Wilf (26 April 2018):
As I wrote earlier, I've followed you for some time.
I've browsed again, a little.
The Jewish orthodox community is extremist. I'm not surprised that there has been instances of child abuse in those communities. You've confined yourself to that area, and well you might because addressing the wider problem of child and adolescent sexuality and undesirable adult sexual behaviour is really difficult.
You see, you also sound "extremist".
Last year I was tried and found guilty of very strange behaviour alleged by a man to have occurred in 1976 when he was 14 years of age. That conduct did not occur, and that's easy for me to say and easier for most others to decry. So if that conduct did not occur, what did happen?
Very briefly, the former boy, as do most kids, had, in my opinion, sexual issues that in the confusion of youth he thought were aberrant. He remains today, I believe, a dysfunctional bisexual. Such people try to maintain heterosexual marriages but cannot desist from seeking out casual sex with the opposite gender. Today he acts out the archetypal victim of child sexual abuse. If it wasn't some other "perpetrator", then it may stem from fantasies, some of which involved me. I had very little to do with him, in fact, other than being his teacher.
Crazy? Well, girls get crushes on male teachers, and vice versa. They are almost never "consummated". But boys can also get a crush on a male teacher. Usually that is never perceived as sexual, but it can be - for the boy - and/or for the teacher. Usually it results in greater interest in school work... For the kids, definitional ages of consent do not mean much at the time.
In the recent Insight program I think you said you are currently undergoing psychotherapy 4 times a week. That sounds like you accept that you need to move on. Have you considered that your intense advocacy may be holding you back? You see, I can empathise on two counts, the societal elements that are holding me back (even at age 71) and what has been happening to my alleged victim, who, like you, has for 3+ years embarked upon advocacy for victims. His behaviour is extreme, and he bases his credibility on the validity of his claims about me. He either knows that to be false, or he is really delusional.
During three years' prosecution he built up his program and engaged in an intense counselling/assistance process with a victim support agency. The record of that association suggests that not only is he not moving on, he has been using the counselling to promote his cause.
I've never met you, but I would take the chance and suggest merely this, as I'd counsel my "victim" if I could: accept your sexual feelings, whatever they were and whatever you recall of them, as a teenager. You are not at fault, not to blame (something that plagues many "victims"). Maybe that guy in New York really did love you. I know what it's like to love, and to be loved.
Many years ago some of such relationships resulted in lifelong non-sexual friendship and respect. Today, well...
Manny (26 April 2018):
Wilf, with all due respect, it seems clear to me that you are a typical pedophile.; an abuser, a manipulator, a predator and more.
Of course, occasionally, courts can get things wrong. So, admittedly, for a brief moment, I felt for you.
But then I found this: http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/international/2003-10-06/convicted-paedophile-held-in-east-timor-over-child-porn/682860
That's what a quick Google search of your name brought up. I suspect there's more.
But I won't bother wasting any more of my time on you.
I just hope you're not hurting any other children today (including through viewing child pornography).
Please refrain from corresponding any further with me.
Additional articles regarding this pedophile:
UPDATE (24 July 2018): Despite my initial reluctance to engage with this convicted pedophile, I felt this was an opportunity to continue to educate myself and the broader community regarding the mind of a perpetrator of child sexual abuse. Below is the full email correspondence between us. At this stage I don't see any additional benefit to continue to engage with Wilf, so I will refrain from doing so.
Wilf (27 April 2018):
This of course will be my last email. I invited dialogue. You are not in a place to listen. Your pedestal is out of reach, but at an elevation equivalent to that of the former student I wrote of. You breathe the same air, so to speak. I'll call him Kelvin. You'll find him on Google too...
Whether you read this or not is of no concern to me. But in fairness you might glance at it briefly.
You cited a url re East Timor. That matter was a typical AFP [Australian Federal Police] media beat-up. I can prove on the AFP's own documents that no pornographic images of East Timorese children were found in my possession. Simple as that. Yet Ombudsmen, other authorities, and Federal Court judges turn the other way.
