News of interest to former Christians


AddThis Social Bookmark Button
AMHERST VA — A local pastor was found guilty Thursday of molesting a teenage boy he was formerly tutoring.

The Rev. Kenneth Payne, 70, was charged with taking indecent liberties and sodomizing the 17-year-old.

Payne has preached at New Prospect Baptist Church in the Pleasant View area of Amherst County for the past 14 years.

Judge J. Michael Gamble heard Thursday’s nine-hour bench trail and found Payne guilty of taking indecent liberties and not guilty of sodomy.

Payne and the teenager met in May 2006 through the Homebound Learning program offered by the Amherst County school system.

Homebound Learning is for students who get in trouble, or are struggling in a traditional school environment. The teen entered the program last spring after he got caught with marijuana and was suspended from Amherst County High School.

The charges against Payne came after a May 25 meeting at the church where the teen said the pastor unzipped the victim’s pants and fondled him. He said shortly after that, the pastor sat down at waist level, clutched the teen’s buttocks and performed oral sex on him. He also testified that Payne licked him in the ear.

A state forensic scientist said Payne’s DNA was found on swabs taken from the victim’s ear.

Payne said the teen had shown up at the church unannounced that day and that he sensed the boy might be in trouble and needed comforting.

He testified that he put his arm around the teen and kissed him on the ear.

“I was looking at him with compassionate eyes, not passionate ones,” Payne said.

The teen said he sped away from the church in his car shortly afterward. He said Payne saw him leave, got into his car and chased him for a while before the teen got away.

Payne said the only reason he was following the teenager was because they had left the church at the same time and were both headed east to Madison Heights.

The victim’s grandmother said he called her after leaving the church and told her about the incident. The two later met up and went to see his mother who works in Madison Heights.

The boy’s mother testified that she saw her son after the incident.

“He was talking to me in a way that said, ‘Mama, you’ve got to believe me,’” she said.

Payne’s lawyer, John Falcone, said the teen’s version of the incident was not credible and had changed drastically since the time of the incident.

New Prospect church members, former co-workers and students testified on Payne’s behalf, saying he was a trustworthy person. While two former teachers testified that the teen had a reputation for lying.

Deputy Commonwealth’s Attorney Cary Payne argued that the inconsistencies were the result of a scared kid who was embarrassed and initially reluctant to talk about what had happened.

Cary Payne also called into question why the Rev. Payne called the administrative line at the sheriff’s department on May 25 instead of 911 if he thought the boy might be in danger. The Rev. Payne said that was a mistake, but that he did not do that so he could have time to think up a story about what had happened at the church.

Payne faces one to five years in prison when he’s sentenced March 14. He also will be required to register as a sex offender.

link
 
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Mmmmm boy juice, that must be real good, Jesus was known to hang around the boys, wasn't he?


Anonymous tigg13 said...
Jesus LOVED the little children -

All the little children of the world!


Anonymous Armen said...
Just because some professing Christian does something so awful, doesn't mean that you should slag off Christ like that. Even if you don't believe that Christ is God, history records him to be a 'good' man, and therefore at the very least you're being slanderous of someone that

1) In your opinion is dead
2) Never done you any harm

So it kinda means you're being unreasonably nasty to someone you think is dead. Would you appreciate someone being nasty to a dead family member, especially when they didn't know them??


Anonymous paul said...
Good article! But we should know certain things after reading this article.
Firstly, Jesus clearly told us that wolves would come into His flock after His departure. That has been proved again and again. Many wolves entered into the church to prey on the sheep. Jesus also told us that the hell of the people who put on religious garbs around them without a true born-again experience will be much much hotter than that of even an unchurched man or woman.
Secondly, this man having sex with a teenager should be called a homosexual. As I repeatedly said, many of the child sex scandals in the church are being done by homosexuals who entered into the churches. That is why homosexuality is so dangerous to the society.
Thirdly, do not miss the word, 'sodomizing'. Before homosexual elite were successful to change the terminology of their abomination, the word for homosexuality is 'sodomizing'. You know where does it come from? The Bible. It was the sin of Sodom and Gomorrow. As many of you aware, God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrow with fire and brimstone for actively practising homosexuality. I am really afraid what judgment would come upon our nation as we increasingly accept gay culture in this country. You might, ask, why should we care about judgment? My friend, we are living in the worly created by God and we have no option to live but by the rules of God. Let us humbly accept that fact. God wants to forgive all homosexuals if they confess their sin to Him. That is my request to all my atheist friends on this website.


Blogger Audie said...
You know, it sounds like the guy might have gotten a bad rap on this one. Though not a defense of the Xian myth, but from reading the post, I feel that the kid is most likely lying.

Hey armen, where does history record that Jesus was a "good man"? Where in history is Jesus ever recorded? Nowhere. Thats
's like saying that there is historical evidence that proves that Zeus was an asshole. They only exist in mythology.

