Pedophile Caught in Pattaya after 42 Years on the Run

[Gaybutton]

Now, in keeping with "What's wrong with this picture?", I can't help but be somewhat sympathetic to this person despite my negative feelings about pedophiles. The article says he is 65 years old. It also says he has been on the run for 42 years. When I do the math, it tells me he was 23 years old at the time of the offense. While he was technically a pedophile, if he is actually guilty in the first place, this is the first time I have ever thought of someone 23 years old as a pedophile, unless he was molesting babies or children.

 

I expect criticism because I always take such a harsh stance against pedophiles and it probably seems hypocritical for me to express sympathy for him. Well, it is hypocritical, but I didn't say he should be given a slap on the wrist and then sent home. I said I feel sympathy for him because I think it is likely that he was only a very few years older than whoever it was with whom he was involved. To my mind, there is an appreciable difference betweeen that and sex between someone two or three times the age of a minor. Nevertheless, the law is the law. I side with the law.

 

The following appears in the PATTAYA CITY NEWS:

________________________________________

 

Canadian National Wanted on Charges of Pedophilia back in Canada Arrested after 42 Years on the Run

 

 

We joined Officers from Pattaya

[Guest jomtien]

 

 

OK. Now you've confused me GB. You say " this is the first time I have ever thought of someone 23 years old as a pedophile, unless he was molesting babies or children. " Well, yes. He was accused of molesting children. That's what makes him a pedophile, not his age.

 

 

You also say " I think it is likely that he was only a very few years older than whoever it was with whom he was involved. To my mind, there is an appreciable difference betweeen that and sex between someone two or three times the age of a minor" If he was 23 when charged with

" conducting sexual intercourse with boys and girls under the age 15 in exchange for money", that makes an age difference of at least 9 years. How is it different if the offender is 65? Isn't the minor still abused?

 

 

[Gaybutton]

OK. Now you've confused me GB. You say " this is the first time I have ever thought of someone 23 years old as a pedophile, unless he was molesting babies or children. " Well, yes. He was accused of molesting children. That's what makes him a pedophile, not his age.

You also say " I think it is likely that he was only a very few years older than whoever it was with whom he was involved. To my mind, there is an appreciable difference betweeen that and sex between someone two or three times the age of a minor" If he was 23 when charged with

" conducting sexual intercourse with boys and girls under the age 15 in exchange for money", that makes an age difference of at least 9 years. How is it different if the offender is 65? Isn't the minor still abused?

 

I never said that I don't think he's a pedophile. I simply said I feel some sympathy toward him and that someone his age, at the time of the incident, is not what I usually associate with the word 'pedophile.' For all I know, it's entirely possible he's been molesting minors ever since, has been getting away with it for the last 42 years, finally got caught, and belongs in jail for the rest of his life. Actually, that's quite likely if Canada was still pursuing him 42 years later. It's hard for me to believe that Canada would be actively still pursuing someone who did nothing more than simply pay for sex once in 1964. There's probably much more to the story than appears in the article.

 

I'm only trying to say that when I think of the word 'pedophile' my first thought is not of someone 23 years old. Is yours? When I think of a pedophile, I'm more likely to associate that with someone, as you said, closer to age 65, a major generational difference. For me, the next logical question is what kind of social life did this guy have if he was busy paying for sex at age 23?

 

Yes, I completely agree with you that the minor was still abused.

 

I also said that I expect criticism for what I said since what I wrote is in direct contrast to my usual stance. Somehow it's no surprise to me that the very first criticism comes from you.

[Guest Hedda]

I wonder if there comes a point when offenses like this, comitted over 40 years ago, should be forgotten in the interests of bringing a close to events.

 

I am not defending pedofiles. But when I see stories about some priest or anyone else being accused of molesting a child 40 years ago, I wonder how on earth one defends themsef against such a stale charge.

 

Would anyone trust the memory of some young person of what happened to him or her during alleged sexual contacts over forty years ago ? Perhaps the younger the age of the victim, the more likely it is that he will have a flawed or corrupted memory of the events. I certainly might.

