Wednesday, June 30, 2010

But Why Would Anyone Bring False Charges? Part I: Sandra Lamb, the Wilsons and the Henkes

When Tonya Craft appeared on "The View" Tuesday, one of the questions asked of her was the standard: Why would anyone want to bring false charges against you? Indeed, that is a common question, one that needs to be answered.

For the most part, people are incredulous when they ask it, for in their minds, they cannot conceive of the following things:
  • A child testifying to things that did not happen;
  • Parents pushing charges even though they don't believe their children were molested;
  • Police conducting a phony investigation;
  • Prosecutors gaining indictments for things they know never happened; and
  • A judge purposely trying to grease the skids for a conviction.
Most people simply cannot believe that such a scenario would be possible, and from a distance, the claim might seem to be fantastic. However, there are two things that were in place that not only make the presented scenario possible, but also demonstrate the most important reason why people commit crimes in the first place: motive.

The Accusing Parents

First, the parents of the children involved were looking for revenge for various things, and in Joal and Sarah Henke's situation, they wanted custody of the two Henke children. Second, there were plenty of incentives abounding to encourage prosecutors Chris "Facebook" Arnt and Len "The Man" Gregor, along with "judge" Brian House. In this post, I will demonstrate why the accusing parents had reasons to bring false charges against Tonya Craft.

Let us look first at the parents, and especially Sandra Lamb and Dewayne and Sherri Wilson. Lamb is vindictive, and her virtuoso performance in front of Eric Echols' cell phone camera demonstrates that she is a pretty violent and unstable person. Furthermore, she filed a false police report knowing that the video would show a very different set of activities than what she had reported, so she is not afraid to lie even when others clearly know the truth.

Lamb's friendship with Chris "Facebook" Arnt gave her a lot of cover, for she knew that no matter how big the lies, she always had her backside covered by the local prosecutor. She also is someone who does not like to have anyone hold her or anyone else in her family to account, and Tonya's admonishment of her daughter for misbehaving at a party at Tonya's house was enough to send her into a violent rage.

There is one other thing to keep in mind. Lamb's parents are both dishonest and vindictive, so she has had a "role model" that tells her that she can lie and get away with it. People who do not pay consequences for bad actions, and who already are prone to bad behavior, continue to push the envelope, and that is what Lamb did.

The Wilsons, on the other hand, wanted to get Tonya fired because she had recommended that one of their children be held back because Tonya believed she was not ready for kindergarten. Furthermore, the Wilsons are people who are going to have their own way no matter what, and they were willing to commit perjury in order to have Tonya thrown into prison.

Don't forget that Sherri Wilson, with her little "hand rape" testimony (that had not been documented ANYWHERE in the entire investigation) committed perjury, which is a felony. Like Lamb, she had her backside covered by the prosecutors and "judge" House.

The sense among my own people is that the Wilsons simply wanted to spread some rumors in order to get Tonya fired (and make it hard for her to find a teaching job elsewhere). Dewayne's original call to Det. Steven Keith was that Tonya had engaged in "inappropriate" touching, not an out-and-out hand rape. I doubt he and his wife believed that it would escalate to a legal crisis; they just wanted revenge, and they are people who usually get their vengeance.

A desire for revenge is a powerful motivator. No, the rewards are not pecuniary, but, as economist Murray N. Rothbard noted, there is the "psychic profit" that comes when one is successful in certain endeavors. Furthermore, the Wilsons are not the type of people who are likely to take the "humiliation" (at least to them) of their child being held back in kindergarten (and not promoted to first grade) and not want revenge. People who are used to having their own way are going to push the envelope, too.

I believe that it is instructive to note that the Wilsons did not involve their own child in the accusations, which would be strange, given that their daughter often was at Tonya's house. The whole selective nature of this case -- Tonya molested some children, but left most of the others alone -- does not fit the M.O. of a child molester, or at least the kind of molester that fits the larger profile of serial molesters.

My sense is that the Wilsons knew from the start that the whole thing was a lie, but they wanted their revenge and they knew that they could break the law and not have to face the consequences. I doubt they believed, at least at first, that the charges would escalate into what occurred, but they had underestimated Lamb and her child-actress daughter, as Lamb had her own agenda and was not afraid of using her child to get what SHE wanted.

I have another theory as well, and that is that Lamb believed that her daughter's "experience" of being "molested" would help expand the child's career as an actress. It never occurred to her that Tonya Craft would be acquitted, and the fact that a jury declared unequivocally that Lamb and her daughter gave false testimony also is a killer of the girl's movie career, as no director will take a chance with a child who committed perjury and her vindictive helicopter mother who files false reports and lies under oath.

(Of course, the fact that "One Last Call," which was the girl's "signature" performance, was a Really Bad Movie, rated one of the worst movies of the last decade (in a decade in which even Paris Hilton's "The Hottie and the Nottie" did not even make the Top Ten Worst Movies), was not exactly a resume booster.)

Then there are the Henkes. As I noted in an earlier post, Joal and Sarah are charter members of the Liars' Club, and they certainly had a huge incentive to lie: getting custody of the children from the previous marriage of Joal and Tonya. In fact, one of the most disgusting and reprehensible things done during the trial was Sarah having a Facebook page with a picture of her holding Tonya's daughter, and thanking God for "giving" her that child.

I did not make mention of that page (now taken down, although I have a copy of it) because I knew that Sarah did it simply to taunt Tonya in a most cruel and evil way. Again, here is a woman who put Bible verses on her page, yet committed perjury, which openly violates the Ninth Commandment (or Eighth Commandment, if you are Roman Catholic or Orthodox).

Joal, on the other hand, is used to lying under oath. His "recovered memories" act during his testimony fooled no one, including "Facebook," "The Man," and "judge" House, who somehow believed that the jury would buy Henke's perjury. It didn't.

