Another Kansas Teacher With Criminal History

Surprise, surprise. No, not really; should anyone be surprised to hear that another Kansas public school employee, a building administrator, this time, has resigned because his criminal history came to light? Mike Burgan, USD 350, in St. Johns, Kansas, was found to have a criminal record for indecent solicitation of a child in 1988. Oddly enough, he was employed by the school district in 1985, which places his offense three years into his illustrious career. Since 1988, Mr. Burgan has lied to the Kansas Department of Education numerous times about his criminal past. In a community that only has about one thousand people, it seems almost impossible that no one heard about a conviction for something as serious as sex crimes against a minor, even in 1988.

A retired teacher from the same community still appears to defend Mr. Burgan. Either the retired teacher has failed to grasp reality, or the retired teacher has other reasons for denying the truth. Either scenario should truly scare any parent who loves his children.

Justice And Magistrate Court In Marshall County Kansas

Anyone experiencing legal problems in Marshall County Kansas, as a plaintiff, defendant, or as a witness, should be aware of his or her constitutional rights. Any attorney you hire should practice mostly outside of Marshall County. You should not hire anyone who cares about the political gossip structure of Marshall County, because a lawyer who cares more about local politics than about your case will not truly represent you. If you are a defendant, you should demand a jury trial if you can. While copping a plea may seem less expensive and easier, a jury of your peers will usually be more fair to you than the prosecutor or the magistrate judge. You have the right to bypass a bench trial with the magistrate judge and go directly to a jury trial, if you so choose. If you have a public defender, make sure he understands this. If he tells you that you cannot have a jury trial, he is lying. If you are found not guilty, you may actually save money in the long run, because you won't have to pay court costs, fees, fines, ect. You also won't have a criminal record. If Laura McNish, the Marshall County prosecutor, threatens you or tries to scare you, remember that she is a dishonest bully, and scare tactics are all she actually has in the way of tools of her trade. Once she is in the courtroom, she comes across as an idiot with no talent or skill. She also lacks insight in the job of prosecuting crime, and goes to court unprepared for trial. A defendant who does not accept a plea is a serious problem in her life. Unless she can intimidate witnesses or charm a jury with exceptionally believable lies, she has no compelling courtroom presence. Even if you have a public defender appointed to your case, tell him you want a jury trial. If he says no, insist upon contacting the Kansas Bar Association, and when you go to your first court appearance, stubbornly refuse a plea or a bench trial. Laura McNish and Angela Hecke are both as woefully ignorant of the law, and of life outside of the Midwest as the wizard in the Wizard of Oz was of "wizardry". Oh....if you are a witness, remember that it is unlawful to lie in court, even if the prosecuting attorney asks you to do it for her.

 

Because of Laura McNish's lack of expertise as a lawyer, actual crime in Marshall County Kansas generally goes unnoticed, uninvestigated, and unprosecuted until the KBI or the FBI becomes involved. She is only proficient in prosecuting petty crimes and intimidating those who do not understand their rights and are too weak to stand up for themselves.

 

Christians Keep Crying The Blues

I looked at comments and emails for today, after coming home, and discovered a comment from a very angry person. The post that got the person so angry was written in July, and I almost deleted the comment without looking at it, assuming it was spam. But....lo and behold.....my opinion that Christian churches are too liberal with their trust of good conformists and other con artists, even those of the criminal element, expressed almost eight months ago, garnered an angry reaction today. The commenter was not terribly specific about the anger and enragement point, other than offering general criticism of my perspective on Christianity. The post deals with a Christian church employee with a criminal record, whose criminal record was not checked upon hire, and who took the opportunity to murder another church employee while both were in the building alone. I decried the lack of background checks across the Christian board, wishing that Christians would stop making all kinds of crime opportune within their ranks. I also hinted at the type of soul who might be attracted by such lenient practices. I also think that I am well in the right to question such things, and to protect my family. Here's the comment: "Juli you have some kind of abhorrent, twisted view of Christianity. Your blog is absolute trash. Unfortunately, I stumbled upon it and I am appalled. You are abusing free speech. This could have happened anywhere and you know it. How intolerant you are of Christianity. Hypocrite."