 

Let's face it, these accused guys probably did nothing worse than dozens of men do in places like Sunee Plaza every week of the year. Most of us, yours truly included, move freely through that scene with disapproval, but not much more. Arresting and dragging someone back to Canada for something that allegedly happened 40 years ago strikes me as good material for a chapter in Les Miserables.

 

 

[Guest freeyourmind]

I do not wish to get all into the legal ramifications of this sad individual’s case, but I would like to make a sort of analogy to the post. But before I do, we all need to understand that very little information about the case(s) is available. In fact we have almost zero information—and the crime allegedly took place in Canada whose criminal justice system I know nothing about---but I will continue.

 

I agree with GB that one needs to take in consideration the spirit of the law (migrating circumstances) and I also understand what Jomtiem said that he, Mr.Kinney broke the law and should be dealt with accordingly.

 

My humble analogy and thoughts:

 

A guy walks into a bank, produces a weapon and robs the teller of 5 million dollars. 42 years later is caught and convicted.

 

A day after the first robbery another guy walks into the same bank, produces a weapon and robs the teller of 5 dollars. 42 years later he too is caught and convicted.

 

Both individuals robbed the bank using the same type of weapon. Both are convicted of robbery and because a weapon was used in the commission of the crime, the sentence is automatically doubled.

 

Bam.... 20 years to life is what the letter of the law states.

 

Fortunately there is the concept of migrating circumstances (what some call the spirit of the law) which will not punish the criminals the same way, but yes, both should be punished.

 

I personally don’t think that the punishment should be the same. Why? Because the mitigating circumstances are not the same. 5 dollars Vs. 5 million dollars.

 

Something that always comes into play with felony crimes is what is called “mitigating circumstances”. Whether one agrees with that, or not, is a fact of the court system in America and maybe Canada as well.

 

On the other hand, if this guy is accused of many instances of child abuse in Canada and is found guilty, then that is a horse of a different color.

 

As much as we prefer to deal with things on a black and white basis, it usually ends up being some shade of gray.

 

The Spirit Of The Law.

 

The Letter Of The Law.

 

What a concept huh? I wish I understood it better.

[Gaybutton]

I wonder if there comes a point when offenses like this, comitted over 40 years ago, should be forgotten in the interests of bringing a close to events.

 

Apparently there is no Statute of Limitations for the two of the most heinous crimes one can commit - murder and getting laid.

 

Unless I am right and there really is much more to the story than stated in the article, it does seem ridiculous to me to make an issue of it now. I'm certainly no admirer of pedophiles, but on the face of it even I would say that it's ancient history and time to let it go.

 

Again, while I realize that I am contradicting my own stance, I too believe there is a point at which it becomes absurd. I don't know just when it does become absurd, but 42 years later? Give me a break. Unless the victim has truly suffered as a result all this time, I'd say it's not only closing the barn door after the horse has left, but it's closing the barn door after the horse has left and long since died.

 

The article says this man was on the run for 42 years. I wonder if he even realized he was on the run.

[Guest jomtien]

 

GB:

 

" Somehow it's no surprise to me that the very first criticism comes from you"

 

I don't see anywhere in my post where I criticised you. I simply stated my interpretation of the news article.

 

"I'm only trying to say that when I think of the word 'pedophile' my first thought is not of someone 23 years old. Is yours? "

 

When I think of the word 'pedophile' I think of someone molesting children. That's about it. I have no mental image of anyone. I was molested at 12. The 'molestee' was 17. They come in all sizes and shapes.

 

" For me, the next logical question is what kind of social life did this guy have if he was busy paying for sex at age 23? "

 

He wanted sex with kids under 15 (allegedly). One generally pays for that. I don't think it has anything to do with a lack of social life.

 

A crime is a crime and I think it should be paid for. My own silly analogy would be if someone killed my mother I'd want them punished no matter how many years later.

