited eight months to do so<\/em>.<\/p>\n While Sitler appears to have boarded only with a single family, he was welcomed into many other Christ Church homes as a visitor. In fact, Sitler confessed to molesting a two-year-old child during a visit with a family in his hometown. All families with young children in the\u00a0church who had had contact with Sitler ought to have been notified so that they could question their children or take them in for professional evaluation. By waiting until after the trial was over before making the congregation aware of Sitler\u2019s actions, Wilson curtailed any search for further victims.<\/p>\n When this came to light in 2006, there was\u00a0a public outcry<\/a>.<\/p>\n Afterwards, when called to account for his dereliction of duty by the general public, Douglas Wilson dismissed his failure as a good shepherd as his enemies\u2019 failed attempt to get \u201chandles on him.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0The absence of a trial assured that the general public and also many church members would be unaware of any of these events. Following completion of his jail time, Steven Sitler rented and then purchased property owned by members of Christ Church, transferred to the University of Idaho, and was gradually reintegrated into the Christ Church and Trinity Reformed Church family.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n Wilson has a serious problem with taking criticism, because he seems to automatically assume that any criticism must be motivated by his enemies desire to find a way to take him down. Regardless, the import of this paragraph is that after completing his jail time, Sitler returned to the Christ Church community.\u00a0In his recent statement<\/a>, Wilson\u00a0works to minimize Sitler\u2019s attendance at Christ Church, stating that \u201che usually comes in shortly before the service, sits quietly, and leaves shortly after the service.\u201d In justifying Sitler\u2019s continued involvement in Christ Church, Wilson writes that \u201cthe church is a hospital for sinners, not a rest home for saints.\u201d<\/p>\n Some readers may wonder why Sitler was released at all. It seems that as a condition of his probation, Sitler is not permitted to have contact with children under 18 without a chaperone.\u00a0According to the Moscow-Pullman Daily News:<\/a><\/p>\n He served one year with the Idaho Department of Corrections\u2019 retained jurisdiction treatment programs and less than a year in the custody of the Latah County Jail before being released onto probation.\u00a0Under the terms of his probation, Sitler is prohibited from associating with anyone under the age of 18 without supervision of an approved chaperone.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Wilson insisted in his recent statement that he and his church have followed this rule, and that Sitler has only ever attended church with a chaperone, but\u00a0he does not mention that Steven\u2019s wife is allowed to serve as a chaperone, which is an interesting omission. And that brings us to 2011.<\/p>\n Wilson Marries Sitler to Katie Travis<\/strong><\/p>\n Some years after Sitler was sentenced, a\u00a0young woman named Katie Travis\u00a0came to Christ Church<\/a>\u00a0to teach at one of its affiliated schools. She boarded with Edwin Iverson and his family. Iverson was an elder at Christ Church and a librarian at New Saint Andrews. By\u00a0the summer of 2010, Travis was 23 and wanted to be married, so she went to the Iverson\u2019s for help in finding her a husband. They set her up with Sitler, and a whirlwind courtship began that August. Sitler obtained Travis\u2019s parents\u2019 permission to marry her, and the wedding took place on in June 2011.<\/p>\n Because Sitler was a convicted sex offender serving lifelong probation, the couple had to obtain the court\u2019s permission to marry. Rose Husky, who was in the courtroom during the proceedings, wrote about what happened\u00a0as follows<\/a>:<\/p>\n This morning I sat in a nearly empty courtroom and listened to arguments regarding the June 11th marriage of Steven Sitler and Katie Travis. The Department of Corrections unambiguously stated that they did not support this marriage. In late March Mr. Sitler told his probation officer that in a year or so (predicated, apparently, on Miss Travis\u2019 graduation from a college program) they want to start a family. Following that conversation, and because of the potential risk to any children Mr. Sitler might father, the DOC (Department of Corrections) requested further psychological evaluation of Mr. Sitler. The results of his AASI = Abel Assessment for Sexual Interest raised concerns.