The boy I described, Kelvin, LIKED AND RESPECTED ME WHEN HE WAS A BOY in 1976. In around 2003-2004 he discovered the "East Timor information" on the net. He thus "discovered" that his former teacher was a pedophile. He became outraged, just as you sound today. He must have felt as betrayed as if he'd actually been abused. So the false media information that so disgusted you (if you'll please read your own words) was the very cause of his personal crusade against me and against all other child abusers. I'll send you a copy of my book (in e-form) if you like, in a year or two.
You two have much in common, other than, perhaps, his cause being rooted in fantasies and delusions. Your PR skills leave him for dead, but you really should consider changing the pic on the cover of the book. Part of your healing and moving on.
Please be assured that there'll be nothing further from me unless you choose to reply.
All the best
Manny (29 April 2018):
I have chosen to respond and to try to engage with you for the purpose of education; I'd really like to better understand the mind of a convicted pedophile.
I will only respond to the relevant parts of your email, as I'm completely disinterested in your observations or suggestions, just what goes on in your twisted mind.
Thus far you have made it clear that your most recent victim completely made up the abuse for which you were convicted last year. You then allege that the Australian Federal Police, ombudsmen, judges and other authorities have all conspired against you regarding the child pornography charges.
I'd like to remind you that in 1993 you also pleaded guilt to sexually abusing two other children. You received a lengthy prison sentence.
As previously noted, I suspect there are many other victims.
I'm genuinely interested to know how/why you can go on denying that you're a pedophile and that you've hurt many innocent children
Please enlighten me, as I think it'll better equip me in responding to the scourge of child sexual abuse.
Wilf (30 April 2018):
In a way I'm pleased that you have decided to respond. But this is a difficult time for me, I'll try to explain briefly.
We may make progress if you'd stop regarding me as a "convicted pedophile". One can be convicted and be entirely innocent, as in the recent "historic matter". I'm not in denial at all, but denial of what? Of permitting my relationships with boys to become sexualised? No, I'm not in denial that this has occurred. I try, however to look at the broader picture of the human condition. The problem is that I discern that other players in this field are in denial.
In cognitive behavioural therapy (a component of a year-long treatment program I did in prison) I was asked to write and repeatedly recite a script in three parts: first, to visualise in my mind becoming sexually attracted to a boy, second, to "switch" and visualise something horrible happening to me as a consequence of offending, then, obviously in a state of anxiety, to "switch" to a safe scene with a legal partner.
The program presented an offender in his upper floor apartment being attacked by an excavator driven by an angry father of his victim.
I chose something different for my second scene: I relived what I knew it must have been like for the boys involved in police investigation. That worked for me, with additional benefits as you might be able to see. I wouldn't want that ever to happen again. And so it worked for me.
You've looked at some of the material that continues to infect my life today and the lives of others. The recent convictions make me a reportable offender under state law - for 5 years. Because of that, it is an offence for me to depart from Australia without permission - for five years.
The problem is that in 2009 I overcame my many inhibitions and met an married an Indonesian woman. We have lived as family in Indonesia, and, if you'll pardon me re the East Timor matter, I have committed no offences of any kind since 1992. Our marriage has worked out. My propensity to form strong and respectful bonds has been adapted, if you like, to my relationship with my wife, to whom I committed the rest of my life.
By September 2014 when I was arrested re the recent convictions going back to 1976, my wife was showing signs of a potential breast problem. Because of my frequent visits to Australia to meet court commitments, I was unable to induce her to go to Bali for a mammogram, etc. By the time of my trial in November 2017, I in Australia of course, she was reporting further health problems.
For my four month jail term I lived in constant agony because I could not contact her until January-February, when I could manage brief phone calls twice a week. We looked forward to my release and return home in Mid-March 2018. Then, having purchased my ticket, I learned that I would be arrested if I attempted to board a plane without police permission. I immediately applied. The police have been sitting on it for 6 weeks, on a clear cut case favouring me.
This obviously had an immediate impact on my wife, whose health has deteriorated. She no longer has function in her legs and is bed-ridden, requiring constant assistance with everything bar using her mobile phone. I think we all suspect that she is dying. The past 6 weeks, on top of the 4 months in jail, have been hell. I am still begging police to permit me to go to her. I am being punished all over again, and I fear that with everything in my life now threatened, I will not want to take long in following my wife.