 

[Guest jomtien]

Apparently there is no Statute of Limitations for the two of the most heinous crimes one can commit - murder and getting laid.

 

Unless I am right and there really is much more to the story than stated in the article, it does seem ridiculous to me to make an issue of it now. I'm certainly no admirer of pedophiles, but on the face of it even I would say that it's ancient history and time to let it go.

 

Again, while I realize that I am contradicting my own stance, I too believe there is a point at which it becomes absurd. I don't know just when it does become absurd, but 42 years later? Give me a break. Unless the victim has truly suffered as a result all this time, I'd say it's not only closing the barn door after the horse has left, but it's closing the barn door after the horse has left and long since died.

 

The article says this man was on the run for 42 years. I wonder if he even realized he was on the run.

 

 

 

When did sexual molestation become 'getting laid'? And if the victim suffered at all (as opposed to 'all this time'), then the scales aren't balanced till the bad guy suffers some too, no?

 

 

 

[Gaybutton]

When did sexual molestation become 'getting laid'? And if the victim suffered at all (as opposed to 'all this time'), then the scales aren't balanced till the bad guy suffers some too, no?

 

I love loaded questions, just like 'When did you stop beating your wife?' Sorry, you're going to have to play that game alone.

 

The scales aren't balanced until bank robbers go to jail too, but if they escape being caught beyond a Statute of Limitations, then they're home free. That doesn't make it right, but that's the way it is. This guy is going to suffer now, isn't he? As far as I can tell from reading the article, the legal issue for which he was arrested is not sexual molestation. The legal issue is that he paid for it and then never appeared in court. 42 years later it seems foolish to me and at this point there would be bigger fish to fry.. That doesn't mean it would be right to just let the whole thing go, either. But, if it were my decision, based solely on what is contained in the article, then at this point I would no longer be interested in making an issue of it.

[Guest Hedda]

"A crime is a crime and I think it should be paid for. "

 

Sort of reminds one of something Victor Hugo wrote:

 

"He would have arrested his father if escaping from the galleys, and denounced his mother for violating her ticket of leave. And he would have done it with that sort of interior satisfaction that springs from virtue.... a fierce honesty, a marble-hearted informer, Brutus united with Vidocq."

 

A description of Police Inspector Javert from Les Miserables.

[Guest bottomdad]

The following is from Globe and Mail, Canada website and explains the situation quite well as regards this gentleman.

 

 

Four-year hunt ends in arrest

Man apprehended in Thailand charged with sexual assault of native students

EVA SALINAS

 

VANCOUVER -- An extensive four-year search that took the RCMP across the Pacific has ended in the arrest of a B.C. man accused of sexually assaulting young residential-school students in the 1960s.

 

Gordon Irvin Kinney, 65, was arrested Tuesday in Thailand, at a residence about 80 kilometres southeast of Bangkok, the RCMP confirmed yesterday.

 

"We've spent the last four years chasing after this guy and we've gone literally to the other side of the world to get him. It shows the RCMP's determination to put this matter to rest," said Corporal Mike Pacholuk with the major crimes unit.

 

A Canada-wide arrest warrant was issued for the man in 2002, after he was charged with seven counts of gross indecency and indecent assault, which were related to his term as dormitory supervisor at St. Mary's Indian Residential School near Mission.

 

He was one of 13 people charged as a result of investigations led by the RCMP Native Indian Residential School Task Force.

 

The group examined nearly 1,000 separate allegations of physical and sexual abuse involving 15 church-run schools and almost 500 victims.

 

"It was just total destruction," said Cyril Pierre, a former student at St. Mary's, upon hearing of Mr. Kinney's arrest.

 

Mr. Pierre, 58, attended the school from age seven until 18 and was a complainant in the case involving Gerald Moran, who, at 78, was given a three-year sentence in 2004.

 

"The hatred just grew, the anger grew, the guilt grew, the shame, the self-pity, the suicidal thoughts, the perverted evil that lived with us for all of those years," Mr. Pierre said.