During this whole affair, I have found out much about Joal Henke, none of it good, and he is and was perfectly capable of lying on the stand to further his own ambitions. It is true that spouses often lie during custody battles and "child molestation" tends to be the charge of choice. That is why Brad Wade is in prison, and Joal had no problem telling lies that he hoped effectively would end the life of Tonya Craft and deny her the opportunity of ever seeing her children while she was alive. Sarah was a willing partner in this reprehensible scheme, and one is sorry that neither she nor Joal really will meet the bar of justice for what they have done, given that "Facebook" and "The Man" were the ones who suborned that perjury, and that "judge" House sanctioned it.

(In my next post, I will lay out the incentives for the LMJC crowd in bringing what each of them knew was a false case. Because I will not have Internet access for the next few days, I will not be posting again until the end of the week.)

63 comments:

tplas said...

As always Bill, great post. I just watched Tonya on the View. She looked GREAT..loved the shoes! lol! I have officially come to the conclusion that these ladies (Sherri, Kelli, Sarah, and Sandra), are just so jealous of her! I mean, look at her! She is beautiful, educated, posied, soft spoken, full of sophistication, has a good looking husband...she has everthing they will never have. Even through all this, she STILL has it together.

She did make a statement that I totally disagree with. Before I get bashed, please know I am a Tonya's supporter 100%. She said "As a teacher and educator 8 and 11 yr olds do not understand consequence." I believe 8 and ESPECIALLY 11 yr olds DO understand consequence. My daughter is 11, she knows if her chores are not done, there will be a consequence. Even at 8, children have rules to follow and know if they break the rules more than likely they are in trouble. Maybe she was meaning they did not understand what the consequence of this trial meant to Tonya. That may be true, because children sometimes have a hard time grasping the word "forever." And that's what she faced in prision. However, the reason I think she meant that statement in general, and not just about this trial is because she used the words teacher and educator in the beginning, as if she had learned this through observing children.

Maybe it's an opinion thing, maybe it's how children are raised, who knows. I still think she did an incredible job and I am very proud of her~

William L. Anderson said...

I understand your point, but we are speaking of the difference between what we might call local consequences and consequences involving larger issues.

For example, my kids know that if they don't clean their rooms, they cannot watch a movie or go somewhere they might want to go. However, they are not at the point where they realize that they could make a statement that would put someone away for life, and they really don't know what that means.

One of the ways that "forensic" investigators would manipulate young children would be to tell them that if they "disclosed" what the interviewers wanted to hear, then they AND THEIR PARENTS could go home. A young child CAN understand the need to go home with Mommy and Daddy, so they would "disclose," the parents would be arrested, and all of a sudden the child is a virtual orphan.

So, I think that Tonya was describing the larger issues of accountability, rather than just the short-term consequences.

Anonymous said...

I think a better term may be "ramification" of their words or actions - instead of consequences

JD said...

I thought that the Wilson girl was not ready for 1st grade, not kindergarten.

Anonymous said...

Another Great Job Mr, Anderson. You are Right about Joal & Rhona Brad Wade's Ex, They told lie's to get what they wanted. But we Know in the end the TRUTH will come out. She is going to have you Live with this, what she has done to her children is unbelievable. She did not care that The boys were Messing with her son. She was sitting in the same room when Stacey Long was interviewing him.
All she cared about was getting Brad. and her baby was being molested. He said the Boy's were playing with his willie and butt. she cared more about a 15yr.old that could not even tell what happen to him. It started out verbal and when they got to Dade it went to touching and even Rhona Seeing something. She went to Their
Paster and he ask Rhona had she ever seen anything out of Brad And she told him she had not..
But like I said she is going to pay for these lie's. Vengeance is mine sayeth the LORD... I will repay.

Anonymous said...

Lie's and more lie's, one thing you have got to remember what you say when you lie. But when you tell the truth it is alway's the same..

Mary Jane said...

"As a teacher and educator 8 and 11 yr olds do not understand consequence."

When Tonya was making the above statement in The View this morning, the first thing that came to my mind was children who cheat during the tests or copy poems out of books and submit as their own work. These children (or sometimes even college students) don't realize the following when committing such acts:

1. A teacher can see what each student is doing in the classroom so clearly that even a furtive glance of a student into another's exam is SO obvious. Place a cheat sheet anywhere hidden from the view of the teacher. The teacher will still catch you cheat because s/he can see your eyes going back and forth from an unnatural direction to your exam.

2. An English teacher can tell if the work submitted by you was not written by you. A piano teacher can tell if the recorded performance was not your own. An art teacher can tell if someone else painted or drew your project.

3. The consequences of getting caught cheating or committing an academic dishonesty are huge embarrassment, loss of trust, feeling of guilt, and a lot more. If other kids come to know about it, the offender even suffers from taunting.

My point is that, as a teacher myself, I know the children who commit such offense have no idea that they'll lose more than they gain by cheating. If the offense is just looking into someone else's exam, or having an older sibling make your project, then you will learn a lesson and move on with your life. You will talk about it later laughing. But, I know of a then 5th grader who submitted a poem he copied out of a book to a large competition and won. After the winner was nationally announced, the sponsor realized what this boy had done and rightly stripped him of the prize. He is an adult now but even today he lives with humiliation, guilt, and remorse.

So, as Dr. Anderson also pointed out, whether a child knows the consequences of something the s/he does depends on what kind of act is involved.

Lame said...

Dr. Anderson, you did a great job with today's article. However, there is one motive for Jowl Henke that you may have forgotten. He also owed Ms Craft thousands, in the $10,000 range, in unpaid child support. She previously had said that she didn't care about the money, because she just wanted to have the children. However, he knew that under the law, if she ever changed her mind, which she had every right in the world to do, if he didn't cough up that money right away, he'd be going to jail for a very long time.

So, when he first brought the accusations against Ms Craft forward, if he didn't do it because he wanted to not have to pay that money, he certainly later had that as a motive, because if he could get her convicted of a sex crime and put away for life, not only would he get the children, that debt to her would disappear.

