Update: AG asks state Supreme Court to deny Bent appeal (kob.com, 10/16)
Advisory: Comments in this thread have been re-opened
Update: “Imprisoned For Sabbath Keeping” (strongcity.info, 10/7)
*NEW*: VIDEO, “Wayne Bent defends his hunger strike” (krqe.com, 9/24)
Update: “Judge rules in favor of force feeding imprisoned cult leader” (koat.com, 9/23)
Update: “Judge puts fasting cult leader in doctor’s hands” (kob.com, 9/23)
*New: (updated to include *VIDEO* of KOB-TV’s 6pm news story) “Court could intervene on cult leader’s fast” (kob.com, 9/23)
Video: (KOAT, 9/22)
Update: “Cult leader Wayne Bent is scheduled to be in court on Wednesday as a judge decides whether the state should force feed him.” (koat.com, 9/22)
Update: Leader of NM sect goes on fast in prison (Associated Press on KOB-TV website, 9/17, 1:15pm PST)
***
(September 17) Beyond90Seconds received an e-mail from Jeff Bent at 7:10 am (PST) today. Bent is the son of “cult leader” Wayne Bent, whose criminal case has been extensively covered on this blog. Wayne Bent (aka Michael Travesser) and his followers have also been the subject of two National Geographic Channel documentaries and numerous news reports around the world. In December 2008, a New Mexico jury convicted Wayne Bent on one count of second-degree sexual contact with a minor and two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. According to his son, prisoner Wayne Bent has been fasting for 18 days.
Jeff Bent’s unedited e-mail, apparently sent to numerous media outlets, is shared below with his permission:
Hello,
You are receiving this message because you have contacted me about my
father, Wayne Bent, or have reported on his criminal case. I have
sent copies of this message to New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson,
Attorney General Gary King, and the Department of Corrections.My father is on the 18th day of a religious fast over his wrongful
conviction and imprisonment. Since Monday, September 14th, he has
been taking water only.John McCall, my father’s attorney, stated publicly, “Our office has
determined that this case is more of a trial of the media and the
structures in our society that are tasked with determining the truth.”
The media’s role is to separate fact from fiction, and to seek the
truth. The courts are to judge according to the facts and the law -
nothing else.The media and the courts failed spectacularly at doing their job. My
father, Wayne Bent, found himself at the center of a national media
feeding frenzy in 2008, having become the subject of a largely
contrived and self-perpetuating storyline of a “cult leader” requiring
sex with the young virgins in his apocalyptic church while falsely
predicting the end of the world. While this fiction had mass appeal
and was much more interesting than the truth, it resulted in a highly
charged criminal case involving his healing practices with two teenage
sisters. Caught up in the maelstrom of publicity and unable, or
unwilling, to separate my father’s media created persona from the
actual events called into question, the court failed in its role to
stick with the facts and the law, delivering a great injustice to my
father and his church.This outcome should be of concern to everyone that understands the
importance of a legal system that protects people equally under the
law, especially unpopular minorities who may find themselves targeted
by the media’s powerful ability to mold public perceptions.The facts of my father’s criminal case are as follows:
1. My father was charged with two counts of criminal sexual contact
with a minor (CSM), and two counts of contributing to the delinquency
of a minor (CDM). He was acquitted on one count of CSM, and convicted
on the other counts.2. These charges stemmed from a religious healing practice where the
teenaged minors asked to be in his presence unclothed. These
encounters were for the purpose of healing prior emotional trauma in a
safe setting. These encounters were decidedly and emphatically
non-sexual in nature. The minors’ parents were not unaware of the
healing practices some in the church were requesting of Mr. Bent. It
was a subject of open discussion within the church.3. It was common for Wayne Bent, when he was still ministering to his
flock, to put his hand on the sternum above the heart, just below the
clavicle. He did this to invest the soul of that person with his own
peace. It is believed by Mr. Bent that the heart is where the soul
resides.4. Witness A.S., age 16 at the time, was one of the minors who
requested of Wayne Bent to be in a state of naked vulnerability in his
presence so she could release prior emotional trauma that blocked her
from Oneness with God. This non-sexual 15 minute session with A.S. is
what resulted in my father’s conviction on one count of CSM. A.S.
left the church and chose a different lifestyle a couple of years
before this case went to trial. The other witness – her younger
sister – remains part of my father’s church.5. A.S. testified that my father, Wayne Bent, placed his hand on her
sternum over her heart. When asked if his hand touched any portion of
her breast, she replied, “I don’t remember.” The prosecutor asked if
Mr. Bent placed his hand anywhere else on her body. She answered,
“Not that I recall.”6. A.S. said Mr. Bent kissed her on her “breast.” When asked to show
the court where he kissed her, she pointed to an area on her chest
below her left clavicle and above the pillow portion of her breast.