 

Mr. Moran, who was living as a monk in a Saskatchewan monastery until his trial, was convicted of 12 sexual-abuse charges relating to boys assaulted in the 1950s and 1960s at both St. Mary's and a school in Kamloops.

 

"This is stuff that we nightmare about for the rest of our life . . . But we're finding our way through the justice system, and thanks to them we're nailing the people that are responsible for these acts upon children that were innocent," Mr. Pierre said.

 

The RCMP set up the residential school task force in December, 1994, to investigate historic complaints of abuse at the schools. At least a third of the suspects are deceased.

 

When the task force dissolved in 2003, Mr. Kinney remained one of two outstanding arrests.

 

Police believe he left his home in Vancouver in 1999 and had traced him to Thailand after the warrant was issued in 2002.

 

The Thai government approved the RCMP's extradition application last year, but before police were able to arrest him, he fled again, this time, police believe, to the Philippines.

 

With the help of the Philippines National Police, the Royal Thai police and RCMP international liaison officers, Mr. Kinney was located 10 days ago in Thailand and was taken into custody this week.

 

The RCMP expect him to attend court there, after which they are confident he will face his charges back in Canada.

 

"I think in this particular case it shows that we are determined to get to the bottom of it," Cpl. Pacholuk said, noting that new complaints continue to be reported.

 

"It's devastated generations of young native children and you can see some of the effects right now. . . the poverty, the alcoholism."

 

The arrest leaves a sole outstanding warrant.

 

Still wanted is Edward Gerald Fitzgerald, a former employee at Lejac Indian Reservation School near Fraser Lake and at the Cariboo-St. Joseph's Indian Residential School near Williams Lake.

 

Although Mr. Fitzgerald is charged with 21 sex and common-assault-related offences, police are unable to arrest him.

 

He has fled to the Republic of Ireland, a country that does not share an extradition treaty with Canada.

 

"Until one gets signed," Cpl. Pacholuk said, "there's not a whole lot we can do to get him back and he knows it."

 

 

[Gaybutton]

Thank you for posting this, bottomdad. I had a feeling all along that there was much more to this story than the new item I posted. In light of what your news item post describes, I can now understand why this man was pursued and why he will be prosecuted 42 years later.

 

I want to make it clear that if it had indeed turned out that this man was arrested for paying for sex one time when he was 23, then my opinion would not have changed about the absurdity of a 42 year chase.

 

But now that so much more light has been shed, and it turns out that there really was so much more to the story, I feel that the 42 year pursuit is justified after all.

[Guest Hedda]

I beg to differ. This is starting to look as much like the Salem Witch Hunts as Les Miserables.

 

Some of you may perhaps remember the McMartin Pre-School scandal in Manhattan Beach, California, which became the focus of a vast investigation into hysterical allegations of child molestation in 1983.

 

In the end, the principal defendants were acquitted, but they and their life's work at the school were ruined professionally and financially.

 

I have no idea if the allegations involving this Canadian school are anything like what happened at

McMartin school. Suffice to say, I am skeptical how one can go back now after 40 years and try to convict anyone of child molestation, based on RELIABLE evidence of some child, now adult, who may blame every failure in his life on what he claims was his victimization as a teenager.

 

These cases are hard to prove when fresh....be they rape or molestation, because it's always one man's word against another alleged victim ... but 40 years later ?

 

I can just hear the prosecutor's first question on cross-exam:

 

And where were you between 6 and 10 PM on the night of August 13, 1966 ?

[Gaybutton]

That's a very good point, Hedda. After a closer reading of the article 'bottomdad' posted, I paused at this:

"We've spent the last four years chasing after this guy . . ." The article says the warrant was issued in 2002.

 

That means for 32 years there was no warrant. What happened four years ago to cause the Canadian authorities to issue a warrant? Perhaps a segment for "Cold Case Files"?

 

Something about this whole matter seems awfully strange to me.