Sunday, March 30, 2008

From someone that understands all too well...

I have mentioned that I get amazing emails. They are incredibly touching, encouraging and supportive. And sometimes there are people that you feel God directs right into your path. This person is one of those. This is just a small snippet of one of their emails. I found it very pertinent and asked for permission to share.
"As for support and hope, I'm glad to offer either at any time. When my pastor murdered my friend (although we all just thought she died in a horrible fire), my world was completely shattered. I've never experienced such devastation and it left me with an experience that has truly changed me. The Lord allowed things to get really bad, but then he restored hope and life for me. Rarely a day goes by that I don't remember the effect it had on my life. It's so strange to me to read that there are such similar evils out there (such as what Matt did to Kari), but I've learned that there truly is nothing new under the sun. Matt's not unique at all, just a type, and his type needs to be stopped. Of course the ultimate justice awaits him, and I would never want to be him. The Lord will hold him accountable not only for what he did to Kari and their daughters, but how he used his position of trust to deceive and use people."


tammy said...

It is scary. It is scary all the stories you can find and that you hear about daily in the news of pastors, priests, cops and other people that are in positions of trust and power that have led seemingly normal lives (on the outside) and then you hear about them killing their wife or husband or whole family. We hear about it way too often. Then when people dig into their histories find that they had other sides to them that few knew about. It is very scary how people can hide that from even people very close to them.

psychology grad student said...

What is also frightening is how some refuse to see this in these people, even when it has been exposed. By refusing to see the truth, these friends help the sick/evil person lead this dark life. Often they put themselves in danger with such blind allegiance.

I have seen this in the postings on other sites made by Baker's friends. I am assuming these are friends and not Mr. Baker (I could be wrong). There is almost an out of control and crazed mentality as these people attack individuals instead of the issues related to the case.

Do they not see that as they enable Baker (and others like him), they make him think he is invincible/untouchable. Evil grows.

A. said...

I completely agree Psych Grad Student, about the fact that these friends do a considerable amount of enabling, and actually allow the perpetrator to get worse.
I also think about how much more difficult it is for one to come forward and confess their crimes (repent), when they have so much support in their lies.

A remarkable disservice to both justice, and the kingdom of God.

Christa Brown said...

Well said Psych Grad! Humans have a natural instinct for denial in the face of evil, and it takes courage to try to see past it. Most people refuse to lift that veil of denial because doing so would challenge everything they believe about their world. So they stay in their seemingly-safe bubble. As a result, predators wind up thinking they're untouchable, and their crimes escalate.

Anonymous said...

I totally disagree with the physc grad. Most of the facts that get blogged are from the "baker side" and the lashing out seems to come from the "dulin side", without facts.

Then christa brown says that most people refuse to life that veil of nedial because doing so would challenge something they believe about their world. True words. However i feel they are being said about the dulins. i think they want to stay in their seemingly-safe bubble and hope to remain untouchable.

Shannon said...

I went ahead and posted Anonymous 8:42's comment. But I'm not sure what "facts from the baker side" they are referring to in "Most facts that get blogged are from the baker side." What blog are these facts posted on?

No one really WANTS to believe bad things about their loved ones. But if I were a betting woman, I'd bet Christa wasn't referring to the Dulins.

Janice K said...

to: March 31, 2008 8:42 PM

It seems I have seen postings on this blog where Kari's family has posted their names. Haven't seen this from the Baker clan. If I were a betting woman, I would say MB is posting, or at least his posse is posting. No names posted, however, Who's hiding?

And that comment about the Dulin's hiding in their bubble. What?????
They have exposed themselves to media scrutiny, personal attacks, and more because they believe that justice and truth are worth fighting for.

Janice K

Anonymous said...

I do NOT believe MB has posted anything, anywhere. That would be insane. And why would he need a posse? I do remember the Dulin's were at one time called a posse before they became better known as "Charlie's Angels of Waco".

