Youth pastor Daniel Richard Robida, profiled here, was sentenced to 17-years and 10 months in prison. He was convicted of unlawful sexual activity with a minor. His 17 year-old-victim will have a long time to live in peace without the fear that this sex offender will ever bother her again.Just in case you are wondering, he knew what he was doing.
According to police reports, the victim said she had been involved in a sexual relationship with Robida, who was 33 at the time and a youth pastor at Harvest Community Church in Summerfield. It was not clear if the victim was a member of the church, according to the report.
Robida later told authorities he performed various sexual acts on the girl, but did not have intercourse with her. He said he was aware she girl was 17.
Source: Former youth pastor sentenced to prisonThis case brought the age of concept into focus. It also highlighted Christian moral blindness. Many of the comments and most of the emails I received on my original post painted the victim as a willing participant. A few painted her as a Jezebel keen on ruining a pastor’s life or at least separating him from his family for her own purposes. The real issue are the actions of the pastor. He is a man who should know better (as all men do), and he has the supposed moral training that comes from being a God fearing Christian. He chose to act on his impulses. He alone is responsible. I’m happy to see our legal system recognized this.
*edited 12/29/11 to correct error
Logging you in...
Jack 119p · 694 weeks ago
Mojoey 107p · 694 weeks ago
deleted8470268 143p · 694 weeks ago
Shana · 694 weeks ago
All of you who claim "they always seem to blame the victim" have NOT been involved in a sex crime case. From the minute someone is accused, their lives are destroyed. If they are convicted, regardless if their "crime" was urinating in public, consensual underage teenage sex, or child molestation they all are forced to wear the same label, face the same restrictions as do their innocent families. Children as young as 10 in some states can be charged as sex offenders! I have yet to encounter a situation where the victim (before they were even proven to BE a victim) was blamed or treated poorly. Sex crime legislation has an admirable goal, but fails to accomplish anything other than widespread public ignorance and collateral damage to innocent families.
Just for the record, when I was 17, I was sexually active and would have engaged with an older man without much thought. I wouldn't have been forced into anything and would have been completely aware and responsible for my actions. If you people think 17 year old girls are all innocent little princesses, sorry, but... think again. It's just the truth.
Shana Rowan www.iloveasexoffender.blogspot.com www.nyrsol.org
deleted8470268 143p · 694 weeks ago
Guest · 694 weeks ago
Mojoey 107p · 694 weeks ago
care.It's completely unethical and a serious crime.
deleted8470268 143p · 694 weeks ago
Mojoey 107p · 694 weeks ago
About the sex registry - it's not meant to drive down crime. It's meant to warn the public. It does a fair job at this.
About my level of expertise - I've been writing about clergy sexual abuse cases for seven years. I follow the topic closely. I've come to a different conclusion than you - but I"m thinking that is because you are biased.
I've written about over 1000 cases of clergy sexual abuse. I have over 15,000 comments on these posts. I track the status - the majority of comments blame the victim.
I don't write about the extreme cases you site - there are no 10-year-old pastors. The focus of my writing is pastors - the conviction rate is close to 99 percent. Most admit to the crime.
AS for your sexual morals - if you choose to fuck a pastor, ruin his marriage, and cause our legal system to incarcerate him as a sex offender, well then... nuff said. But it still the pastor's fault.
Qlab · 693 weeks ago
You state that Shana is biased because of the man she loves, however you are obviously biased as well. You are an Atheist that writes about the clergy's sexual proclivities. You can not honestly expect your viewership to not see that correlation.
Shana brings up some very valid complaints and shortcomings in our legal systems logic.
Also it should be noted that the Sex Offender database put forth into law as the "Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act" IS IN FACT meant to protect the public, by warning them of offenders, but MORE SO to create a database for Law Enforcement that crosses state lines in an attempt to stop the spread of this act. Thus bringing the level of this crime down. Now you claim her logic is weak, but you didn't really put much into your statement either.
What really shocks me is the fact that your biased anti religion stance that leads you to post these articles, has managed to over-look the fact that Age of Consent laws are based on religious morality movements in the late 19th and early 20th century in the US. The original laws were based on standard British laws stretching back to 1275. The age of consent in the states at this time was between 10-12, these laws worked on the assumption that the age of consent should be linked to the age of maturity, ie the age at when most girls have their first menstrual cycle. Moral-Reform movements at the turn of the 20th century successfully lobbied state legislatures to increase the age to 16 or higher.
Now Im not saying what is write or wrong here, Im just pointing out a flaw in your own logic. Social norms likely play a larger part in your own morals on this subject than anything else, but I thought I should at least put forward the irony in it for you.
I have to admit that if you did not attack Shana at the end of your last post, I would not have written in at all. You turned her words about her own views of her own sexuality around on her in a very hurtful manner. It was a pretty dick move on your part and completely uncalled for. She is the only one that can say for certain that she was consensual and knowledgeable of the full gravity of having sex at the age of 17. You have no place to make snide comments towards it.
Oh yea, one last thing.
" He is a man who should no better (as all men do)"
You need to edit this, as it should be know, and not no.
Mojoey 107p · 693 weeks ago
evil pastors, I can take the heat. Thanks for finding my error.
My bias is in the open, although I think you may misunderstand it. I
follow one segment of abusers for one specific reason. Christian like
to point out that atheist have no morals. I do this simply to give the
atheist community a resource so that we can counter this inane
argument with proof. I'm not biased against clergy as abusers. My
experience tells me that if an allegation reaches a minimum criteria,
the case almost always ends in a conviction. When I say almost always,
I mean the conviction rate for the stories I post is at 99%.
I understand your point on sex offender registry, but I don't agree
that it is the primary reason. Since most registries are state-wide,
it does not act as a good clearing house for information. A national
registry would be much better. Therefore, I would say it is one of the
main reasons, but not the main reason. Public awareness shares this
spot. I think what we both can agree that the registry is not meant to
change abuser behavior.
Age of consent laws have evolved (in our modern era) to a point where
the emotional and cognitive state is the basis for the law. A child's
sexual maturity has nothing to do with it. Social norms drove this, as
did the labor movement. Custodial relationships are the focus of this
post. A pastor (teacher, doctor, police officer) has a moral and
social obligation to act in the best interest of their charges. A
pastor sleeping with a girl in his youth group, even if she is 18 or
19, is morally and socially wrong.
My 'dick move' is exactly what you call it. When a naive and jaded
woman extrapolates her experience to cover all sexual molestation
cases she needs a wake up call. He position is ludicrous. I could have
been nicer, but seriously, It is hard to be nice all the time. My
statement could have been worded nicer, but the message would have
been the same. If you think that sleeping with your married youth
pastor is ok, then you've missed an important part of your moral
upbringing. If you are 17 when you make this decision you are either
immature, self centered, or morally corrupt (or all three).
I've started a mini-project to look into her case. So far, the story
is not promising. I've sent away for the court transcripts. I'll post
the real story when I get it.
Dont worry about it · 561 weeks ago
Mojoey 107p · 561 weeks ago
Brother · 544 weeks ago