There were significant questions during the trial of what constitutes
a breast that were never answered.7. Defense attorney Sarah Montoya showed witness A.S. a Barbie doll
wearing a bikini and asked her if Mr. Bent touched her anywhere on her
body where the Barbie was covered by the bikini. She answered, “No.”
Ms. Montoya asked “Are you sure?” A.S. replied, “Yes.”8. My father, Wayne Bent, testified under oath that he never touched
the breasts of either witness.9. During a bench conference with counsel at closing arguments, Judge
Gerald Baca can be heard on the record whispering, “There’s no
evidence to support that there was ever a touching of the breast.”10. During closing arguments, the prosecutor told the jury multiple
times that the witnesses both testified that they were touched on the
breasts by Mr. Bent. This falsehood, as well as others uttered by the
prosecutor, helped sway the jury in the direction of conviction,
according to one juror who was interviewed afterwards by The Alibi
newspaper.11. Judge Baca sentenced my father to 18 years in prison, with 8
years suspended. He also received 8 years supervised probation and
must register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.To say the least, my father did not receive justice at his trial. The
State failed to meet any reasonable burden of proof that my father had
broken the law. Much of the trial consisted of testimony from the
State’s witnesses about my father’s controversial religious beliefs.
Having controversial beliefs is not a crime in New Mexico.The sentence he received is incredible beyond belief, being extremely
disproportionate by any measure of comparison. The sentence for
murder in the second degree is 14 years. The day before my father
received his sentence, a high school coach in Alamogordo was sentenced
to ten months work release for having sexual intercourse multiple
times with a 16 year old student at his mother’s apartment. This year
a fire captain in Rio Rancho received probation for having sexual
intercourse with a 15 year old multiple times in the fire house.My father has been turned down twice for a bond that he is legally
entitled to receive during his appeal. Why is that? Why is this
frail, physically at risk 68 year old man such as threat to everyone?
Why is the State so determined to keep him locked away?My father is mindful of the fact that the courts are heavily
influenced by public opinion regarding his case, and not the facts and
the law. There are no political costs for keeping him in prison, but
justice has taken a back seat to political expediency.This is why my father is now on a religious fast, and will not end his
fast until there is movement in the direction of justice, or he dies.
He was wrongly convicted and wrongly incarcerated as a result of a
modern-day witch-hunt, and he cannot continue to be a party to this
travesty of justice.Jeff Bent
Sam, thanks from me for posting that picture again, of the hand over the breast.
It reminded me of an old Arabian proverb about a camel who has to stand outside the tent in the cold while his master is inside where it is nice and warm. As I remember the story, at first, the camel just wants to stick his head in.
If the camel were to take the stand in his defense, this is what he would say. I only meant to touch the part between the breasts, the non-sexual parts.
That’s probably what he did with the other girls too, at first–only touched them between their sexual parts. But then if they couldn’t help but start to imprudently wiggle a little, his plan would be thwarted and more would take place, which he now has admitted.
Given Wayne’s grandiose impressions of himself to the world, that court scene with Wayne standing there with his face on, demonstrating that he only put his hand between sexual places is amazing. To the jury, I am sure it said it all.
There’s another issue that I have regarding the testimony at the trial and where his hand was that I found very interesting. Below is Healed’s testimony regarding seeing him naked:
Ms. Montoya: Have you seen him naked?
L.S.: No.
Ms. Montoya: So, that’s gonna cause some confusion. Ok, because I think people think when you said he didn’t have clothes on, that you saw him naked.
L.S.: It was dark and there was no lights on.
Then Wayne’s testimony:
Wayne Bent: Yes.
(Bent stands up)
In L.S.’s case, it was straight up and down like this. If I put my hand on the sternum of somebody clothed, I’m not always so careful where I put my hand. But in her case, I was being exceptionally careful, not to enter into any kind of sexuality with her.