<\/p>\n Mr. Wallenwaber, representing Steven Sitler, challenged the appropriateness of the test in Mr. Sitler\u2019s case, as well as the academic credentials of the evaluator. (The evaluator has a clinical practice in Coeur d\u2019Alene \u201cspecializing in the treatment and evaluation of sexual offenders\u201d and sits on the Sexual Offender Classification Board; his credentials seem pretty solid to me.) This tiresome old rhetorical device of Christ Church members and leadership, i.e., ad hominem attacks fell, I believe, on deaf ears. Mr. Wallenwaber also argued that the issue in front of the court today was marriage, not potential children\u00a0. . .\u00a0.<\/p>\n The discussion amongst Latah County Prosecutor, Bill Thompson; Judge Stegner; and Mr. Wallenwaber, focused, in part, on the legal consequence if\/when Steven Sitler and Katie Travis have children. It may be the case that Mr. Sitler will not be allowed to share a home with his wife and child or children. This remedy may be utilized in Idaho when the father is a convicted pedophile. Judge Stegner ruled that the wedding could go forward and issues regarding the protection of children will be addressed if and children are a factor in the marriage.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Wilson explains and justifies his involvement in Sitler and Travis\u2019 wedding\u00a0as follows<\/a>:<\/p>\n Seventh, in the latest round of accusations, much has been made of the fact that Christ Church approved of Steven\u2019s wedding to Katie through the fact that I officiated at the wedding. First, it should be noted that in our community, weddings are not arranged or determined by the church. Katie and her family had all the facts when she agreed to marry Steven, which was important, but the decision to marry was the couple\u2019s decision, not ours. That said, I officiated at the wedding and was glad to do so. While we do\u00a0not<\/em>\u00a0believe that marriage is an automatic \u201cfix\u201d for the temptations to molest children, we agree with Judge Stegner who approved the wedding and said that \u2018an age-appropriate relationship with a member of the opposite sex from Mr. Sitler is one of the best things that can happen to him\u00a0and to society<\/em>\u201d (emphasis added). Moreover, if everything is on the table, we do not believe the church has the authority to prohibit or \u201cnot allow\u201d a lawful marriage.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I looked and could not find Judge Stegner\u2019s ruling, from which Wilson quotes. Husky, the eyewitness I quoted from above, did not mention that the judge stated anything about whether an age-appropriate relationship would be good for Sitler, suggesting instead that the issue hinged on differentiating between\u00a0marriage<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0childbearing<\/em>. She was very clear, too, that the state argued adamantly\u00a0against<\/em>\u00a0allowing Sitler to marry. I am not a psychologist, but based on what little I know about pedophilia I am highly skeptical of the idea that marriage would be\u00a0seen as even part of the\u00a0solution of sorts for a convicted pedophile. Over on Wartburg Watch, Huskey\u00a0has promised<\/a>\u00a0to pull together primary sources to \u201crefute\u201d Wilson\u2019s statement. Stay tuned for that.<\/p>\n But all of this leaves out Wilson\u2019s utterly\u00a0bizarre<\/em>\u00a0claim that the church cannot refuse to perform a marriage the state has declared lawful. Does Wilson intend to begin performing same-sex marriages, I wonder? I suspect not. Further, while\u00a0I was not married in an evangelical church, my sister was, and the pastor required them to satisfactorily pass weeks of premarital counseling before consenting to marry them. This is\u00a0typical<\/em>\u00a0for evangelical churches. Wilson\u2019s decision to marry Sitler and Travis was indeed an\u00a0endorsement<\/em>\u00a0of their marriage. Wilson did not have to marry the couple.\u00a0Period<\/em>. And frankly, from where I\u2019m standing, Wilson\u2019s disingenuousness here calls into question the reliability of the rest of his statement.<\/p>\n Regardless of what the judge ultimately decided, the\u00a0Department of Corrections argued adamantly against allowing Sitler to marry because of the high level of risk to any children Sitler might father. This should have made an impact on Wilson, but apparently it did not. Wilson chose to officiate the ceremony in spite of this opposition. In doing so\u00a0he very clearly and unambiguously endorsed the match. In addition, while Wilson insists that the match was not arranged, Travis went to Christ Church elder Edwin Iverson looking for a husband and was immediately set up with Sitler. While I don\u2019t know whether Wilson was asked beforehand, it remains a fact that the idea for the match originated with one of his elders.