He violated the law and the custody agreement in so many ways that he should not only lose custody and never be allowed visitation, he should be in jail RIGHT NOW. Just like the CAC/Greenhouse, and members of the prosecution, Joal Henke stood to benefit monetarily should Tonya Craft be convicted. His motivation was worse than any other player, because it was a mixture of revenge and greed.

Anonymous said...

So Sandra Lamb's primary motivation here was that Tonya had admonished her daughter? That's it?

Anonymous said...

Nah the money is not a motivation. He still owes back child support, if he in fact owed in the first place, that must still be paid. I think all the characters in this fiasco convinced themselves that the charges must be true. Quite similar to the Salem witch hunts.

kbp said...

Anon 2:22:
"So Sandra Lamb's primary motivation here was that Tonya had admonished her daughter? That's it?"

I'd say that and she's a bitch.

Bitch enough to block a "black bastard" from leaving and then slap him, all for delivering papers.

Makes you wonder if Echols volunteered to serve papers to Saundra for the lawsuit?

As for any back child support Joal may have owed, it could have been credited against any he in turn would be owed in temporary custody, if he was provided such.

KC Sprayberry said...

Anon 2:22. From what I understand in the very early posts or perhaps from the T4T website, Tonya wasn't happy about SL's daughter missing so much school as an excused absence to make not one but two movies. After seeing Ms. Lamb's performance with Eric Echols, having a mere teacher (getting into SL's mindset here) voice an objection to her darling acting in movies that will further her career and make her millions in later years is completely wrong and that woman must be taught a lesson. This sounds almost too simplistic for the accusations that came out but if you think like SL (yuck, must clean my brain later), you will come up with the way she reacted to anyone ever objecting to anything her little darling said or did. Then again, I can't help but believe accuser 1 knew something of the lies, either from overhearing conversations or mommy prep, because she, according to news reports, spoke in a matter-of-fact matter in the interviews and while giving testimony. Another reason to believe the child was acting out a part was the whole 'evil one' naming and using/wearing the color yellow when she testified it terrified her because that was TC's favorite color. To understand children of that age, some of the things said and done were far beyond her linguistic abilities or mental grasp. Coaching was evident with this child from the beginning. Unfortunately, I'm relying on third hand information here and may be wrong, but the sense I got from that one video tape performance SL put on, I don't think I'm far off the mark.
Bill, great article. You really laid it out correctly. JH did stand to have his child support debt wiped out (experience speaking here) if he managed to have TC jailed for the rest of her life. The last charge, the one that alleged abuse from DOB on accuser 3, would have given him everything he needed to prevent TC from financial gain from her actions. Sounds nuts but a good (or ratty) attorney could have gotten it through in the area we're talking about. I can't wait to see the rest of this information. A very clear picture of the main instigators is revealing itself rather well. Put a bunch of greedy prosecutors into the mix and a corrupt judge and you have instant conviction - until they got a jury who took truth over lies.

Lame said...

Anon 3:20,

The money is more than likely a motivation for Henke, because, yes, he still owes it, but if he got her convicted, there's no way he would ever have to pay it. That's the motivation. It wasn't that he'd receive money, like LMJC and CAC. It was that he wouldn't have to pay it. His motivation was the same as that of David in having Uriah the Hittite murdered, to cover up/blot out his own crime.

JD said...

I believe Henke got into this for the reasons given and was convinced by Lamb or Wilson that Tonya would be convicted and therefore he would not have to deal with any custodial issues. Why else would he take his daughter to a counselor that the judge in the custodial case prohibited her from seeing, talk on the phone with people he said on the stand that he didn't run around with and had a divorce decree that said he was prohibited from causing parental alienation. He would only do that if he believed he didn't have to worry about a custody battle.

volfan69 said...

All of this makes me so sad. Have these people lost their soul? I would not want to have to answer to GOD for this. What have they done to those children? How do these people justify this in their mind? I just can't think straight right now. I'll be back later. Thanks to all, Bobb.

Victoria said...

I think its easy to imagine how Lamb's annoyance at Tonya for chastising her daughter would snowball into much bigger circumstances. Think about high school cliques and how after one of the girls has a falling out with the rest of the clique how vicious the gossip and bullying can escalate. I think that is exactly what happened here. In this situation we have an articulate, gainfully employed woman who falls out with these women who never progressed from high school drama queens and may also have too much time on their hands to scheme up their vendettas. A lot of gossip and scheming later and Tonya is arrested.

Also, I too thought Tonya's assertion on the view about children and consequences was poorly worded. I agree that "ramifications" would have been a better choice of words. She ought to have only mentioned 8 and not 11 because that seems extremely out of bounds on the cogent scale. However, I do understand and agree with Tonya's intention.

As for Joal, I am surprised he hasn't been dealt some consequences already from the family court. Its really shocking. I do believe that he will lose complete custody and may even lose any visitation with the children, or only supervised visitation, but I am surprised it hasn't come more swiftly. I suppose the judge is proceeding very cautiously because of the profile of this case. It was nice to learn a tad about Tonya's visitation with her kids.

Anonymous said...

This is why everyone in Chickamauga is so sick of the Lambs & Wilsons.If they would do that to their own children,then what would they be willing to do to other children.These people are so evil & cruel.

Lame said...