So I am not in a good space. The recent convictions, the evidence of which even you might find suspect, have not caused my wife's illness, but they certainly reduced her chances of getting medical attention. The problem is that many Australians want their identified pedophiles to live in eternal punishment here in this life, and onwards if you believe in an after-life.
As I write a seriously ill woman lies in Indonesia hoping to see her husband again before it is too late, and nobody cares about her. Never mind about me.
That's what is preoccupying me at the moment.
Manny (30 April 2018):
Thanks for your detailed response, Wilf.
To be honest, I'm finding it difficult to come up with an appropriate response.
On the one hand, it seems clear to me that you don't really fully understand the gravity of what you have done (convicted of sexually abusing three children & possessing child pornography). And this is only what we know about. I suspect you have many other victims as well, especially in Indonesia, where it's much easier to sexually abuse children with impunity.
On the other hand, you have paid for your horrific crimes. And you apparently have a very sick wife back home in Indonesia.
It reminds me of my own early predicament. I vividly recall one of the first hearings for my second abuser, David Cyprys, when some of his family turned up. I felt for them. At one point, I turned to Cyprys' dad, whom I've known since I was a child, and said something like "I'm sorry for what you and your family are enduring because of this". On the one hand, I personally felt guilty for putting them through this. On the other, I viewed Cyprys as the one responsible for all of this. Notwithstanding my thought process, I have always felt a sense of guilt for causing pain and suffering to family members of perpetrators through my work. It was deeply painful to hear what Cyprys' family (especially his children) were going through. So, it was almost inevitable for me to feel a sense of guilt.
Having said all of this, I try to focus on the most important aspects of my work: To pursue justice for past victims and to ensure the safety and well-being of children today
And there is no doubt that part of this work means taking extra precautions in certain cases, often at the expense of certain people (mainly perpetrators, but sometimes also their family members). In your case, this means that I would much rather you be prevented from returning to Indonesia to be with your sick wife rather than risk you continuing to offend against children there. Unfortunately, I won't believe any assurance that you may give. I view you as a major danger to the community. You need to be monitored and have restrictions placed on you. Let's not forget, you have probably given life sentences to some of your victims.
So, as much as I feel for you as a fellow human being deserving of human rights and dignity (despite the fact that you didn't provide these to your victims), I feel much more for your victims and potential victims.
I hope you understand my position.
I'm (somewhat) comfortable continuing this honest dialogue as I feel I'm learning a lot.
Wilf (18 May 218):
I haven’t heard from you for a while – understand you must be very busy, whereas I am just existing, useless, waiting to rejoin whatever will be left of my family.
I asked you to tell me anything you cared to disclose about your relationships with Velvel and David. I would suggest that these are matters which you would find difficult to disclose even to yourself.
I found a pic you must have put on the net so that people could see the innocent little Manny before he was abused. It is easy to imagine you as a fairly engaging and attractive young fellow. Easy to imagine Velvel as a young man when he found himself attracted to you, easy also to imagine that you responded in friendship. Also easy to imagine that this developed what I will call an erotic aspect which of course could not be explored in the middle of the street. I can never know what actually did happen, physically and ideationally, and I suspect you really do not want to recall. I say that because these things have been my experience. I know the difference between purely sexual, call it “experimenting” if you like, behaviour between same-age boys, and relationships where there is genuine affection. 30 years ago (as, I believe, in your case) such things were private and never discussed.
It was entirely feasible, again from my personal experience, for a boy to so deeply trust his older friend that he felt safe to explore his sexuality with that friend. That is no longer so because of changing attitudes and a prurient interest of many people in the private lives of others. Today others say the trust was betrayed – they are the real abusers.
In Velvel’s case I would have thought it possible that at the time, while perhaps surprised at the intensity of your feelings, you were not put off to the point where David could not have later imposed himself on you and continued to do so, as I understand it, for some time. Today the experts would say that you had been sexualized, groomed for David by Velvel. I know that many pedophile rings work on the basis that “members” exploit the preparatory activities of others. I have no experience of this, and of course it mirrors adult scenes such as swinging, gay saunas, and group sex. There is no emotional bonding. Not my scene at all.