If it was too dark for her to see his nakedness then how could he see enough to be “exceptionally careful” where he was placing his hand? I’m completely confused.
JEREMIAH 3:3
As I first saw the case of my old friend Wayne Bent in the news and began to follow the case through trial, sentencing and jail time, if there was one text more than another that kept coming to mind, it was this one.
“Jeremiah 3:3 Therefore the showers have been withholden, and there hath been no latter rain; and thou hadst a whore’s forehead, thou refusedst to be ashamed.”
Wayne wonders why his god, the voice, just leaves him there to twiddle his fingers. He keeps trying to figure out what he should be doing, or not doing. But his voice, it won’t tell him. Fasting and threatening suicide is the best he can come up with. Still, the showers of refreshing (blessings) do not come. They still won’t give him what he wants.
Ever since his misbehavior with women, for the world, he has put on his proudest front. He looks people straight in the face, as if it is them who is thinking evil and sexual thoughts. He did this in court. We have just seen the picture of him demonstrating for the court how he had carefully placed his hand between the sexual parts.
This is what Jeremiah 3:3 is about. It’s about this kind of a forehead—one that looks straight at you and without shame.
We have often seen those who when caught and taken into custody and are brought outside in front of the cameras. They are often ashamed and bow their heads as they proceed. They cover their foreheads and faces with their hands or their coats as best they can. Jeremiah 3:3 is not about them, but about those who are proud of their foolishness and willing to stare you down with it, forehead to forehead.
Casidi
That is a very good point and so subtle that it could be easily overlooked because as much as I went over the text that never jumped out at me. It is very interesting that to her it was to dark to see if Wayne had cloths on,yet there was enough light for an old man that wears glasses to be able to see clearly enough to tell exactly where and how he placed his hand.
I am no expert and will never claim to be but to me that is very cut and dry. Next you add in the pictures Sam used in his example and even an idiot can clearly see Wayne clearly got a pretty good thrill feel. Then Diane clearly stated the fact that most women have larger bust than those shown giving our old perverted messiah quite the handful of flesh.
I hope our Jury member will chime in on this because his/her actions and thoughts are the ones that convicted Wayne on the 3 counts. We can clearly read and see what was said in the court room but no one but the jury members knows what the deciding factors and elements of the case were that brought them to the choices they made in the convictions.
What Sam states about witness selection sounds fine to me, but what I understand about this case was also the fact that Judge Baca as an elected official on the bench was going to be leaving that elected office at the end of December 2008, and that there had to be an adjustment in the witness selection in order for there to be enough time for the case to be heard and settled before he left office. The State and the defense both had to cut witnesses so the case would fit in the time slot alloted. Prudence Welch was cut, as also was some of Wayne’s “Character” witnesses. I, on the most part was basically “unheard” of during the trial witness selection, as the state knew very little about my history in the Strong City saga, and seriously what could I say? Prudence had the history and the website, so she was selected, and rightfully was qualified. The state did not know that there was a former LOR member and witness avialable (Me) who was there on the land when all the events happened. It had also been suggested that I was still a little fond of Wayne Bent at the time, and maybe anything that I could add would have been confusing. Milton Bernheisel has been saying that I am a fence rider. Wayne had wrote quite a while back stating that I was “luke warm”. I can’t say one way or another why they believed so, afterall I did leave the church, and that act should have sent a clear message to all of them. I just still love all of them, and want them to be free from all of this present madness. I probably would have been willing to give my old friend Wayne a hug as well, as did John Sayer. National Geographic had filmed alot of interviews with me as well for their trial documentary. I was the only former member of the cult would was at the trial and who also was present on the Land when Wayne lain with the underage girls. I beleive I was interviewed about 11 times. But they had chosen to not use any of it, as I had an upcoming divorce pending, and they did not want to have anything from the documentary brought up that would negatively affect Lillian’s divorce from me. I talk about this in my book. I believe people are smart enough to read what I write, and can figure out where I stand on the issues.
I agree with Sam on the issues at trial and why most of the witnesses weren’t called.
On the issue of time, most judges set a specific amount of time for a trial based on the charges, how many witnesses each side intends to call, and other motions that were filed pretrial. Many of those motions were decided pretrial.