If you find my view of Christianity abhorrent, so be it. I will not be the one to get murdered or raped because I was inside of a church by myself with a Christian. Writing about these people, making others aware of certain things.....such as profiles on national sex offender registries.......and guilty pleas in court to crimes that put others on sex offender registries, just not Catholic Bishops, (see Bishop Robert Finn) is not an abuse of free speech. If it was, sex offender registries would not exist.

You are also incorrect about the notion that this could have happened anywhere. This could only happen in an environment where a person's past is unimportant, or where background checks are not done on employees. The notion that "Jesus saves", and that a criminal no longer has criminal tendencies is in error, especially in cases of sex offenders. There is no "initiation process" involved in becoming a Protestant Christian, and as a result, Goddess only knows who and what is running amuck within their churches. You're darned tootin' I'm "intolerant" of Christian churches; everyone should be!

Here's another reason I think Christians are rather stupid about persons with criminal pasts: last year, a local church was asked to help a friend of mine who is homeless. She is a woman, and has no criminal record. For whatever reason, this particular local Baptist church turned her away. But then, they actually helped a violent sex offender pay his legal fines! They expose their children to him, and by enabling him, they give him the chance to re-offend and maintain the level of danger he poses to the rest of his community. It would be nice if they would use common sense about who they decide to help and who they turn away, but they don't. Both of these people were from other areas; the church simply chooses to help better conformists who are good at saying the stuff they want to hear. Between driving down property values to exposing unsuspecting victims to serious danger, I do not think I can find a reason to respect many Christian churches today. I know that does not describe all Christian churches, but it describes too many.

 

Kansas, Don't Get Your Clergy At Kmart

As a bit of an update to to this post, and in answer to a question someone had, here is more information about the charming Hugh Cranford, the lovely Lutheran youth paster in Topeka who likes liturgical positions that give him access to children. His former place of "vicarage" was Concordia, in Saint Louis, Missouri. The final outcome of pending matters against Cranford there is unclear; but the whole disgusting matter is still quite recent, and the wheels of our justice system have a reputation for turning slowly at times. He was ousted from their church and school in the summer of 2011.

Something that should concern the Luthern community in Topeka Kansas is this, according to the Capitol Journal, "Dale Meyer, president of the seminary, said Monday after hearing about the allegations in early June the seminary immediately suspended the vicarage and prevented Cranford from enrolling in any other classes.
Meyer also said the alleged incidents didn’t take place at Faith Lutheran Church or Topeka Lutheran School. He said they also had no word that the alleged incidents took place on the seminary’s campus." Now; who cares WHERE his alleged assaults on children took place? The deal is this: parents were told by the church that they could trust this man with their children. As it happened, they could not. The information was readily available through a criminal background check AND through a reference check. This, apparently, was not performed. Now the church wants to distance itself from any responsibility in the matter at all. Someone at the church may have even given Hugh Cranford the information that charges were being filed, and assisted him in leaving town before law enforcement could find him. It's entirely possible. Hugh Cranford is still at large, and Dale Meyer is more concerned with damage control than with child safety. This is why I do not allow my children at attend Christian churches in Kansas. It's dangerous.

 

Hugh Cranford, without his Neo-Nazi beard.

 

Letter To School Superintendent In Kansas

Here's a letter I wrote to the superintendent of schools in the school district that includes my childrens' school. I have substituted the letter X for proper nouns, as identities of individuals and places are not necessary to the point of my letter.