Victoria has a point with Sandra Lamb. There is a case here in Salt Lake City that just broke, which is now hitting national news, where a 30-something year old mother photoshopped a middle school girl's face onto a pornographic picture that involved beastiality, made 30 copies of it, and then placed those pictures all over the girl's school. The exact motivation for this has not yet been disclosed, but the press has thus-far said it involved a "perceived slight" that the girl did the the woman. Two theories have been put forth on local news commentary forums: 1) the woman's daughter, who is the same age and attends the same school as the victim, used to be friends and had a falling-out, and 2) that the woman wanted to be "special friends" with the girl, and the girl's mother wouldn't allow this. So, yeah, unstable women can do wildly outrageous things as acts of revenge over the simplest of things. How about the four women who recently went to jail for assaulting a man and super-glueing his penis to his abdomin after he broke up with one of them? How about the woman whose daughter got into a fight with another girl who posted a fake craigslist add saying she wanted to have sex with annonymous partners and used the other girl's phone number. Or, how about the woman in Arkansas who created a fake myspace account and caused the girl her daughter didn't like to commit suicide? All due respect to sane women, but part of the reason I'm still single is because it's hard to tell if a woman's nuts until after marriage; they have an uncanny ability to pass themselves off as being sane until "I do," and then they pull off that mask and say, "Hahahaha! I'm really a crazy b--ch!"

Anonymous said...

Why should anyone bring false charges?

That may have been my question 40 years ago but I have looked evil in the face and it ain't pretty.

Intelligent, caring people need to wake up to realize that intelligent, caring people are a minority.

Malicious prosecution occurs all of the time. Couple that with a corrupt court and the defendant is toast.

Kudis again to Prof Anderson and Tonya and her defense team.

Godspeed to you all.

Reader from NYC

Anonymous said...

Correction little (bad) actress was in "one missed call" just so we all know what movie to avoid hate for it to get any royalties because curious people want to see what bad acting looks like!!

justiceseeker51 said...

Bill,
What will we do without you?

eagle1 said...

Concerning the point about the kids understanding the consequences of their testimony...
During the trial, I remember the Dr from Vanderbuilt noting that in one of the interviews, a child was told something to the effect that "You can tell me anything, and No one will get in trouble"... which, he noted "was a lie".
So I don't think the kids understood at all what was happening to them.
These were 5 or 6 year old children, being manipulated thru confusion and anger.

Stacy said...

I may be confused. When you said, "Lamb's parents are both dishonest and vindictive, so she has had a "role model" that tells her that she can lie and get away with it. People who do not pay consequences for bad actions, and who already are prone to bad behavior, continue to push the envelope, and that is what Lamb did." Are you talking about Sandra or the daughter? I haven't heard anything about Sandra's parents, so maybe I am just misreading this?

Anonymous said...

Ramifications would have been a bettr word choice. Young children are capable of understanding the short term consequences of their actions but not the long tem ramifications - that comes with age and experience (I teach high school studnets and a number of them are not mature enough at this point to understand the difference).
And yes, parents can be vinditive over the smallest things. I once, many years ago, had a student who I admonished (he was an eighth grader) because he decided one day to crawl around on the floor and act like a two year old. I told him to get in his seat and stay put - that if he wanted to crawl around he could do it on his own time and in his own home. He got into his seat, class went on. Three weeks later I was called into the principal's office - the parents of the floor crawler demanded that I take voice lessons as the timbre of my voice was disturbing to all the students (I guess tht they had conducted an independent poll? - was my first comment and my second was that I did not think that this complaint even merited my being summoned to the office). The principal, who was one of these sorts who wanted to be everybody's friend and who was not above being influenced by parents gifts, reported back tot eh parents that I was "intransigent". The parents then went to the school board (it was a private school) demanding that I be fired as I was "insubordinate". That got nowhere - I had taught at the school for a number of years and had a very good reputation among both students and parents for being an academically demanding but extremely fair teacher. Parents of the crawler withdrew their child from school in a huff and bad-mouthed me for some time in the community. How different the outcome could have been if I had been a new teacher. So yes, when it comes to parents who view their darling as the be all and end all and who can do no worng (does such a person, let alone a child even exist?), any perceived slight cannot go unpunished. I could write a book about the things that parents say and do to good teachers because they (the teachers) do not worship at the altar of their perfect child.
cks

Cinderellla said...

June 30, Lame's last sentance -Just like the CAC/Greenhouse, and members of the prosecution, Joal Henke stood to benefit monetarily should Tonya Craft be convicted. His motivation was worse than any other player, because it was a mixture of revenge and greed.
I would like to add that on top of the motivation was something much worse- he was willing to do all of this using his own flesh and blood with no regard for their emtional well-being. No who needs to have full custody and who needs supervised visits?

Anonymous said...

I have been following your posts and must compliment you on your well reasoned and well written posts (I am a former English teacher!). And as a former teacher, (it's been 13 years since I taught)I have to say---it floors me when people claim that they don't understand why people would lie and make horrible accusations against an innocent person---I was a young single (not ugly)young woman teaching junior high and high school English in a small Southern town---and I was accused weekly by the rumour mill of everything under the sun. The people making the accusations were often openly committing adultery and much else. I had one father (married) make a pass at me in front of another teacher. When I did not respond, he spread vicious rumours about me. All I was doing was trying to make a living and pay off my student loans. It was sheer hell--at one point, I had to involve the school board and the teacher's association. If my now husband had not rescued me, I honestly don't know what I would have done.

William L. Anderson said...

Stacy,

I was writing about Sandra's parents. They are known to be quite petty and vindictive, and Sandra's mother told her own church that Tonya was a "whore" and a "lesbian."

Now, neither was true, but this is a woman who holds herself out to be a Great Christian, so you can see that the label "Christian" does not mean much in some churches.

If I said the girl was not ready for K-garten, I meant first grade. Gotta change that.

Hope all of you are having a great week. Thanks for your comments and kind words about the blog!

BTW, I am at my oldest daughter's lake house at Hiwassee Lake, and I found out there is wireless at the clubhouse! Just in time for my students to be turning in their papers, and other things. I met a woman from Michigan and another from Florida, and both were very, very familiar with Tonya's case and were supportive of her.

Tonya has made friends all over the country; Arnt, Gregor, and "judge" Outhouse have made enemies and are a laughing stock around the country. Congratulations guys, for showing yourselves to be the dishonest jerks you are. And Tonya will continue to grow in stature, and you cretins will continually shrink.