<\/p>\n And there\u2019s more, too. During the ceremony, Wilson\u00a0asked for<\/a>\u00a0\u201cthe gift and heritage of children\u201d for Sitler and Travis. That Wilson was willing to ask, in prayer, for the couple to have children knowing what he did about Sitler\u2019s condition, including the court\u2019s determination that his risk level was high, is\u00a0absolutely and completely reprehensible<\/em>. It suggests that Wilson did not see the serious problems that would arise from the couple\u2019s having children.<\/p>\n Sitler Has Contact with His Infant that Results in \u201cSexual Stimulation\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n This past Spring, Sitler\u2019s new wife had a baby boy. Then last week, this happened<\/a>:<\/p>\n During Tuesday\u2019s review hearing, Latah County Prosecuting Attorney Bill Thompson said the state originally requested a review of Sitler\u2019s conditions of probation to provide guidance on how to move forward given the fact Sitler had fathered a child and the results of a polygraph test had disclosed concerning actions.<\/span><\/p>\n Thompson said information\u00a0the court now has \u201cshows (Sitler) has had contact with his child that resulted in actual sexual stimulation.\u201d Thompson said\u00a0the incidents in question occurred while Sitler was chaperoned.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cIn some extent the state\u2019s worst fears appeared to be realized by some of the recent disclosures in the polygraphs,\u201d Thompson said.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cThe actions that he has engaged in and disclosed are a compelling basis that he cannot have anything close to a normal parental relationship at this time with his child,\u201d Thompson said. \u201cEverybody would love for Mr. Sitler to become a normal person, but the fact is he is not. He is a serial child sexual abuser.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n According to the court,\u00a0Sitler\u00a0\u201chas had contact with his child that resulted in actual sexual stimulation.\u201d [Edit: Regardless of whether the \u201csexual\u00a0stimulation\u201d mentioned here refers to Sitler becoming aroused or to Sitler molesting his son, the prosecuting attorney is correct in noting that\u00a0\u201che cannot have anything close to a normal parental relationship at this time with his child.\u201d]<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cThe best way to protect is to prohibit contact except in direct line of vision with a responsible, approved chaperone. At this point in time, that means he would not be able to reside with his wife and child.\u201d<\/p>\n During a review hearing Aug. 1, Sitler was allowed to continue living with his son until a second review hearing could be held. However, during the past month, Thompson said, Sitler\u2019s wife was disqualified as an approved chaperone for failure to report disclosures related directly to the couple\u2019s son and Sitler was required to move out of their home.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n As you remember, one term of Sitler\u2019s probation was that he not have contact with children under eighteen without a chaperone. However, Sitler\u2019s wife was permitted to serve as a chaperone, meaning that he was allowed to live at home with his wife and infant son after the baby\u2019s birth last spring. Sitler\u2019s wife has now been disqualified from serving as a chaperone because she failed to report \u201cdisclosers related directly to the couple\u2019s son.\u201d<\/p>\n Latah County 2nd District Judge John Stegner did not rule Tuesday on whether Sitler can live in the home or not, only that he must have an approved, \u201cline-of-sight\u201d chaperone present at all times when with the child, Thompson said.<\/p>\n Stegner said Sitler\u2019s wife could be reinstated as a chaperone with additional training at the Valley Treatment Centers.<\/p>\n Stegner also said Sitler must go through relapse prevention therapy and complete and pass another polygraph test. Thompson said it is troubling that Sitler has yet to successfully compete a polygraph test and it is concerning that there may still be more that hasn\u2019t been disclosed.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n I don\u2019t pretend to understand Stegner\u2019s reasoning here. If Sitler has molested his child, he has violated his parole. Shouldn\u2019t that mean a return to prison? [Edit: Some readers have suggested that the sexual stimulation referred to in the article above indicates that Sitler was sexually aroused by contact with his son rather than that Sitler has now sexually molested his son. If this is the case it might explain why he is not now in prison for a parole violation. However, if that is the case, at the very least it ought to disqualify Sitler from living with his wife and son.]