Richard Brown statement regarding Court hearing
The following is a statement that was provided via e-mail from Richard Brown:
Today I stood before the Court of the State of Ohio in Lucas County for my fourth time this year. I have done my best to remain silent amidst all of the persecution that I have had to endure in order to protect those whom I love. However, I can no longer sit by and watch certain media outlets speak for me or “on my behalf.” The plea when presented to me had NOTHING to do with a sex offender program because had it; there would have been no plea. I stand by that and no program can ever get me to change my stance. I, because I know the Court is made up of humans who have many shortcomings, assumed that a mistake had been made, however, the Court ORDERED me to attend sessions that are specifically designed for felons who are all REGISTERED, I might add. I am not a felon, nor will I ever be one.
Registering as an sexual offender was not even an option that I entertained throughout negotiations.. It’s quite strange that the recommendation of this treatment program (who is under contract with Lucas County and gets paid based on their recommendations) recommended that I attend a program of this magnitude. Again, due to my concern that a mistake had been made I wanted to consult with my attorney and therapist. They both found it quite unorthodox that this program would be recommended for me however, the Court would not entertain medical information from my therapist, who is licensed. So, it is unfortunate and a complete waste of taxpayer money but when threatened by the Court to either attend a sex offender treatment program or spend six months in jail, what would you do?
I cannot answer for you, but I have a life that I am very proud of. A one and a half hour program will never stop me from being who I am. I am a mentor to a plethora of people, both young and old. Throughout this journey, I found out who my real friends are. I am a much stronger person despite the fact that this ordeal has strengthened my conviction that this County is racist and very discriminatory. From the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas, to the Lucas County Children Services, to the halls of Government Center, and lets not forget the Public Safety Building, all have been very judgmental and I never stood the chance of a fair trial. In this day and age we live in, being transparent and using your past mistakes to help others can and will be used against you in a courtroom. That withstanding, I look forward to whatever assistance I can provide to those in this sex offender treatment program because I am not now nor will I ever be a registered offender, I am still waiting to find out who the alleged victims are that I keep hearing that I am not supposed to be in contact with.
I plan on starting a ministry at the church where I serve as the Senior Minister at in the coming days specifically designed to assist and walk with those who are STUCK in the Criminal Justice System and have found themselves discriminated against because of color, gender, sexual preference, etc. because as the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” What has happened to me and to countless others who will remain nameless has been a tremendous injustice however; it has not stopped me from doing anything that I was doing before all this drama began. If anything even more parents are seeking me out for advice in how to understand their children and for that I am grateful and I thank those who plotted against me to do me harm because I have a strong faith in God and see that what was meant for evil has now turned out for good! Thanks to all and God Bless!
I found it both responsible and respectable that instead of plowing into this event head-strong after this story broke earlier this week, unlike some posters to this site that want to hold your feet to a fire because your response wasn’t as immediate as they would have liked, and instead allowed this person to provide a response to clarify what the media has portrayed and what many of those detractors will miss.
The facts.
And you know the old saying, don’t let facts get in the way of an agenda.
and watch what you’re drinking. Sometimes the “kool-aid” looks just like sweetened iced tea.
March 6th, 2009 at 4:57 amThanks Brian, since I worked yesterday I wanted to wait to post this, the last time this came up for discussion some of the words used placed people into moderation, which then created claims I was trying to monitor them were made. Which of course wasn’t true, the spam software does it automatically to everyone who comments. I knew I wouldn’t be able to approve comments, in a timely fashion so it made more sense to wait, even though I would have preferred to have posted it earlier.
I’m not going to pretend Richard is not my friend, but I also am not going to ignore the fact that the reason I have the opinion I do is because I was there, I attended almost all of the hearings, I saw the evidence, I’ve read the reports from the Court and from his own licensed therapist. Some of our media has done a pretty irresponsible job in covering this story, not because they don’t agree with me, but because they haven’t gotten the basic facts correct.
Even if he wasn’t my friend, if I knew what I know or suspected, I’d take the same position. It doesn’t make sense for someone even by the courts own standards who should be deemed as “low risk” on their scale. By their own records they state he has a “non-contact sex offense” which gave him a one. He received the other “1″ for not have living with a lover for at least 2 years, which still makes him a “medium-low” offender on their Risk Categories.
He’s being set up to fail as being required to attend this “Responsible Living Treatment Program” because he can’t comply with it. Their program states he is expected to:
He can admit to emails from almost a decade ago to and from college friends and other friends (none were minors or involved sexual contact) and he can admit to not taking steps to secure some pornography that teenage males accessed, he could even admit to not monitoring them on the internet. That doesn’t appear to satisfy those in charge of the program. He’s the only person in this particular class who is not required to register as a sex offender.