Lame said...

Like I said, there are other people here in Utah who know about this case, even a couple who have brought it up without me even mentioning it while discussing topics such as injustice or prosecutorial misconduct.

I have heard the item about someone accusing Ms Craft of being a closeted lesbian in front of a church, but didn't realize it was Sandra Lamb's mother. I thought it was someone else. Can anyone 100% confirm that she said that? If so, I'd add her little (or big--haven't seen, so don't know) butt to that $25 million lawsuit, and if it is true that she said that, I'd also sue that church's pastor for not having the mother publicly apologize to the church. Remember, there was a case a few years ago where two women successfully sued, in federal court, a minister who accused them of being in a lesbian relationship in front of their church.

Abraham said...

This concept is about sick to me.
I have seen "so called" Christians get up in church and request prayer for some person and openly refer to them as a whore, drug addict, whatever.
I heard one say his brother had a live-in concubine.
On some of these occasions, it is only that person's uneducated opinion, and not factual at all. Yet the person says this openly in church to unfairly spread false rumors; almost as effective as a phone chain gossip group.
If Sandra Lamb's mother requested prayer for Tonya calling her a Lesbian... wow.
This is the sort of thing that makes decent folks stay away from church.
Maybe stupidity really has no limit.

Anonymous said...

Yes Lame, Sandra's mother said that. Also, Tonya didn't ask for child support during their divorce. The judge ordered it. I have many friends who have had the same thing happen. Ultimately, the judge can order the maximum & can sign the divorce if one of the spouses continues to contest. The money was an issue to Joal even though Tonya was not pursuing it. He was in arrears over $10k, but he was the one afraid of being in trouble for not paying (he wasn't being threatened or anything). Tonya & David could have cared less about the actual "support" money. Joal has chosen a career to where he couldn't be garnished. What he had to fear was being ordered back to court & to make payment arrangements. Then if he didn't keep up, then he would face jail time. He is one of the most vile people I have ever encountered. To make it worse, he has this very naive wife who not only shaved her area in the shower with her step-daughter, but actually allowed her to help. Now here she sits pregnant with another Henke spawn. This one will be the rough one. A & K have a chance because of their mother, grandparents & wonderful support group. The new kid doesn't have a chance.

My prayer remains that at this next hearing, Tonya gets her kids back. I pray that if the judge doesn't automatically give her custody, that the kids are at least removed from Joal & Sarah. Once they are removed from them, I guarantee that they will slip away from A & K. Right now, they are fighting for the wrong reasons. After the kids are back with Tonya, and Joal & Sarah have their own child, they will care less about the older two. It's never been about their love for the kids & that is sad & disgusting.

All of these players on the prosecution side are absolutely disgusting. They are actually the laughing stock around the world, not just the U.S. I turned several friends onto Bill's blog from the start. India, Australia, England....they've all been watching & reading.

Keep it coming Bill. Once everything is out, people should be able to understand it better. Of course, I don't see how people can't see it now, but there are still some who "don't see it". Keep opening eyes!

Lame said...

I almost wish someone had recorded Sandra Lamb's mother saying that so that it could be entered as direct evidence and not hearsay. What an absolutely horrible thing to do. When I lived in Apopka, Florida, we had a member whose husband left and was shacking up with another woman. We prayed and prayed that he'd come back. We didn't call either of them names, well, the woman did say something to the effect that it was "almost like this woman put a demonic spell over him," but it wasn't anything as horrible as like saying that he was keeping a concubine. Besides, we were praying for him to come to his senses and return. Guess what! He did come to his senses, he returned, and before the whole church asked forgiveness, and you know what, he ended up becoming one of the most dedicated and faithful members of that church, and was a better husband to his wife than he ever was before. I don't say that because he was such a great person, I say that because the earnest prayers of many people entreating the Lord to send his Spirit to speak to the conscience of that man is what brought him back.

As for the issue of the child support Henke still owes, here's what I believe--I maybe didn't state this clearly enough in previous posts:
Henke was contacted by Sandra Lamb about the conspiracy against Tonya Craft and he joined in because that way he could get custody, and because he knew that if they could convict her of molesting the kids pretty much all the parents involved would be getting a settlement from either the state or from the school district--happens all the time, kid gets molested by teacher, parents sue, don't believe me, just google Allison Hargrave (they haven't even tried the lady yet, and the girl's parents are sueing). You can tell from the first interview of Ms Craft's daughter, that the girl wasn't thoroughly coached, just generically lied to by Henke. He figured he didn't have to do much to get something out of this. Then, the deeper he got into this sordid affair, at some point he came to the realization that if Ms Craft was found not guilty there would be serious recriminations; and especially after she lost her house, he realized that with her being so far in debt, should she walk, she'd call in that $7,000 he owed her. That's when he threw in the kitchen sink with blatant lies such as her watching lesbian porn and sleeping with another woman.

So, while money was all along something he wanted, the child support he owed wasn't an initial concern, but it became one after Ms Craft herself went into debt. He caused her to go into debt, and he knew the only way to keep her from calling in that money he owed her was to put her away, that was when it became all or nothing for him. It's kinda like telling a mobster that you've got good inside information that Mario Andretti is going to lose the race because his tires are worn, then finding out the night before the race that he got new tires put on the car. The only way to save your skin now is to sneak into Andretti's garage and slash his tires. Too bad they're run-flat tires, and he still won the race. Now you've broken the law and some big fellas are coming after your skin.

Anonymous said...

I don't believe Joel's reasoning had much to have to do with money, a side issue. I have known people who were so angry about a divorce that they would say or do most anything to get back at their former spouse. It's about revenge.

Anonymous said...

In many ways Tonya Craft was fortunate.

Valerie Carlton 28 felony counts including reckless endangerment for accidentally leaving breast milk out of the refrigerator.

Net result. Beat up in jail. All charges drop before trial. Her infant died 2 months into foster care.

Alinusara10

Lame said...