You insisted on confronting Velvel and having it recorded on video. I can still hear the man’s voice saying that he loved you and was infatuated with you. That resonates deeply with me, though I am troubled by the term “infatuated” and its negative slant of immaturity. With experience it becomes “love”, which is acceptable, even applauded. Some people think it better to keep love out of it and just engage to satisfy lust. I have never been comfortable with that. I also draw a very conservative line at being “persuasive”, on a scale at the top of which is true rape.
That you should view these adolescent experiences negatively now is not unusual. There is however a need to establish how they may continue to be viewed. You have chosen a pathologically negative path. If you did not, your campaign would have no meaning. Are you sacrificing your well-being to demonstrate the weight of your cause?
The protagonist in my recent case used a variety of help organisations such as Bravehearts, Men’s Line, Helpline, and even created his own “council” lobbying for legislation reform to decorate his bandwagon. He displayed increasing dysfunction up until the trial. He was either lying outright or making himself ill, perhaps both are possible. If something did happen to him, it was not I, for nothing happened at all. Had there been a non-physical two-way connection I would remember it. It was all in his mind. There is a possibility that someone close to him was involved when he was a boy, someone he did not want to accuse publicly. If so, then I am probably correct in saying that at the time he was a willing participant, but now must regard it as abuse. Does that ring a bell for you?
I recall a treatment session in jail where a woman came to tell us offenders how horrible it was to have been abused by her father from pre-pubescence until her 20s, abused all of her siblings and many of her cousins, male and female. I asked the question: did she make a complaint, was her father charged? The answer was no. We were so shocked. It was so obvious that she sought to deal with her father’s behaviour, – to whatever extent it was true – not by sending him to prison but by confronting us in jail. It so often happens that way.
Ever read James Michener? He was personally a fairly conservative man, I think, but he did have a knack for portraying historical matters with few of the modern filters through which people usually see them. He wrote a book about Israel-Palestine which you should read: The Source. Late in the book he wrote of the Ottoman empire, of a kaimakam (did I spell it right?) in Tubariyeh who became “infatuated” with a teen-age boy. They were lovers for some time, after which the sexual aspect faded, the young man married the kaimakam’s daughter, and in turn ascended to that rank, all described by Michener in a matter of fact non-judgmental way. All dependent on the culture, of course. I’m certainly not suggesting that we revert to those times, but as an exercise in comparative mores Michener did a good job.
I wish you all the best, and hope that the schism in your life between pedophiles and non-pedophiles is healed, that one day you can talk again to Velvel.
Manny (19 May 2018):
So much of what you write is deeply disturbing and triggering, that I'm finding it difficult to continue to correspond with you. The only reason I have continued to do so is to educate myself more on this issue - they don't teach these things in school, so getting a lesson from a convicted pedophile is the next best thing, I guess.
At this stage, I only really have one remaining question. It relates to the concluding paragraph in your last email. You refer to the apparent 'schism in [my] life between pedophiles and non-pedophiles'. I'd be interested in understanding your definition of a pedophile.
Wilf (21 May 2018):
Manny, I'm not sure I understand that myself. There are several lines in the sand. On the side of one line we have people who find prepubescent children attractive. A slightly different line has children who are sexually active/aware vs those who are not. I honestly don't know. I think that adults who just don't like kids are under one side of the Bell curve. Others, well if they did not exist, life wouldn't be much for young people.
So there are women who do not like breastfeeding. I have often wondered how it is for a woman to breastfeed a baby, and receive the attentions of a partner to the same part of the body, whether sequentially or not in time. It is, I believe. a wonderful feeling to feed a baby naturally.
Our definition must relate to TODAY. Whatever one's feelings for a young person, even love, respect must be paramount. The boundary must not be breached. The common definition therefore is someone who breaches that boundary, whether reported or not, convicted or not. My definition does not involve plethismography or mindguessing. It's about respect for others and self-control. Whether you like it or not it's a cultural thing, and today's standards are clear.
That's how I get by these days. The digging around in the past won't get anyone far in this area.
All the best.