Deep Thoughts: Youth pastor Barry Caudle arrested

Friday, November 04, 2011

Youth pastor Barry Caudle arrested

AoG youth pastor Barry Caudle was arrested for trying to hook up with an underage girl for sex via the internet. Of course, it was a sting. What a dumbass.

Barry Caudle, a 39-year-old youth minister at the Marengo First Assembly of God, 22817 W. Grant Highway, was arrested Tuesday morning and is being held in lieu of $150,000 bail.

Prosecutors said Caudle solicited a Rock Island police officer who was posing undercover online as a 14-year-old girl.

Source: Marengo youth minister charged with soliciting a child by Paul Biasco

I hope they caught Caudle before he hurt anyone. Harvest Chapel, his former church, is waiting for the police to start the investigation. Meanwhile, Marengo First Assembly of God, is cooperating with the investigation.

Technorati Tags: Clergy Sexual Abuse,AoG,Internet Stings,Child Molestation

Comments (25)

Logging you in...

Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout

Logged in as

0 Vote up Vote down

@arclight · 703 weeks ago

Aren't 90% of the "teenage girls" online actually entrapment-friendly law enforcement personnel? Seriously, there's less prosecutorial risk in trying to hook up with an actual live 14-year-old. Thankfully most predatory pedophiles are lazy, uncreative and stupid. And (apparently) youth pastors...

1 reply · active 703 weeks ago

+3 Vote up Vote down

Mojoey 107p · 703 weeks ago

Right. The guy is a dumbass.

+2 Vote up Vote down

mikespeir · 703 weeks ago

Assembly of God???!!! Noooooooooo! I can understand Baptists. They don't have "the Spirit." But AG? Now I'm completely disillusioned.

;-)

-1 Vote up Vote down

thirstyjon 22p · 703 weeks ago

Innocent until proven guilty folks. Don't forget it.

7 replies · active 683 weeks ago

+3 Vote up Vote down

mikespeir · 703 weeks ago

If he's proven guilty, will we hear from you again? This was a sting. Now there's a thin chance the cops are lying. Maybe they're a bunch of atheists out to sully the reputation of good Christian ministers by whatever devious means necessary. But there's possible, plausible, and likely. On this one, I'm going with likely.

+1 Vote up Vote down

thirstyjon 22p · 703 weeks ago

I don't know if you will hear from me again. There are a lot of blogs out there. If you did hear from me again I would say "Ok, a jury of his peers has reviewed the accusation and the evidence and found him to be guilty as charged - it would appear that he did the deed."

Our whole society would do well to remember that people are innocent until proven guilty. My observation is that in the popular culture when the police arrest someone and drag them off the damage is already done. The general public assumption is "guilty." Everybody knows that OJ did it, even though the jury said otherwise. Everybody knows that Casey Anthony did it, even though the jury said otherwise. Etc. Etc. Etc.

If anyone wishes to assume a person is guilty or dumb just because the police arrest him/her... Well, that attitude gives great power to the police and the Attorney Generals and State's Attorneys of the world - a great power to destroy lives without even having a trial. I choose not to participate in that.

I presume that Barry Caudle is innocent until a jury of his peers can be persuaded otherwise. I choose to encourage and challenge my fellow human beings to look at things in a similar fashion. I don't want to live in a culture where most people tend to believe the worse about their fellow human beings and I am willing to work to encourage the culture to be something brighter than that.

+2 Vote up Vote down

mikespeir · 703 weeks ago

So, do you have any actual reason to present here that would suggest there's some other legitimate way of interpreting how this sting came out? This wasn't a simple arrest on hearsay or circumstantial evidence. The truth is, now--right now--he's either guilty or innocent of this crime, regardless the technicalities of the law. His actual guilt or innocence don't hinge on the law, but on whether he did the crime. And it sure looks like he did. This was a sting. The police themselves caught the guy red-handed. Yes, I agree that he shouldn't be punished until a jury finds him guilty. But sometimes that's just a legal technicality. It can be used to exonerate the falsely accused but it can also be used as a mind-numbing mantra to chant when we want to distract ourselves from the obvious.

-1 Vote up Vote down

thirstyjon 22p · 703 weeks ago

Of course, you can choose to believe the police and whatever other authorities have executed this operation. As a matter of principle I don't participate in any "armchair jury." I am unwilling to declare anyone guilty, nor am I willing to say someone is "probably" guilty solely based on the fact that the police or authorities say so.

You can write that off as a "mind-numbing mantra" if you would like. I only pray that if I am ever accused of a crime the people on the jury do not think according to the philosophy that you are presenting.

+3 Vote up Vote down

Mojoey 107p · 703 weeks ago

ThirstyJon (I like the name). I am jaded by experience. I've profiled
over 1000 pastors accused of some form of sexual abuse. To date, 3
have been innocent. When I right a story now, I don't assume
innocence, just like i don't trust every stranger I meet. I've learned
from history. There are stories I will not write. Allegations from 20
years ago without evidence come to mind.

I could not serve on a jury. I know that. I'm ok with it too. It is
more important that the cases recorded and in the public eye. People
forget.

I have a standing offer for anyone who is found innocent. They can
post their story on my blog. So far, there have been no takers.

-2 Vote up Vote down

thirstyjon 22p · 703 weeks ago

Hmmmm...

Well, I feel that my point was sufficiently made. Any reader can make up their own mind based on the comments already posted.