Yes, they have exposed themselves to media scrutiny, personal attacks, and more because they believe that justice and truth are worth fighting for.

However, I read it as the Baker's have exposed themselves to media scrutiny, personal attacks, and more because they believe that justice and truth are worth fighting for.

Both families believe the same, thus, each individual has to decide which side they believe is the side of truth.

Since I do not think you will really let this be made public, Shannon, I will also say, that I think truth has already spoken, thru the ME report, thru the DA's office, thru other info that is not necessarily public.

Shannon said...

Why would I not let it be made public?

A. said...

I'm not clear how anyone can say that they know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that MB didn't murder his wife?

If the argument is; "I know him, and he couldn't have done such a thing...because if he did, then certainly I would be on to him", then I challenge you to look deep within your self, seek God and really pray about what type of a pride it is to make such assertions about you're ability to know Matt's heart, when the Bible clearly states that we don't even know our own heart (Jer. 17:9).

Matt's philandering speaks volumes against his character, and he knows it. He also knows exactly what both Psych grad student and Christa are talking about in terms of denial and he is counting on it. Counting on his cunning deception and power to fool you, that is.

Anonymous said...

b. says to a = I'm not clear how anyone can say that they know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that MB did murder his wife?

If your argument is "I know him, and he could have done such a thing...because he did, then certainly I would was on to him."
Then I challenge you to look deep within your self, seek God and really pray about what type of a pride it is to make such assertions about you're ability to know Matt's heart, when the Bible clearly states that we don't even know our own heart (Jer. 17:9).

Tammy said...

Apples and oranges. Not the same concept at all.
If you have proof and evidence that he DID murder his wife, then you are not claiming an ability to know his heart.

Does "b." claim to have evidence to prove he DID NOT murder his wife? No. Even Matt's attorney conceeds that point. So therefore a person saying they know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that he did NOT murder her...what are they basing it on? Time and time again people have said they just know Matt and know he wouldn't be capable of doing such a horrific thing. Well, I'm sure Scott Peterson, Nick Hacheney, Michael Peterson, Christian Longo, Rabbi Fred Neulander, David Brame, Mark Hacking, Susan Wright, Dr. Richard Sharpe etc; etc; all had people that had known them a long time that were perfectly stunned to find out their co-worker, doctor, friend, son, daughter, sister, brother, father, mother, minister was responsible. And there are priests, preachers and pastors left and right committing atrocious crimes just like every other occupational group. So just because someone is in the ministry doesn't disqualify them from being a sexual predator and or a murderer. People are almost always stunned.

A. said...

b.--The idea that Matt could be guilty of something so horrible must be very painful for you, I'm truly sorry, and understand that you didn't ask to be put in this position.

Just as Shannon has said many times, I would never claim to judge Matt's heart, but I will judge the fruit of his actions, the Bible tells us to do so.

If a man is capable of using his power, position or authority to take advantage of young women (many), then it's not a stretch to believe that he is also capable of murder.

As Tammy has pointed out so well, this is nothing new. Even though it's (Matt's guilt) an excruciating reality, the sooner you can wrap your mind around the possibility, the sooner you can get healing for the effect this has had on you.

Anonymous said...

B, above, your comments remind me of some 8 or 9 year-old who can't think of an original come-back and must resort to parroting. Except that I don't know of any 8 or 9 year-old sociopaths...Your only success is in being an irritation.
Why don't you use today to figure out a way to be original, since you have lots of free time and the rest of us have JOBS. Who do you think you are fooling? Only yourself.

Shannon said...

I will add that "b." went on to parrot the response at 7:32 that "a." left to him AGAIN. But he added more of the same unsubstiated baloney that I'm not letting him spew on here. So I removed it.