The judge feels he’s being arrogant, he’s frustrated because this doesn’t make sense. The Judge would not consider other options so it was this or jail. Which frankly, I fear is going to happen anyway, because when he did try to share his frustrations in this group, he was told he was not allowed to.
Which is ironic since one of the rules of the group demands honesty and states that dishonesty either by admission or omission will result in a reprimand. Apparently you can only be honest if you state what they want you to state, not what is what you believe to be true.
When you question a diagnosis from a doctor, you can get a second opinion, when you are being diagnosed by the very program that will profit from billing taxpayers? In Lucas County it appears you attend or go to jail.
March 6th, 2009 at 9:05 amQuestion: Richard states that Again, due to my concern that a mistake had been made I wanted to consult with my attorney and therapist.
Who is the therapist Richard consulted with? What kind of credentials and State licensing does the therapist have?
Question: Lisa states that He received the other “1″ for not have living with a lover for at least 2 years,
How’s that again?
March 6th, 2009 at 10:01 amRichard, I never thought you were guilty of anything more than some poor judgment and naivete about the world of politics and what some will do.
I believe you have been unfairly treated by the judge.
You have shown remarkable restraint as Brian mentions while the facts of your case are misconstrued by the press.
I can see you will accept this as a lesson and learn from it. Even the worst of circumstances and decisions, although difficult to live with, can have a silver lining. Good luck in putting your life back together.
March 6th, 2009 at 10:23 amMad Jack, there is a series of items that are used to score one’s risk level as a sexual offender. You are either scored a 1 or a 0 for each item. One of the items in the risk category is that if you have lived with a lover for at least two years you would score a “0″ if you have not you are scored “1″. He scored a 2 out of a possible 12 points. If he had lived with someone for 2 years, he would have only received 1 point which would have made him a “low risk” as opposed to the 2 which labeled him as a “Medium-Low”. As stated, the only other category they scored him a “1″ is non-contact sex offense.
His therapist is a clinical psychologist with over 30 years of experience and was a former psychology professor before entering private practice, so I don’t think his level of skill or experience can be questioned.
March 6th, 2009 at 10:44 amLisaRenee wrote:
So am I correct is saying that Richard Brown’s therapist is, in fact, a licensed clinical psychologist and is licensed as such by the State of Ohio?
Anyone’s level of skill can be questioned, Lisa. You should know that better than most. For instance, a person could graduate from law school and pass the Ohio Bar, then practice law for thirty years. None of that indicates that the person is an excellent criminal defense attorney, or trial lawyer, or corporate lawyer. Checking the number of cases the attorney in question has won – now that’s a solid indication of skill.
The same is true in the mental health industry. There are ‘professionals’ at all levels that can’t have a conversation at the local watering hole without committing malpractice. Then there’s the other end of the spectrum, which anyone rarely hears about.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:12 amYes, he is licensed by the State of Ohio and his license is active and has been since 1973.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:42 amAnd…there is no record of the State of Ohio Psychology Board ever taking any kind of action against him, which would probably be your next question since it appears that seems to be what you are trying to suggest is that the Judge did not take this evaluation into consideration because there was some deficit on the part of the therapist…
March 6th, 2009 at 11:49 amI have watched this story unfold with a helpless feeling of frustration.
I don’t have a relationship with Mr. Brown but many of my friends have had long relationships with Mr. Brown and I would be a far happier woman if I didn’t know what has happened to this man.
It is true what he says about the bias in Toledo. It is very true. All I can say is that if she chooses to run again, I will campaign very hard to see that Judge Linda Jennings is not re-elected after her conduct in this case.
I was involved for years in a divorce where I had to prove, as he has been required to do, negatives. It’s almost impossible to prove you didn’t do something and that’s not the way our system was designed to work. I can’t imagine what it’s like to be involved in the same kind of misconduct in a criminal court room and have my freedom at risk if I couldn’t prove a negative – make a miracle happen. I just can’t imagine it.
And I believe I know why it happened to him. What I have a hard time in believing is who did the things they’ve done to him. Moral deficients who will someday be called on to account for themselves to a much higher power than voters or the bench.
And to Richard Brown I would say that I want him to know I am praying for him. And God does not waste anything – not even the evil that men will do. So you build your ministry and be a good mentor – you know the community needs this.
Living well is the best revenge, Richard.
March 6th, 2009 at 5:15 pmkateb wrote:
Kate already said what I wanted to say. I do not know Richard but have followed this case as well and it really is a travesty of justice.
Richard – know that there are strangers out there who are praying for you.