:-)

-2 Vote up Vote down

ThirstyJon 6p · 683 weeks ago

Hello mikespeir. Caudle has plead guilty.

Although, I still stand by the principle that I originally stated. It was right to presume innocence until guilt was proven. That will always be right. Especially for people reading blogs who don't have all of the evidence in front of them.

Here is the story: http://www.daily-chronicle.com/mobile/article.xml

+1 Vote up Vote down

marion · 702 weeks ago

This is the guy who held my hand after I tried to commit suicide. He was the first thing I woke up to. He was holding my hand praying. I find it hard to believe he would do something like that but, Romans 3:23 says all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. I do think justice must be done and I am shocked. I knew him through small group as well. This just does not seem to fit his true nature. If this was any other person I would be like "hang them high" but when it is someone you know it hits closer to home and hurts more.
muggles

+5 Vote up Vote down

deleted8470268 143p · 702 weeks ago

ThirstyJon needs his meds ! It is sick how anyone can defend this child rapist given the evidence. Innocent until proven guilty even has it's limits. ThirstyJon would think this guy innocent even if you had a Video of him running around naked yelling " I'm Guilty !" " I'm Guilty !"

1 reply · active 683 weeks ago

-2 Vote up Vote down

ThirstyJon 6p · 683 weeks ago

So what happened to "SCIENCE, LOGIC,and COMMON SENSE ! vs IGNORANCE SUPERSTITION ,and FEAR"???

That's what your profile says.

I assumed that readers of my comment would know that "innocent until proven guilty" is short for "PRESUMED innocent until proven guilty."

Of course I didn't KNOW that he was innocent, but I presumed so until he'd been proven guilty before a jury of his peers. Or until he admitted it. Now he has admitted it.

How can someone who claims to be focused on "science, logic, and common sense" vs. "ignorance, superstition, and fear" be so logically silly? Do you NOT understand the importance of the "innocent until proven guilty" concept?

If defending that great American tradition is "sick" then call me "sick." If what you are doing is called "science, logic, and common sense" then I want nothing to do with those things.

Of course my point of view is not "sick" and the one you presented is neither "scientific," "logical," nor consistent with "common sense."

At least the blog author admits that he is "jaded" and is prepared to allow any of the accused who turn out to be not guilty to come on here and defend themselves.

+1 Vote up Vote down

simpleman · 702 weeks ago

No evidence has been let out other than how the police was lead to him... so maybe people should stop talking as if they have the facts and proof right in front of them.

0 Vote up Vote down

Donna · 701 weeks ago

I have known people who pay hookers for their time so they can get them off the street and talk to them, give them info of places that would help them get out of the "trade". It is possible that the pastor was trying to connect with someone, so he could see her face to face, to tell her of the options she has...I dont know what that man was thinking ..Im not him...Im just saying, thats an option. Also I have heard multiple storys on how manipulating and how good these "stings" are. He could have told her he just wanted to talk and "she" could have said the only way she would talk to him is if he "paid" for "it".

3 replies · active 683 weeks ago

+4 Vote up Vote down

Mojoey 107p · 701 weeks ago

What you say sounds reasonable. However, in a situation like this the
pastor should publicly announce his mission before visiting
prostitutes. The fact that this was a secret is telling. This pastor
did not minister to hookers.He consumed them.

0 Vote up Vote down

Publius · 701 weeks ago

Hookers? "Consumed them"?!? Which lines did you read between to make that up?

+4 Vote up Vote down

Mojoey 107p · 701 weeks ago

It's logicall conclusion give Pastor Claudle attmpted to buy a hoodker for sex.

+4 Vote up Vote down

deleted8470268 143p · 701 weeks ago

Well I guess, the only good thing one could say about Pastor Claudle is unlike most of the pervert pastors featured on DeepThoughts at least he was willing to pay for sex ;rather than raping the children of his church. You know me, Sunny side of the street !

1 reply · active 701 weeks ago

+3 Vote up Vote down

Mojoey 107p · 701 weeks ago

The libertarian in me says Prostitution should not be a crime so it's hard for me to treat the guy like a child molester. But still, he's not living his life like a pastor should.

Sent from my iPhone

-4 Vote up Vote down

Barry C · 688 weeks ago

So...Barry wanted to fuck a 14 year old girl. Who cares?

-2 Vote up Vote down

ThirstyJon 6p · 683 weeks ago

Here is the latest: http://www.daily-chronicle.com/mobile/article.xml...

+2 Vote up Vote down

Dave Winfrey · 608 weeks ago

I know Barry...He made a stupid mistake, never hurt anybody, never even tried to meet the middle-aged cop pretending to be a horny teenager. It was dumb, and, yes, a bit creepy. Grown men can't act on those thoughts and impulses.
But I know Barry to be a good and humble man. An honest man. It's over for everybody but Barry; this is gonna haunt him forever.
Cut Barry Caudle some slack.

+1 Vote up Vote down

Chris · 538 weeks ago

In my darkest time, Barry was there to counsel me. Yes, he made a stupid mistake but what people tend to forget is that pastors preach the word of God, they are not God themselves. Humans are imperfect and make mistakes, even big dumb ones, and pastors are no exception to humanity. Unless you have not ever made a mistake, then leave him be.

Post a new comment

Comment as a Guest, or login:

Tweet this comment

Connected as (Logout)

Email (optional)

Not displayed publicly.

Submit Comment

Subscribe to

Comments by IntenseDebate

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)