In this particular case, 2 things were in play. First, there was a long list of possible witnesses on both sides. Many of those were character witnesses for the defendant and probably for the jury’s sake, the judge limited those types of witnesses because they would likely say the same thing. I know that many of them wrote letters in his defense before the trial but I don’t know if the Judge read them all.
Before a trial and usually before a jury is seated, the judge meets with the attorneys for both sides, sometimes to try to resolve the case, other times to lay the rules on the line. I imagine each side was limited to a certain number and type of witness not for time but because they would be repetitious.
The second thing in play was as Sam said, the religion aspect. The defense wanted it to be a trial against religious freedom, the DA wanted to keep it just to the facts at hand. I also think the Judge wanted to keep it to the charges and not about religion. These charges were not about religion although the defense certainly wanted them to be but there were 4 charges and not one of them mentioned religion. The legal precedent in NM that Sam mentioned, State v. Trevino, gave the jury the right to decide the charges in part on their “community standard” of decency and propriety. It doesn’t say based on your religious beliefs.
Barbie came into play to show parts of a female body trying to counteract that legal precedent. The problem there was that Barbie was clothed in a very modest bikini and the girls weren’t clothed in anything. Big difference!
If Prudence or Johnny had been put on the stand and told the jury about SC and what had been happening over the years, not limiting it to just the 2 girls, it would have been more likely to become a religious freedom trial. By keeping it to expert witnesses about sexual grooming, mind control, etc. religion was for the most part kept out of the trial. And Bent sealed the deal when he testified and showed how he touched people on the sternum.
At sentencing, many of the witnesses who had not testified were able to speak up for or against the defendant, including the defendant.
So I really don’t think time was an issue. The trial started Dec. 8th, the jury came back with their verdict on Dec. 15. If needed, there were still at least 10 days for the trial to continue. As it was, the Judge kindly permitted Bent to go home before sentencing. That’s not always the case.
I also think that if Bent had read Mark’s quote for today (really good one Mark) and not written his hateful letters, not gone on and off fasts and been a more model inmate he might be at home now waiting for his appeal to go through the legal system instead of fasting in Los Lunas on Ensure.
How many days?
How many days until he gets sick of (uncomfortable with) drinking Ensure and figures out a reason or the voice tells him to start taking those trays again? Then when he does, will the count have to start over for trays? Or will it just run on, like it did when he started taking the Ensure? How heavy should he be before the count is restarted?
Link to KOB has been added at top. Thanks Jan & KM.
AG asks state Supreme Court to deny Bent appeal
KOB reports:
New Mexico’s attorney general is asking the state Supreme Court to deny an appeal request for imprisoned cult leader Wayne Bent.
Bent is serving a 10 year prison sentence for molesting a teen follower on his Union County compound.
Bent is now asking the Supreme Court to consider his appeal.
The AG’s office says both a district and appellate court denied appeal requests, and there is no new evidence showing Bent should be entitled to one.
http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S1196002.shtml?cat=520
I wonder if this is what they are waiting for and until there is word Wayne will continue fasting on Ensure?
Jan
New News!
Just posted on KOB online:
“New Mexico’s attorney general is asking the state Supreme Court to deny an appeal request for imprisoned cult leader Wayne Bent.
Bent is serving a 10 year prison sentence for molesting a teen follower on his Union County compound.
Bent is now asking the Supreme Court to consider his appeal.
The AG’s office says both a district and appellate court denied appeal requests, and there is no new evidence showing Bent should be entitled to one.”
It’s interesting! I’ve been watching the court sites and no rulings have been published since August. But it seems that maybe the Appeals court ruled on more than just an Appeal Bond.
Bent is 4th from the bottom on the Supreme Courts “Filed and Pending Writs of Certiorari.” They work from the bottom up.
Thank you Mark! Don’t know if you saw in an earlier post today, but I love today’s quote! Stephanie Barron was a very smart woman!
They’re not going to consider his appeal seriously as long as he continues to act crazy. Maybe it’s not an act, and he truly needs to be in a psychiatric facility.
I cannot imagine living on ensure (crap in a can) for the rest of my life. I would rather give up being vegan than drink that.
