The head of a Wiltshire-based Christian charity has been found guilty of sexually assaulting a female member of staff.
Patrick Sookhdeo, from the Pewsey-based Barnabas Fund, was also found to have intimidated two employees who were due to give evidence against him.
The jury at Swindon Crown Court found the 67-year-old guilty on all counts.
Read it all and there is a report from the Western Daily Press
I am anxious to see Barnabas’ response.
Julian Dobbs is quoted here in World about the conviction: http://www.worldmag.com/2015/02/barnabas_aid_director_convicted_of_sexual_assault
As someone who greatly values the work of Barnabas Fund, I want to believe and support Sookhdeo — but I also don’t want to be one of these “circle the wagons” people that I witnessed following the Sovereign Grace Ministries allegations. It is a mistake to immediately take someone’s side because we value their work. Flawed people can both do good work for the Kingdom and still have weak spots that necessitate healing.
It says he has denied all the charges, but he has been convicted in a court. His resignation is appropriate. This is very sad, but it is true that sometimes good causes are served by people with private failings and sins. The organization can continue to do good work under different leadership.
#2 This report you link is confused and confusing. What, if anything, has he effectively resigned from, and what does that mean?
The report states:
and yet the article goes on:
Then again, of the trusteeship what does it mean to say:
and of his directorship:
If he has resigned, why would he be attending ‘certain engagements,’ whether or not he would be able to travel?
As for the convictions, it seems to me that the correct approach if one believes that there are grounds on which to say that jury decision to find guilt to a standard of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ after a five-day trial has not taken something into account or is unsafe, is for Dr Sookhdeo to appeal that conviction; not to claim that Dr Sookhdeo has denied the charge, nor to claim that the conviction is somehow de minimis because of the light sentence [expected given his prior good record]. Appeal has integrity, denial does not.
The other reports here and here are no more clear.
What exactly is Barnabas Fund [in its various iterations] saying? What is the message it is sending out?
Barnabas has lost credibility by not immediately accepting Sookhdeo’s resignation as Director.
I’m afraid, Jeff #2, that the wagons seem to be circling. I hope I am wrong.