I know money wasn't the only issue. I'm saying that it is an issue, none-the-less. I think that all of them had revenge as a primary motivation, but getting a bunch of (or in Henke's case, not having to pay a bunch) of money was also a major part of it. I think Sandra Lamb was especially pleased with the notion that if Ms Craft were found guilty, she could make the talk show circuit, shed some faux tears, and get a bunch of munchausenesque sympathy, just like what happened in the case of the mother whose daughter posed for some non-nude modeling photo shoots who partnered with the feds to take down a modeling service and website by claiming the girl was coerced--yeah, coerced to pose completely clothed while in public, in front of her mom, yeah if you believe that, I've got a bridge in New York I can sell you.

Anonymous said...

Nah Lame 10k is chump change. In fact revenge wasn't really an issue. The issue is it's easier to believe lies about someone you are mad at then someone you actually like. It's human nature.

Alinusara10

Lame said...

Alinusara10,

Where did you get that info on Valerie Carlton? I saw the articles about the allegations, and there are blog entries all over the net about her pertaining to the indictment and remanding of her, but nothing at all about what happened to the case. This so often happens, the media finds out about a story from the police and make the person out to be a huge monster (sound familiar, Channel Slime?) and then they just completely drop the ball and never say what happened, whether she was found guilty, innocent, sent to jail, what. There's a case here, literally down the street from me, where a 37 year old woman was caught IN THE ACT by a policeman having oral sex with a 15 year old girl who was her daughter's best friend, and it was a huge media firestorm for a few weeks, then nothing, nada, zip. When the prosecutor choked and gave her a plea deal, no media reporting. When the judge sent her to jail for 3 months and didn't require her to register as a sex offender, zero media attention. The only reason I know what happened to her is because I'm friends with one of her family members. And, yet, a guy I know who was set up by a former friend/framed for having child porn on his computer, he was slandered up-down-and-all-around in the media from the moment he was arrested until the judge threw the book at him. Yeah, that's another reason I believe pornography laws need to be fixed, my friend who was sentenced for having only five images an a 30 second video got 15 moonths in jail and had to register for life as a sex offender when someone else I know who was caught in the act actually having sex with an under-aged girl who she preyed upon by hooking up with her daughter's best friend got 90 days and doesn't have to register for anything.

Victoria said...

I happen to know someone eerily similar to Henke, even in looks, background, womanizing, and reported temperament. Judging by this person, I would say Henke would be motivated by the child support in part. This male personality type not only does not want to concede anything to the ex but they also tend to look for romantic relationships that are financially advantageous, i.e.- women who will support them and create stability because they have unreliable prospects on their own. Guys like this would rather not work if they believe the fruits of their labor will go to the woman. They consider anything they do for their own children as a favor to the mother - childcare, financial support, and whatever else. If Henke owed back child support and was facing court ordered payments or garnishment, you can bet this factored in with this type of guy. Additionally, this type of man will still consider his ex sort of an extension of his property and seek to continue the retaliation even after starting a new relationship.

Also, I do think I remember reading somewhere along the line, and I'm not sure if this is fact or was gossip, that Henke was bailed out on several occasions by Tonya's parents and owed them money. I cannot remember exactly what the money was for...if it was for legal trouble, business debt, or other. Perhaps someone who has intimate knowledge can confirm, but if true it only further support to Henke's financial motivation as well as showing his irresponsibility and his knack for sponging.

I must wholeheartedly agree with the commenter who said that Henke and Sarah won't be interested in the Craft kids once the new baby is born. I have been thinking that same thing about the Henks as I have seen that attitude among some other remarried men once new children arrive. For the step mother, its a story as old as fairy tales- the mother does not want affection for the older ones to jeopardize her natural child's standing and wants her offspring in first position for any benefits. So I doubt Sarah will be too disappointed and probably relieved. It won't be long though before Sarah starts regretting this marriage to Henke though. I think she is a nurse and I suspect she is the one bringing home the paycheck...what happens when she wants to take maternity leave and stay at home with her baby. Oops! She won't be so useful to Henke anymore, and he won't seem so appealing to her anymore.Also, its hard to believe that Henke would stop his extra-marital affairs and at some point Sarah is bound to find out something negative. I guess the reality of what she married is soon to set in.

Anonymous said...

If Joal was really saying things to Tonya like.."Take a look at your children. This is the last time you will see them", when he would pick them up for visitation, then he is capable of the type of vengence we witnessed in the trial.

I think Sandra was just trying to divert the negative attention from the child play. She didn't want her movie star branded as dirty minded. She HAD to come up with an explanation!

Lame said...

Anon 9:05, I have to disagree with the idea that Sandra was motivated to do this, in any way, to protect her child's reputation, keep her from being labled "dirty minded." Ever heard of Lady Gaga? Teenage bisexual super-famous entertainer. How about Ruby Rose, super famous and successful model, came out as lesbian at age 12. Maybe you've heard of Kim Petras, 16 year old German singer/celebrity who used to be a boy, and is the youngest person to have had a sex change operation? How about Greta Garbo, not in the closet, not out of the closet actress who dated more women than most of use men have; her first relationship was with another girl at her all-girls boarding school. Being "dirty-minded" has never been much of a hinderance to one's career in hollywood, and these days, there are more 'dirties' than 'cleans' there. Hell, the guy who played Willaby in the original Disney movie The Shaggy Dog was gay, and was caught having sex with a 12 year old boy, but he continued acting. And, if you really wanna know about how lesbians get ahead in the movie industry, look up "sewing circles" on wikipedia. It'll blow your mind how many teenage girls were involved in what can only be described as a "sex for parts" trade with older lesbian women.

Anonymous said...

When Joel moves on to yet another woman, I just wonder if his new wife will put Sarah's child in the bathtub and have the child help her shave private areas??? Wonder if it will be sexual abuse then?

Lame said...