<\/p>\n I am also baffled by the fact that Sitler\u2019s wife\u2019s disqualification from serving as a chaperone is only temporary. She\u00a0has already proved her willingness<\/em> to hide things the court believes are relevant<\/em>. Shouldn\u2019t this\u00a0disqualify her from serving as a chaperone more permanently?\u00a0Both Sitler and his wife come from communities that teach male leadership and female submission. Could this be contributing to Katie\u2019s willingness to hide information from the court? Or perhaps she\u2019s simply more afraid of losing her husband than she is of her baby being molested?<\/p>\n Note the concerns about the polygraph test. It looks like the court thinks Sitler is not being entirely truthful with them\u2014in other words, he may be hiding something more.<\/p>\n Dean Wullenwaber, Sitler\u2019s defense attorney, said Sitler was not told until Tuesday that the Idaho Department of Corrections would try to remove his wife and parents as chaperones. He added that Valley Treatment Centers is now taking a more restrictive approach in its recent statement compared to its stance four weeks ago.<\/p>\n \u201cIt is possible to achieve all of the Idaho Department of Corrections stated aims without trying to perform surgery with an ax, as they have done,\u201d Wullenwaber said.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n And here is Wullenwarber. If you remember, he was the Christ Church member who defended Sitler in court when charges were first made against him and then argued six years later that he should be permitted to marry. And now he\u2019s back, and this time upset that Sitler\u2019s wife has been disqualified from serving as a chaperone in spite of the fact that she has been\u00a0failing to report relevant information to the court<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n Conclusion<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Wilson\u2019s<\/span> most recent statement<\/a> is 1853 words long but mentions\u00a0Sitler\u2019s son only once. Wilson shows far more concern for Sitler and for his own reputation than he does for Sitler\u2019s son. Wilson finishes as follows:<\/span><\/p>\n If you have occasion to visit our worship services, the chances are good that Steven Sitler will be there, listening to the proclamation of free grace. It is a proclamation that never gets old. He is welcome to be there with us, and you are most welcome also.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Free grace<\/em>. Would that growing up in a home safe from sexual abuse\u00a0were\u00a0so free.<\/span><\/p>\n Where does this leave us, exactly? In part, it leaves us in the uncomfortable position of saying \u201cI told you so.\u201d Uncomfortable because I do not want to be saying it<\/em>. There is no rejoicing over this news. Wilson needs to be held accountable for his actions, but he clearly feels he has done nothing wrong. Take a look at<\/span> this paragraph<\/a> from his recent statement, for example:<\/span><\/p>\n Third, in Moscow, Idaho there are 38 registered sex offenders. The chances are good that the only one you have heard about is Steven Sitler. This is because he provides an easy way for enemies of our ministry to attack us. If he abandoned the faith, or joined another church, or joined in on the attack on us, he would still certainly have the legal consequences of his crimes to deal with, but would probably be allowed to retreat into relative anonymity. As noted above, despite the greatness of his sin, we have not pulled away from him. But it should be noted that despite all the \u201cextra treatment\u201d he is getting, particularly on the Internet, it is to his credit that he has not pulled away from us either.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n This<\/em> is the message Wilson is taking away from this situation. Wilson paints himself as a victim, with enemies just waiting to pounce.\u00a0He appears to see the outrage over Steven Sitler is just a show and a front. Yes, there are other sex offenders in Moscow, Idaho, but there\u2019s only one sex offender for whom Wilson wrote a letter to the judge asking that his penalty be \u201climited,\u201d and there\u2019s only one sex offender whose wedding was sanctioned and blessed by Wilson. This isn\u2019t about Sitler, it\u2019s about Wilson\u2019s<\/em> actions, and about what those\u00a0actions say about his leadership and his beliefs. But then, Wilson honestly doesn\u2019t think his actions were wrong in any way, so perhaps it\u2019s not surprising that he feels\u00a0the outrage surrounding this situation is\u00a0a facade.<\/span><\/p>\n\n
\n
\n