March 6th, 2009 at 5:58 pmand know the names of the two TPS board members directly involved will pop to the surface one day soon.
shame Richard was seen as a threat.
just remember who you’re voting for to be an “at-large councilman” this election when you push the button.
and the other hates that Carty ruined his agenda.
March 6th, 2009 at 6:31 pmLisaRenee wrote:
Which has nothing to do with the number of complaints against him, valid or otherwise. Do you have any idea how often and how blatantly a mental health professional has to violate the code of ethics before the board will even start to think about taking action?
The reason I asked about credentials is because this man is more accurately referred to as a psychologist, not a therapist. He could have been a psychiatrist or a councilor – someone with a license to ‘council’, so to speak. He isn’t, and that makes a huge difference to me.
This entire discussion is reading like a conspiracy theorists dream, complete with multiple ‘If only I could tell what I know’ posts. If any of you actually know anything beyond what is published in the Toledo Blade or official, public court documents, let’s hear it. If Richard really is a victim, then publish it. Isn’t that a large part of why we read this blog?
As for the supposed email from Richard, why doesn’t the man start by explaining how he managed to plead guilty to a crime he supposedly didn’t commit? Supposedly the police found damaging email evidence on his laptop, which is pretty thin as email is nothing more than text – it can come from anywhere. The item I keep wondering about is the pornography that teenage boys were shown when they were in Richard’s home or office. The man was a youth pastor at the time – what’s he doing with pornography? Unless he didn’t have any porn, and it was planted. Again, if that was the case, let him say so.
Richard’s email makes him out to be some kind of long suffering martyr, falsely accused and wrongfully convicted. Ok, if that’s the case then let’s hear a few facts to support it. Richard wouldn’t be the first, and he sure wouldn’t be the last.
And while I’m on the subject of disclosure, just who is Richard’s psychologist anyway? Has the man got a name?
March 6th, 2009 at 10:42 pmYou don’t want to believe Richard, no one is forcing you, you want to believe that his therapist, psychologist, however you prefer to label him is the issue? It’s not, but if that’s what you prefer to believe? No one is going to change your mind. There’s only so many times you can debate the same thing and it’s clear no matter what evidence/documentation/information/answers you receive? Your mind is made up. So, we can continue to waste each others time or? I can say, have a fantastic night Mad Jack and thanks for stopping by where the “cool kids come to talk” or wait…the Toledo Tattler…
March 6th, 2009 at 10:53 pmLisaRenee wrote:
Lisa, do you even bother to read what I post?
You continue to maintain that Richard is somehow being treated unfairly. Okay, fine. Just explain how it came to pass that a youth pastor (Richard) was in possession of pornography, and how that same youth pastor (again, Richard) showed this pornography to at least two teenagers.
I’ve asked this question before and no one seems to be able to answer it. If Richard is really your close friend, it seems to me that this is a question you’d know the answer to.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:13 pmMad Jack-
It should seem fairly obvious here. No one should ever question a friend of Lisa’s, because they are above the law and beyond reproach. Others, however, watch out, she will pile on and out you as other do in their defamatory posts…
March 7th, 2009 at 12:29 pmMJ – Regardless of whether he is a minister or not, he is an adult and last time I checked it is not illegal to have pornography unless of course it falls in the area of under 18. I believe Lisa answered this question, but I don’t recall the specific answer.
As to the boys viewing the pornography, I remember Lisa answering the question. As I recall, he did not show the boys porn, they found the porn and viewed it. Now most of us know that young men have a natural curiosity, and they are gonna look at it if they found it. I don’t know how difficult it was for them to find it, but having them look at it by themselves is not showing it to them. Now if he had it on a coffee table and he knew the boys were gonna be around that is bordering on the show aspect but still he did not open up the magazine and show them as you state.
I have a question for you. Why do you keep saying or debating basically the same things over? At least that is how I perceive your comments here and in the past on this subject. We know you don’t agree. We pretty much know your position.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:30 pmMad Jack and Henri, I realize that you both prefer to focus on me and make snide comments, which I’m a big girl and I’ve faced much worse. This is a basic simple scenario, either you believe Richard Brown was treated unfairly, which the documentation and all of the evidence I’ve seen is my position, or you disagree.
You are more than welcome to disagree with me, it’s clear I disagree with the both of you when it comes to this. Now, if you prefer to assume that I am basing this only on my friendship and not on the facts? I’d suggest you are mistaken, just as Mad Jack, you were mistaken as to your statement to Chris. I try to base my opinions on the facts, not emotional hype, unlike some, when I have been wrong? I’m not afraid to admit it. The very same reason that I am pushing the Connecting Point story is the reason why I believe this is important. There is another side to this, one that the media has not told. What you do with that information? I have no control over.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:40 pmhenri wrote:
I don’t now, nor have I ever, had the same perception. On the contrary, I find Lisa to be pretty fair. At least, she tries. Everyone has experiences that impact how they view events. It would appear that you do. So, at times to others it may appear unfair.