No, his next wife won't have the child shave her private areas, because Sarah will accuse him of molesting their child and move in with Laurie Evans.

Anonymous said...

This has all been so complicated. It makes Peyton Place look simple. On one site, a contributor stated that Tonya Craft was Sarah Henke's Sunday School teacher when Sarah was around 12. Is this true? All of these relationships and interrelationships are just mind boggling.

Anonymous said...

Yes Lame, but Lady Gaga wouldn't make it on the streets of Ringgold if she wasn't "famous". She would be considered a freak. These parents were upset, remember. They were trying to get to the bottom of why "sex" was written on the concrete with sidewalk chaulk. If they were all "free minded" they wouldn't have cared, and one child wouldn't have been beaten with a belt for touching another. Whoever the child was who was the main instigator of these games was a potential embarrassment to her parents, unless they could cast blame. Just like a child failing kindergarten was an embarrassment. Issues like this are inflated in a small southern towns. Especially among the pretencious crowd....haha.... I have NO idea if I am spellin some of these words right....But then again, I'm not "pretencious".

Ooltewah mom

tplas said...

Lame:

I know most of us regulars love your comments and usually agree with your posts, however am I the only one that caught this in your 8:34 comment? "having only five images" Hey, that is NOT ok. "Only" five?? I know it was a comparision, but terrible wording. Your friend got EXACTLY what he deserved. It's the 37 yr old lady that didn't. You did state he was set up. If he was set up by someone else putting pics on his computer, then I apologize. If he was set up because someone told on him...then my orginal statement stands. One of those "only 5" could have been someone you knew!

William L. Anderson said...

I think the people making comments understand Joal Henke pretty well. He is extremely vindictive and also manipulative. The people at Eastwood Church really think he is a great guy and only has the best interests of his children at heart.

This guy is not to be trusted at any time, and I mean that. Not surprisingly, he has an attorney who tends to reflect the character of his client.

Anonymous said...

tplas, I totally agree. I was shocked when I read "only 5" too. Seriously child porn is child porn whether it's 1 picture/video or 1000. Now, I have read stories where child porn hackers hide their porn on others computers so that it cannot be traced to them. If that's the case I would have expected there would be more than 5 and his time would have been longer. If he is innocent it's ashame no it's a tragedy. Not everyone has the knowledge and resources of Tonya Craft. I have the utmost respect for her and how SHE went about proving her innocence, as DLO stated putting together her own defense team.

CA

Anonymous said...

Here is a yet another victim of a witch hunt, her name is Valerie Carlton. Like Tonya, she managed to beat the charges, unfortunately for for her, her infant child died in foster care several months after she was jailed. It also seems that she was assaulted and placed under increasing levels of solitary confinement during her incarceration...in an effort to force her to "confess". She has filed a lawsuit.

I thought this stuff only happened in countries ruled by a dictatorship like Syria, N. Korea, Cuba, Sudan, Iran....

http://www.thehostagechild.com/



duane

KDaw said...

I, too, have entertained the thought that Sandra L. has Munchhausen by proxy. In her interview it was poor pitiful me, my child was molested look at me. And her anger at Mr. Echols was so believable, how dare you when my child was molested. It was as if this woman truly believed it at this point.
In reports I've heard, she also seemed to live vicariously through her child's acting. With Munchhausen, one would feed off of positive attention too. They don't always poison their children to get attention from hospitals. It's just about getting that attention and praise positive or negative. That is what drives people of this mindset.
Now, I'm not a DR. I just play one in my fantasies. But psychology, and metal disorders have always facinated me and I do consider myself to be well read.
I have seen both of my brother's become victims of parental alienation. One went as far as to have my nephew adopted by her new husband and change the child's first and last names at age 4.All against my brother's wishes. Now, at 6 he is described as an "emotional child". NO SHIT?!! While she is proud of the fact that she "won". The damage to my nephew is great. And my brother has suffered with depression. He has mourned his child as if he died. It is a subject very dear to my heart.
My Aunt, on the other hand raised two children alone and no matter how angry she was, she never once spoke ill of the kids father in front of them. This was 20 years ago. We actually had the common sense to know that kind of behavior was harmful to the children. About 75% of people possesses NO common sense anymore.

I miss that! :-{

Anonymous said...

Just an update. The judge denied Evans' motion to dismiss. Evans argued that Georgia requires and affidavit. The judge, who did not wait on Tonya's lawyers to respond, denied Evans' motion to dismiss. Basically, Judge Murphy ruled that Georgia procedure does not apply in federal court. I guess Laurie is officially invited to the dance!

Anonymous said...

12:17 what was Evans trying to have dismissed?

JD said...

Evans was trying to get herself dismissed from Tonya's lawsuit.

Anonymous said...

The lawsuit against her. Thanks Duane you put up the link for Valerie Carlton before I can get to it. You wouldn't think in the U.S that a mother would go to jail for 13 months over the coerced accusations of a 6 year old child.

Q.A. said...

William L. Anderson said on July 1, 2010 1:53 PM:

"...Sandra's mother told her own church that Tonya was a "whore" and a "lesbian."...."


Lame said on July 1, 2010 6:45 PM:
“I almost wish someone had recorded Sandra Lamb's mother saying that so that it could be entered as direct evidence and not hearsay. .....”


Lame, such a recording , if admissible, would indeed be very convincing evidence, and I would prefer that there was such a recording.

I agree that in every-day parlance the mother was asserting a spiteful, false, opinion, for which I believe she should be held accountable, but would it be Hearsay-as-defined-at-law?

I do believe that what Sandra's mother allegedly said about Tonya, in the mother's own church, is not Hearsay, as defined at law.

For the purpose of entering an alleged statement as evidence in trial proceedings:

“Hearsay” is a statement made out-of-this-court, submitted to this court for the purpose of proving the matter asserted in the statement.