And Paul, welcome back. I notice that you pop up on a post like this one, but you are strangely quiet 3 days ago when Brett Keene took on some deacon about some disturbing things in the OT. In case you just missed it : http://exchristian.net/exchristian/2007/01/atheist-brett-keane-vs-deacon.html

I am eagerly awaiting your response to this.


Anonymous Anonymous said...
THIS time...I don't think he did it, or at least that theres not enough evidence to be completely sure, I'm watching though, these preistophiles are tricky beggars.

Also, word to paul who's the only supposed christian here and yet can't spell "Gomorrah", nice one douchetard.


Anonymous Vixentrox said...
Armen, which history records do you have that calls Jesus a good man? Certainly there is nothing from his contemporaries that stated such.


Anonymous Vixentrox said...
Hey Paul, as you know, God destroyed Sodom and Gomorroh. He could wait to kill all the babies and little children that lived there. We all known that the babies were doing each other in the bum and other unspeakable crimes against god. Oh and Paul, how come there is just as many sex scandels involving straight sex? They homosexual pretending to be straight?


Anonymous Ronnie said...
Yeah Paul, God was against Sodom and Gomorrah but it was Ok for Lot's two daughters get him drunk and have sex with him, incest Paul, Gen. 19:34, keep reading Paul!

So incest is good everybody, call in the family, before Jesus gets here.


Blogger Lupis Noctum said...
Hate to come out on the side of the christers here, but this story doesn't wash...

Why didn't the boy simply leave after the preacher pulled down his zipper? Why stick around for fondling and a hummer? Did the big mean 70 year old man overpower the 17 year old?

I'd say that a more likely scenario is that the preacher offered special treatment in whatever little scam the church had going in exchange for sex, the boy accepted, then decided to "bust" the preacher afterward, assuming that this was a good way to avoid participation in the scam altogether.

Really though, anything that reduces the number of pulpit-pounders is a good thing. Problem is, when you kill or disgrace one of 'em, you make a martyr...


Blogger eel_shepherd said...
Armen wrote:
"...Even if you don't believe that Christ is God, history records him to be a 'good' man, and therefore at the very least you're being slanderous of someone that

1) In your opinion is dead
2) Never done you any harm..."

Actually, this one might some day appear in the Department Of Redundancy Department files.

I'm thinking that if statement #1 is true, y'don't really get that much extra out of statement #2...

Come to that, even #1 might count as excess for those of us who don't believe there even _was_ a Jesus who might have been in any position to fulfill statement #1... Let's just shake the dust off our sandals and forget the whole matter. Least said the better.


Anonymous Pull The Other One! said...
Well done Audie for pointing out that Paul is very selective in which subjects he is willing to address.

By the way, Paul doesn't seem to have responded yet to Audie's challenge and commented on the bible passage referred to in Brett Keane's video, which to remind everyone is from Numbers 31 - the story of the slaughter of the Midianites (apart from the virgin girls).

Neither has any other Christian since the video appeared four days ago now.


Anonymous paul said...
Dear Audie and Pull the Other One:
thank for referring me this video. I typed my answer and lost it due to a mistake. I will post it again tomorrow.


Anonymous tigg13 said...
Armen wrote, "Just because some professing Christian does something so awful, doesn't mean that you should slag off Christ like that. Even if you don't believe that Christ is God, history records him to be a 'good' man, and therefore at the very least you're being slanderous of someone that

1) In your opinion is dead
2) Never done you any harm

So it kinda means you're being unreasonably nasty to someone you think is dead. Would you appreciate someone being nasty to a dead family member, especially when they didn't know them??"

1. History does not record jesus at all, so in my opinion it is quite likely that jesus never existed.

2. If he did exist, then all of his immediate family died some 2000 years ago.

3. Would you find it equally disturbing if I were making slanderous remarks about Hitler? Or Napolean? Or George III? Or Nero?

4. If jesus/god can't take a joke, then to hell with 'em.


Anonymous Pull The Other One! said...
Just to let you know folks, Paul didn’t post a comment to the Brett Keane video as he promised to do above.

If you’d like to read a fuller response to this little piece of pious fraud, please see the article entitled ‘Brett Keane Vs a Deacon’, which appeared on January 10. (Sorry I don’t know how to do links) and scroll down to my comments posted on January 18.

Thanks.


Anonymous Pull The Other One! said...
Just to be fair, I thought that I’d better let you know that Paul has today (January 20, three days later than promised) posted a response to the ‘Brett Keane Vs a Deacon’ video (which appeared on January 10).

Check it out! Just make sure that you’re not eating at the time!


Post a Comment | Create a Link | Post in the Forums | Permalink



The first 200 comments appear here under the article. If over 200 comments are posted, click on the "newer" and "newest" links on the Post a Comment page to continue reading the latest comments.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

  Subscribe to this post's Comments (Atom).
Subscribe to every post's Comments (RSS).
Quickly catch up on all recent comments posted on ExChristian.Net on the Recent Comments page.

<< Home