Anonymous said...

shannon, you use the pronoun he while i can assure you i a not a he. but you have esp i assume, so you will call it the way you want. if anyone has lots of free time it must be you, and a couple of others that comment regularly on here, and i choose not to call them by name. if b sounded like a parrot it is because most of the comments that a has been saying can be turned around and said with the prounoun she in the place of he and still be a possibility of a true sentence. just trying to make a point. i am not MB and not even sure how i stand on the entire issue, but do think you allow him to be bashed while this is suppose to be a justice for kari blog. why don't you encourage your commentors to write memories or happy thoughts of kari instead of encouraging them to say negative things about MB? you have that power, just by choosing what you post.

Shannon said...

1) Okay. I will try to change my words to he/she in the future.
2) I do have the luxury of a flexible schedule...but lots of free time, no. Most of my work is done on the computer and a good bit of it online. You claim to know "a couple of others that comment regularly on here, and i choose not to call them by name." YET you get hot and bothered if I or some of those others claim to think the same thing. What's up with that?
3) Read Tammy's last comment. I couldn't agree with her more. Those believing Matt did kill Kari have some evidence and proof behind their reasons. Those that believe that Matt did not kill Kari do not have evidence and proof behind them. They are the ones going on feelings and saying they have the ability to know his heart. Therefore, the comments "b." is parroting aren't true in this regard.

Anonymous said...

Shannon, how can you know beyond a shadow of doubt that those that believe Matt did not kill Kari do not have evidence and proof behind them. You can assume that, but to know that is a far stretch.

It also seems like such a far stretch that those that believe Matt did kill Kari have evidence and chose not to use it with the criminal case. That does surprise me.

As for the amount of time that I can use on the computer, yes, I do have some extra time as I do not have to work for a living.

Shannon said...

I can think of all kinds of evidence that would show someone did kill someone. What kind of evidence is there that shows that they didn't? Alibi and timing of events don't work out for Matt. He had the motive, means and opportunity. I would think those are three real points that someone would have to prove AGAINST in order to begin clearing their name. How can you prove he didn't? Not asking for any "secrets" but just in would one truly exonerate himself WITH proof?

law student said...

Neutral comment maker here.

You cannot prove something that did not happen. That is why our justice system assumes innocence and puts the burden of proof on the prosecutor. Matt Baker does not have to prove he is innocent. The prosecutor has to prove him guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Do I think he did it?
I don’t doubt it for a minute.

Do I think there is enough physical evidence to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt in a court of law?
Or at least not that has been put out there in the media yet.

Since the crime scene was not treated as such and so much material evidence was lost, I am not sure that Matt Baker will ever be convicted in a court of law.

But in the court of public opinion the guy has already received a life sentence. He’ll never preach or work with kids again. Not in this state anyway. Who would hire him after all this? Unless he goes back to school in a totally different field, his degrees are worthless. The guy will probably never be able to make enough to support himself and his girls and will spounge off friends and family for the rest of his days.

But it’s a well deserved life sentence in my opinion, especially after the abortion accusations. That was unforgivable. If Baker is going to put that out there, he should have put the physical evidence to back his claim up out there as well.

Gray is a good defense guy though. His job is to produce a shadow of a doubt. The abortion thing may have cast some shadows, as ugly as it was.

Shannon said...

Law Student - Thank you for your comments and observations. It's good to have a lawyer in the making that can see through this case so far. Just want to make sure you understand....I was only asking what proof/evidence the defense had to prove he did not do it because "b." was trying to say they did have it. And you are very right on the "or at least not that has been put out there in the media yet." It's there. And it will come out at trial.

Thank you again! Feel free to comment any time.

Kelli said...

To law student...
It is "beyond a reasonable doubt," not shadow of a doubt.

Please remember that the evidence hasn't been revealed. What has been revealed is that there is evidence in several forensic areas. Once the case goes to trial, then the evidence will be shown.

Also, remember that this latest issue has nothing to do with the murder. This is something brought up two years later....and it is from the guy accused of killing her. If there is some serious forensics evidence and other pertinent and compelling evidence that she was murdered, nothing else really matters.