To decide whether it is Hearsay, as defined at law, we, and the court, need to know if what Sandra's mother allegedly said was being submitted to prove what the mother asserted.

i.e.that the mother's alleged statement was submitted to prove that Tonya actually was a "whore" and a "lesbian." If so,that would be Hearsay.

I do not believe that even these defendant’s would try to pull that one.

On the other hand, if the mother's alleged statement was submitted to prove only that the mother had alleged in church that Tonya was a "whore" and a "lesbian." that would not be Hearsay and could be entered as “direct “ evidence.

Roll-on the days-of-reckoning for these grossly-malicious ones, now deserving-Defendants themselves!

Lame said...

Thanks guys, I did word that part rather poorly. However, when I said "only 5 images" I meant that in comparrison to what the other person had done: Only 5 images as opposed to actually raping a girl; as it would be said, only slapping someone in the face as opposed to a dagger up the strap. Also, what is defined as child pornography these days is very broad. You can take a picture of your child innocently jumping and playing on the bed and be charged with producing child pornography (look up the film Snap Decision--based on true story). You can photograph a teen in a bikini in a professional model shoot and be charged with child pornography (look up Webe Web models in wikipedia). I did not see any of the pictures my friend was alleged to have downloaded, but trust me, you don't have to have a picture of a child being violated in any way in order to go to jail for having child pornography. Yes, oh, believe me, yes, there are people out there producing real, horrific child pornography. I am all for those people being jailed. But, in my friend's case, no I don't believe he got what he deserved, because, as I previously stated, he didn't actually download the pictures. It was someone he had housesitting for him who did it, but he couldn't prove that he wasn't the one who actually downloaded the pictures--one reason I suggest all of you password protect your computer to keep people from doing things on it when you're AFK.

So, please, don't think that I was trying to deminish the plight of real world people suffering because of those who take advantage of children. What I am arguing for is sensiblness in criminal justice. Statutory law tends to have these kinds of problems, because when they make them legislators very, very rarely take into account "circumstances" of individual cases--like the kid who got sent to jail for 10 years because he had oral sex with a girl, but had he had full-on intercourse it wouldn't have put him in jail for more than a few months. It's sensnsibleness, not licentiousness, that I'm advocating here.

Anonymous said...

I am truly amazed that all of the churchs are standing by these people.Yes church is a safe place & a church family environment,but can they not read or understand what is on tv?It shocks me that so many educated people are so blind.

Lame said...

When the church that Marsha Mote's husband pastored stood by her after she admitted to having sex with a 14 year old girl she taught, who was also a member of the church congregation, a lot of people made comments like, "she has repented" and "the church needs to support her." Then, a truly wise individual came along and posted that the church needs to show compassion and forgiveness, but it shouldn't be stupid. That person said, and I agree, that even if she truly was sorry and repentant, that doesn't mean anyone should let her be around their children again, because it would serve to be a temptation to her.

In the case of Sandra Lamb and her family, if she is truly repentant for what she did, then we should show her Christian kindness. But, whether or not she's forgiven, the church needs to receive an apology from her, and she should not be allowed to hold any leadership position until she really earns back trust. I doubt, however, that she's the least bit sorry for what she did. I hope she is, and I hope she changes, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Anonymous said...

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/stepmonster/201005/stepfamily-drama-and-the-prosecution-tonya-craft

Anonymous said...

Lame the sad thing is that I don't think Sandra or the Wilsons will ever feel sorry.I like everyone else have done things that I regreat,but for the life of me I cannot understand never feeling guilty or sorry.

Anonymous said...

Way off topic but anyone who likes Nascar,Dale Jr. is driving the # 3 tonight.Sorry for getting off the issue,but this is history.

Anonymous said...

I would venture to say that Evans was seeking to have the DA's charges dismissed.

REader from NYC

Anonymous said...

You all, you are attributing the virtues you hold as good people against those people who are not as good.

Evil in this world does not have to be as drastic as many think it would be.

Evil can come about in small measure.

I agree with Prof Anderson that this was a malicious prosecution.

These players used the law and hysteria to put forth their evil.

Pure and simple. Not everyone is good and evil is a simple game to play.

Reader from NYC

Lame said...

I belive it was Edmund Burke who wrote that all evil needs to succeed is for good men to do nothing. I would add to that, all that evil needs to thrive is for good men to not care. And again add, all that evil needs to triumph is for good men to know nothing.

Take a look at how trivial our lives have become over the past 100 years. We no-longer have to worry about starving to death. We no-longer have to worry about hardly anything. Our main concerns these days involve the cult of celebrity, what so-and-so is wearing, and who so-and-so is dating. And, this is not just by coincidence. Very powerful entities within our society and government have been deliberately dumbing down and desensitizing America to wanting to be informed about the world around us. Open yahoo, and see what their lead news stories are. There are people in the Gulf of Mexico region whose entire livlihood has been destroyed by this oil spill. But, still the majority of the coverage of the spill relates to who's to blame rather than fixing it. Tens of thousands of civilians in one of our ALLY countries, Uzbekistan, have been displaced, many killed or raped, in ethnic violence, but BBC is the only news source I've heard anything about it from. Fox, MSNBC and CNN are too busy talking about whether or not Obama's nomination to the Supreme Court is a lesbian or not (I personally think she looks like stand-up comedian Patton Oswalt wearing a dress), and giving gushing and glowing memorials to a senator who just passed away who used to be a member of the ku klux klan.

Our friendly reader from NYC no-doubt has heard about the two NYC teachers caught having lesbian sex in an empty classroom, but how much have you seen reported on how every state has slashed their education budgests so much that literally tens of thousands of teachers will be out of a job this year? Seriously, there are people who want this country to fail. I have so much faith in this country and in our Constitution, but I am seriously concerned that ther ARE people in the highest levels of our government who seek to render our Constitution void.

justiceseeker51 said...

Happy 4th of July America!

Thought some might like this. A friend sent it to me.

http://www.openmyeyeslord.net/UltimateFreedom.htm