Jack Schaap blames health, financial woes for his relationship with teen (PDF attached)

There are 35 Comments

Alex Guggenheim's picture

Jay wrote:

I was link surfing and I hit this piece, and it sums up exactly why I think Schaap will get a harsher sentence.  Kudos to Darrell at SFL for putting into words what is so unfortunately often in our circles.  I do NOT agree with his levying this charge at BJU, but the point is clear and unassailable.

For no matter how many court rulings and media stories and witnesses and blogs and protestors rise up against you, you can be confident that you have never been wrong. This is your birthright. This is your heritage. This is the sacred trust passed down from father to son for generations: the gift of being always and forever right.

So Be Right, BJU. Be right, fundamentalist, wherever you are. But you can only be right until the stars fall. For in that latter day then shall the Judge of all the earth stand and deliver His final verdict on whether you truly did justly and loved mercy and walked humbly. There will be no more reasons or excuses or equivocations then. And unless you repent, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment than for you.

But there’s still today. There’s still this moment. You still have time. It’s not too late to do right.  

If there had been any real conviction of sin or the enormity of his crimes on Schaap's part, then I would say to give him less.  I still don't see it, and I doubt the judge will too.

Judges don't go by "conviction of sin". Pleading guilty is taking responsibility. He has also apologized in the court and to the court for his crime. What I am observing is the lack of distinction being made by you in imposing on the court some kind of Christian requirement. That is not what the court considers.

Federal sentencing is normally very predicable, especially in someone who is getting a first conviction and has zero points. It will likely be 120 months but it will be far more surprising if he gets more than less.

Alex Guggenheim's picture

Jim wrote:

Alex Guggenheim wrote:

The likelihood is that Jack Schaap will get the mandatory minimum or less. He has no points and has pled guilty. His lawyer has some bearing but frankly, in a federal case especially, the judge is the one who will have the greatest bearing, good lawyer or none.

I agree with Alex except I see him getting 120 months (not less). Next strategy is good behavior and with the hope that he gets some kind of early release (perhaps on health reasons).

I suspect that the judge will grant the prosecution request for the additional 45 days. And that we will see a victim's statement. Probably no final decision until the 1st week of March.

Normally Federal sentencing only allows a particular amount of good time which is universally applied to all which is, I believe about 54 days a year. In the end they have to serve around 85% of their time even on maximum good time earned.

Jay's picture

Rob Fall wrote:

has any relation to l'affaire de Shaap?

I just thought that Schaap's behavior with this whole disaster is exactly what BJU had been accused of by the DRBJU group - stonewalling and denial until reality finally sunk in and they had to address it.  

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Rob Fall's picture

There's a difference between accusations (so far unsubstantiated) and a case which not only went to trial but ended in the conviction of the accused.  This http://sharperiron.org/filings/1-10-13/25831 didn't come close to happening at FBCH.

Jay wrote:

Rob Fall wrote:

has any relation to l'affaire de Shaap?

I just thought that Schaap's behavior with this whole disaster is exactly what BJU had been accused of by the DRBJU group - stonewalling and denial until reality finally sunk in and they had to address it.  

Hoping to shed more light than heat..

Jay's picture

Rob - agree with you on that.  I have just found Schaap's attitude at the plea agreement hearing so very telling...shooting winks and waving to his congregation that was behind him while he was on his way into the plea hearing.  

Schaap, former pastor of First Baptist Church of Hammond, periodically winked and gave a thumbs-up to family members and others gathered in the court's visitors gallery.

One man seated in the gallery and holding a Bible whispered a quiet prayer to Jesus when Schaap took his seat in the defendant's chair.

During the proceedings, Schaap admitted to Lozano that his sexual encounters with the girl began when she was 16 — in June 2012 — and continued two more times through July, when she was 17.

At the time of the encounters, the victim was both a church member whom Schaap was counseling and a student of the Hammond Baptist Schools, of which Schaap was the superintendent, he told the judge.

Schaap told Lozano he had someone else — who was not named during the proceedings — drive the victim to locations in Crete, Ill., and western Michigan for the encounters.

He told Lozano what he did "was a sin. It was wrong." But Schaap also claimed he did not realize it was illegal at the time he was carrying out the acts.

Lozano deferred accepting Schaap's plea until the scheduled Jan. 15 sentencing hearing.

In any case, I think I'll drop the subject now.  PM me if you still want to discuss it.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Pages