And Gray, the attorney? I think really good attorneys don't need to toot their own horns so much. Not so sure he has served his client well. He parades MB around like a beauty queen. Perhaps in the short term he has earned some points. Long term? I think not.

I agree with you on your perception
of MB and the court of public opinion. I think he will go to trial, however. He may go to civil court first and then criminal but he will go.

Dear Lord, gotta get that guy off the streets for the sake of other women he "meets." Actually, he needs to be off the streets for the sake of the daughters.

Sometimes justice moves much to slowly! I gotta believe it moves, however.

A. said...

Law Student has such an excellent way of clarifying...

I think it's also notable to say that there would be much evidence that would (probably) never make it into court that is also relevant, particularly on the level of Matt's character wrt his inappropriate pursuit of other women in his past.
Common sense and wisdom tells us that this indeed shows Matt for who he is, but it is very unlikely that a jury would ever hear it.

Also, there are issues of hearsay. What people know and what they've heard, no matter how relevant, that is tricky to get into court testimony.

These are the reasons Matt walks as a free man.
There is a big difference between being innocent of a crime, and being unable to convict in a criminal court based on legal maneuvering and technicalities.

Anonymous said...

You are right "a." Hearsay, on either side won't be admissable. Fortunately, I think there is some pretty compelling forensic evidence. Just gotta believe that the people fighting for truth won't quit. There is too much at stake.

Christa Brown said...

Law student said: "He’ll never preach or work with kids again. Not in this state anyway. Who would hire him after all this?"

On this point, I very sadly disagree. If MB walks, he'll probably be able to preach again. I wouldn't even be surprised if a Southern Baptist church hired him - or perhaps a regional or state Baptist organization. I wouldn't even be surprised if he got still another job with a connection to the Baptist General Convention of Texas. In fact, as of 6 months ago, it was reported that he was on PAID leave from his last position as a student ministries director, and it's a job funded by the BGCT. I wouldn't be surprised if he could simply continue in that same job. And even if MB couldn't get hired by a church or denominational entity, he could start up his own "Baptist" church (assuming he's a good preacher), affiliate the church with whatever Baptist group he wants, or make it an independent Baptist church. Who would stop him?

cjw said...

Christa is exactly right. There are men who are still in the pulpit who have admitted abusive relationships with young girls. If you go to you can read about many of them. Matt could make a "comeback" regardless of ALL the women who have accused him of improper sexual advances. It turns my stomach how the powerful BGCT looks the other way and continues to support men who are guilty of sexual abuse and allows them to be affiliated with their organization. And church members look the other way too! When are people going to wake up??????

From Kerrville said...

I heard that the Hill Country Baptist Association head person was told about Mr. Baker when he (Baker) first moved back to Kerrville. He was even told to contact Baker's last church to confirm the improper relationship he had with the young woman. I don't know if the man was told anything else. What I also heard was that he (the guy over the association) ignored it. He said he knew Mr. Baker when he was a child and couldn't believe such claims (didn't investigate). So, Baker continued to do fill-in preaching for the Hill Country Baptist Association churches.

Christa, I think you are right on target. These Baptist churches and organizations ignore issues dealing with Baptist ministers.

Tammy said...

I have read some impassioned comments from those close to Matt saying things like, "Well, it doesn't look too good with all those sexual allegations against him. But even if they were true, it doesn't make him guilty of murder."

But think about this - He denies and lies about all those claims. All 11+ of them. (Well, he did admit to Baylor about Lora but then they shoved that way back in file somewhere and then he denies it to the public when he realized BU wasn't going to turn him in. Convenient.) Sexual assualt is a crime committed by a person with a very selfish and violent mindset and someone that cares very little for women. A person such as this that has gotten away with those sexual assualts for a decade or more would feel quite empowered and would feel they could get away with a lot more. Well, he almost did. Almost.