One of the things I admire about Lisa is that she sticks up for people even when she knows someone will lay the guilt of association at her feet. She is loyal as well. But that loyalty will not hold her back if the truth is necessary. As far as I can tell, she always lets those that her post is about respond. She usually lets them know in advance of the post because she asks for their response before she posts.
I just don’t see the evidence to support your claim of “above the law and reproach”. And I don’t see the “defame” part either as she does considerable research including have at least two sources or other corroborating evidence before she posts.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:49 pmhenri wrote:
It couldn’t be more obvious, although I’m a little surprised at Steve Flagg’s response.
Steve, there is a high moral standard that applies to everyone holding the position of youth pastor in a Christian church. If any children visit the home of a youth pastor, I am going to presume that those children will not have access to alcohol, tobacco, illegal drugs or pornography. I am also going to presume that the children will be carefully supervised, and that the code of conduct will be Biblical.
I have repeatedly asked Lisa to explain what the youth pastor, Richard, was doing with pornography and how these two teenagers came into possession of pornography while they were in his care. Lisa declines to answer. You tell me that the kids were nosy, and they snooped around and found it. Okay, if that’s what happened, then that’s what happened. Now, what was Richard doing with the pornography in the first place? If Richard had been living the way he should have, the way a youth pastor should live, none of this would have happened.
The reason that I bring this up repeatedly is because I can’t get an answer from Lisa or anyone else. No one can explain what a youth pastor was doing with pornography in his home or Church office.
There’s a reason for that.
Richard Brown pled guilty to a misdemeanor of disseminating pornographic materials to juveniles. Richard is out on probation instead of serving time in jail, and he should be very thankful for his freedom.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:47 pmWell said.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:55 pmThere’s a high moral standard in any esteemed position which places you in a position of deserved respect.
It’s apparent some people put the position of being associated with God as being the example of carrying the “sin-free” flag.
Then there’s those of us who reflect upon those same people as just…people.
Sorry MadJack, but with the moral destruction of the world around us, I think that a person harboring porno in the confines of his personal space out of the general access for children, especially when he has no children about of his own, dosen’t warrant such an attack.
When I was 13, I had a barber that had playboys in a crate buried under some tarps in the back room of his shop on the way to the lavatory. Prying eyes.
I don’t recall reading anywhere that porno was found at the Church. Perhaps you can show me where that info can be found, but I’ve not come across it.
To hold someone of such a miniscule thread of being labeled “Christ-like”, especially when the parents of these children spoke out against even prosecuting this gentleman, to such a high regard, considering the circumstances, compare to a hungry dog finding a freshly killed deer. Everything you tried to peg Lisa on has washed out.
And because Lisa is associated with this person in his personal life warrants Lisa to be held accountable as if she led the children to the porn?
I’m more concerned about the reason this event even occured, especially seeing this whole thing began when Mr Brown expressed his interest in running for a position on the TPS board.
But I guess it’s just different perspectives.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:51 pmI’ve answered that before Mad Jack, why you aren’t paying attention to the answers I can’t explain to you. There was never any pornography in the church, the media reported that incorrectly. The box of pornography that was found and the almost a decade old hard drive that contained the emails were in Richard’s home. The teenage boys that accessed the porn did so because they had an almost father like relationship with Richard where their mother let them visit and stay at his home on occasion. Where they accessed the porn without his knowledge or consent.
That’s been out there, it’s been stated, so now I’ve stated it again.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:26 pmMy understanding is that the boys found some adult magazines in the house and shared them, as boys have done for a long time. The information on his computer was available because he mentored these kids and they had access to his house and used his computer.
My kids friends use my computer, and while I don’t have any porn – many people do share adult emails and that type of thing. I don’t pass judgment on them – but I’m sure he wishes he had supervised the use of his computer.
But you put those things together and it could have happened to alot of people.
This guy crossed the good ol’ boy network. And this is what happened to him.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:20 pmYou’d be correct Kate, some magazines and I believe some older dvd’s that other parents had actually found that their boys had and Richard just set aside, meaning to throw out. Which goes to show you he didn’t have a guilty conscience, he had ample time from when this whole thing started until when the police searched his home. He was confident he had done nothing wrong…
March 7th, 2009 at 10:23 pmJack – you know me. I’m telling you that I have followed this and it’s all wrong.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:39 pm