[i]If it was too dark for her to see his nakedness then how could he see enough to be “exceptionally careful” where he was placing his hand? I’m completely confused.[/i]
Night vision goggles? lol
Braille?
VOX!
He should have used “hands free” VOX (voice operated xmit/relay). Used in radio communications many years. Voice activates transmitter to relay your messages so can remain hands-free, not touch anything!
Perhaps this voice he’s been following forgot to tell him how this could be done and he wouldn’t be where he is now and for the next 110.763 months.
But never mind “just” sternum touching. Doesn’t it “arouse” anyone’s anger upon hearing of this 67 yr old naked man, alone in his bedroom with these young totally innocent and very naieve underaged naked girls, in the dark, between sheets, face to face, toe to toe, with him on top of them for any reason/purposes, no matter what?!
With Mr Bent, while naked together on top of these girls, Newtons law of gravity applied and parts is parts, how can we think otherwise?
Is this legal in New Mexico or anywhere else in America? If so, then lets change this, make this Class A Felony: Crime against a child!
Why wasn’t Mr Bent charged for this as well as the women “grooming” these young girls with very inappropriate writings?! They are just as guilty, if not more so, because I feel Mr Bent mentally insane.
Lets examine the logistics alone:
Did not his intimate/private parts make contact close or near these young girls private/intimate areas when Mr Bent claims to perform these “healings” while maintaining greatest deference and utmost respect for their bodies and souls.
Are we to believe he remained focused on healing while never having one single sexual thought and that his body simply did not have normal God given reactions and feelings. Really? Honest to God?
Are we supposed to be so stupid and fooled in believing otherwise?
(Jeff, I truly want to hear what you have to say about this, if you’ll be honest, tell the truth here.)
Ask any mother of boys, she’ll tell you what often happens while changing his diaper! I’m not talking about the faucet end of this either.
It is just a God given normal reaction. Is how God made little boys.
To me and many others must admit this is all so terribly wrong! Even if both were fully dressed, in the light of day, surrounded by entire LOR congregation, with a sleeping bad between them for any reason healing or holy, just is not right!
I stand by my convictions that this is ugly, nasty, filthy, sexually explicit practice for any male be on top of any female outside marrital relations under Gods eyes. I will never accept this as moral or Godly.
But is what Mr Bent and those decieved followers wants us to think.
I will never accept and would never happen under my roof. But, if it ever did, then the person doing this would suffer the consequences and I’d carry out my own law and order.
In my younger years, I served as a Sheriffs Deputy and I live in Oregon way out in the country.
There’s lots to be feared about protective mothers in my “neck of the woods”!
Around here, “Fasting” takes on a whole new meaning and “Ensure” would make ones flannels a bit messy, with or without those NG tubes!
And as for me and our house, We shall serve The Lord!
I remember when I was a little girl and was walking to school one morning when a man about WB’s age stepped out on his porch wearing not a stitch of clothing on his body. I also remember him smiling at me as I walked on.
When I got to school I told the teacher about it and she went into action calling my mom and the police.
After they arrested him for indecent exposure, he told the police that he had done nothing wrong because he didn’t touch me and that there is nothing wrong with seeing the naked body.
They ended up fining the man and releasing him back into the same neigbhorhood where he pulled this same antic a few more times with different children before he ended up in jail for a couple of years.
The one thing he continued to hold on to was that he wasn’t in the wrong because he never touched the children he exposed himself to.
WB kind of reminds me of that old dirty man who feels he did nothing wrong because …..oh, he never touched anyone wrongfully.
It is still damaging and the incident I speak of happened when I was in kindergarten. All of these years later I barely remember much about my first year in school but I do remember what the man did to me.
He stole away a piece of my innocence even though he never laid a hand on me.
There’s nothing wrong with the naked body, but it’s what you do with it and how you present it especially with children. WB just doesn’t get that though.
“With Mr Bent, while naked together on top of these girls, Newtons law of gravity applied and parts is parts, how can we think otherwise?”
You raise good points and without going too far here, I daresay it must have been a feat for an old man to carefully position and hold himself up or away from the victim’s private areas. And the whole scenario where Healed claims this took place in a room so dark she could not see his nakedness, it really amazes me that he managed at his age to avoid, if even accidentally touching the private areas. And this is probably why these little stories didn’t wash with the jury. It’s just plain common sense.