Dear Mr. XXXX,

I was in the office at XXXX School yesterday, returning two of my children to school after an appointment at the eye doctor. One of the first people I noticed, because he was out of place, was a Mr. HXXXX, (I have forgotton his first name) who lives in town, but no longer has any children who attend this school. Not only did his name NOT appear on the sign-in sheet that you told me would remain in the office for any adult who visits the building but is not on the payroll; I am curious about the need for his volunteer services and his qualifications. My children cannot participate in certain sports, because you have spurned my offers to volunteer based on my popularity scores here in XXXX that have little to do with my character or other qualifications, which probably, by far, exceed the qualifications of other parents who volunteer at your school. Have you checked the criminal record of Mr. HXXXX? His two sons, who are both young adults, still live in his house, and I have personally heard them both discuss the use of illegal drugs. Mr. HXXXX was physically present when his sons were speaking. Apparently, Mr.HXXXX does not take prohibition laws seriously. After hearing those comments, I do not allow my daughter to even visit that home to buy Avon from his wife. I don't want my children in that type of environment. Also, I have seen him allow minors, his sons, when they were still in high school, to drink beer in his home. This is not the person I find appropriate to volunteer in the school, and share his "influence" with my children, thankyou very much. Also, since this is such a small town, and since at least one of Mr. HXXXX's children has experienced "run-ins" with the law in the past, in connection to violations of prohibition laws and alcohol, I will contend that your principal, Mr. DXXXX, was aware of this, yet welcomed him into the building anyway.

Since the rules apply stringently to yours truly, to the extent of her own children not being able to participate in sports because the adult/child ratio is unsafe in your school during these activities, and that does not bother you; I am curious to know why Mr. HXXXX, who violates the law in connection to children and alcohol in ways I would never even consider, is welcomed with open arms into your building. Would you please explain the bias to me? Also, why is he not required to sign in, as I do, whenever I enter your building? Why does his wife use your school as a venue for her Avon business? I sold Avon on the East Coast, and would never have considered a school building an appropriate place to dispense product and collect revenue for same. This takes the attention of teachers and other staff away from children and creates an atmosphere of business other than education. It is not safe for the students. Please make it stop.

I have one more question for you. Is this IP number, XXXX, in any way associated with computers in your school buildings? If so, you have at least one teacher who harrasses others for political reasons. My children and I should NOT KNOW where anyone on your staff stands on issues such as abortion, yet we do, and we should certainly not know for whom any of your teachers intends to vote! Please ask them to all be less obvious about their political stances.

Sincerely,
XXXX

............In all fairness, I should convey that the superintendent did respond to my letter, the same day he got it. He told me that the sign-in sheet in the office would be in use from now on, whether the local Kansas folk wished for that or not. He also told me that the Avon Lady would no longer be making stops at the school, as this is against policy for several reasons. I should add that the Avon Lady also never bothers to sign in at my childrens' school, and moves freely through the building as if she worked there or had children there. Neither apply to her.

The superintendent was not able to explain the inherent nastiness and unjust prejudism expressed by these people toward myself and other members of my family. He was not able to explain the constant pressure to vote for a presidential candidate who is not of my choosing. He was also not able to tell me why my children and I even know for whom most of these teachers intend to vote. He and I both agreed that if a child ever disappears from this particular school or is otherwise harmed there, the FBI will be VERY interested in the number of unofficially present adults in the school from day to day, and in their identities, activities, and criminal records. That said, it seems to me that persons who have unlawful recreational drugs in their homes from time to time, and persons who allow minors to drink alcoholic beverages in their homes, should take heed.

 

Terri Horman, You Have A Message

Someone left some spam for Terri Horman under this post today. Since I am not in the habit of publishing spam, I will not publish it, but I will say that it recommended ten things a job seeker can do to increase his chances in the job market. I was mildly disappointed, however; that among the ten things an applicant should do, none was "cleaning up criminal record", "clearing oneself of criminal suspicion", or "returning all formerly kidnapped children to their families"! I'm afraid the ten generic suggestions will be of no real use to Terri Horman!

These two pictures squashed together spell "thug extraordinaire". Even if Terri Moulton Horman is not using this as a cover page for her resume, most perspective employers, especially in the teaching field, and other jobs involving children, for which Terri has a degree, would not hire her. If Terri Moulton Horman suddenly found employment at a school, I imagine parents would protest as soon as they discovered her identity! She still has not cooperated in the efforts to find her stepson, Kyron Horman, who went missing from his school in Portland, Oregon, on June 4, 2010. Below is another picture of Kyron.