Camille Lewis replied: “Will Peck doesn’t exist. I totally made him up.”
He appears to have been invented almost entirely to provide an anonymous place for Camille to criticize, ridicule, and otherwise deride Jocelyn Zichterman. Jocelyn, who ran a Facebook page devoted to abuse, both sexual and psychological, in the Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) network of churches, was instrumental in pointing law enforcement to the culprit (since found guilty and now serving a prison sentence) in the Tina Anderson rape case.
Well, actually, William Peck = Camille Lewis. Thou hast been warned.
There are several of these.
And then there is the little issue of copyright infringement.
Here is a comparison between the fake William Peck (AKA Camille Lewis) and the real Camille Lewis on the issue of painting one’s face:
And just so we’re certain that the above post was made by Camille, here are her own words later in the ensuing conversation:
Contrast that with this from “William Peck”:
In addition to the fake William Peck page, Camille also created a blog cleverly named “jocsapeckadilloes.blogspot.com” (with the word “pecadilloes” mispelled on purpose) where she put lots of documents all related to Jocelyn and what Camille doesn’t like about her. That would be fine, except this site purportedly is run by “Bill and Steve.” “Bill” is William Peck AKA Camille Lewis. Not sure about “Steve,” but no matter.
We know that “Bill” is Camille, because she put “Bill’s” photo at the bottom of the page:
The blog contains lots of the same colorful striped memes all with Jocelyn’s doctored photo front and center, along with various screen shots of things Camille didn’t like that Jocelyn said. Interspersed are various shots of documents as well.
This is not about whether or not Jocelyn was right or wrong in the the things she did, or what issues Camille had with her. It’s about using a fake Facebook page and a fake blog and a fake YouTube channel to attack her.
As you read this, I want to make a little list of the facts in this story.
Cathy tells us that she was a new nursing school graduate, engaged to be married, working at an emergency room in Philadelphia.
She was raped by a single associate pastor from Richard Harris’ church.
Richard Harris and the rest of her adoptive family (she calls them “afather” and “afam”) tried to stop her from pressing charges.
She went to court and then couldn’t proceed and abruptly left.
The kindly police detective talked her into meeting with people from NOVA.
They helped her deal with the situation and the trial went on.
The rapist was convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison.
He is a register sex offender.
He is a Bob Jones University graduate.
Cathy was in her twenties when this happened.
This is a poor copy of this comment, made separately from the original story, but you can still read it.
Somehow, Bob Jones let the guy leave Greenville without reporting it to the police.
He’d raped three other people.
One of the others was a child.
Gee, that’s quite a tale, isn’t it?
I began looking into the facts around this narrative by constructing a timeline.
1964 – Cathy Harris was born
1984 – listed as a freshman in the Vintage at Bob Jones University
1986 – listed as a sophomore in the Vintage at Bob Jones University
1987 – listed as a junior in the Vintage at Bob Jones University
1989 – married to James Fallon
There are a few things to note. First, when Cathy says she told the rapist that she was engaged, she might have been lying to try to get him to leave her alone. So, she may not have been referring to James Fallon at all. However, it would seem that if she were already married, her rapist would have known it. He was, after all, an associate pastor at her adoptive father’s church.
At the time of her marriage, she was working at a nursing home. She didn’t graduate from Bob Jones University, and is not a registered nurse. She is a licensed practical nurse (LPN). This is the sort of work that LPNs typically do – nursing homes. Not emergency rooms. They aren’t commonly hired for that sort of job because they are so restricted in what they can do.
1992 – graduated from LPN school, granted license
When I first saw this, I thought something had to be wrong. Cathy was working at a nursing home when she was married in 1989, but this says her license as an LPN was issued in 1992. I thought perhaps they made a clerical error.
But here’s an old copy of Cathy’s license. Same origination date. No clerical error. She was originally licensed as an LPN in 1992, three years after she was married.
So she was not working as an LPN at the nursing home when she was married. My guess is that she was working there as a nurses’ aide, which probably required no training at all.
So, Cathy’s first detail just doesn’t work. She could not possibly have been a new nursing school graduate, working in an ER in Philadelphia, engaged to be married.
But let’s just assume that some of my assumptions are flat-out wrong and there is a reasonable explanation for this discrepancy, and let’s also assume that some ER actually hired a new LPN to work there.
That would date this rape to someplace between 1988 at the earliest and 1993 or so at the latest. She tells us she was in her twenties when it happened. That means the decade from 1984 to 1993. But she was at BJU until at least 1986 or maybe 1987. And even if the state of Pennsylvania made a clerical error about the issuance of her license, she still had to go to nursing school, which takes one year.
Armed with some idea of the time frame of this story, I next set out to find news coverage. After all, this is a rape trial, held in Philadelphia, I assume, since that’s where the supposed rape occurred. But in addition, it’s a story about a young woman, adopted by a pastor, who is raped by the associate pastor of her adoptive father’s church. That would be certain to make the news, especially in Buck’s County, where the church is located.
Here’s a picture of what I found.
After using every search term I could think of I found. . . nothing.
There are a couple of other very odd things about all this, as well.
Maybe she didn’t include this particular BJU grad, an associate pastor at an IFB church, who raped four people, including a child and one of her closest friends, was tried and sentenced to 25 years in prison because she was asked not to by Cathy herself, who didn’t want to draw attention to the story.
But Cathy told the story, in public, in detail.
And Camille could have included the case without mentioning Cathy’s involvement. After all, there were supposedly other victims.
The other weird thing is that bit about how Bob Jones “let” the guy leave Greenville without calling the police. Only he raped her in Philadelphia in the hospital parking lot. How did he get to Greenville and what did Bob Jones have to do with anything? When I first read this, I thought that maybe her comment there was a completely different thing, on a totally different subject. But it isn’t. [I know the copy I have is poor, but it’s a continuation of the same conversation.] Notice the time stamp. Same date, and the first narrative was posted at 9:02 while the second was posted at 9:12. That would give her ten minutes to type out the long first narrative.
So, after I looked and looked for anything, anywhere in the news media that this case ever happened, I did the obvious.
Richard Harris’ church, where this guy was supposedly an associate pastor, is Bethel Baptist Church in Buck’s County, Pennsylvania. I contacted the church.
I had a long, very interesting conversation with a person in a leadership position there. It wasn’t the cleaning lady, or the groundskeeper.
He checked with multiple sources and assured me that no such event ever occurred at Bethel Baptist Church. The associate pastor during the time period involved (late eighties on) was the same person for many years, and he’s never had anything more serious than a traffic ticket. My contact agreed that had such an event occurred, it would certainly have been in all the papers.
If this event occurred, the rapist has either completed his sentence and been released, or is very close to doing so. Shouldn’t Cathy be telling us about this, so we can all be on guard because this rapist is going to be released from prison and will be a registered sex offender for life?
I distinctly remember Camille and another person giving me holy hell once because I dared to say that women sometimes make up rape stories. I was informed that they never ever do that.
Cathy Harris, what’s the guy’s name? It should be easy, a matter of public record. What is his name?
Another brief thought occurred to me. Remember when Cathy got so upset with “N” because “N” telephoned the NOVA center to find out if “Judith” had been heckling clients? I found that story a little unsettling because Cathy’s reaction was so over-the-top, way beyond what might be considered reasonable.
Is this why? Was Cathy afraid that the people at NOVA would tell “N” that they never heard of anyone named Cathy Harris – that she’s never been a client there, ever? Without a rapist, there was no counseling at NOVA and no NOVA representative going to trial with Cathy, and no detective who helped her, and Richard Harris and family did not abandon her at her time of great need.
Linda’s so-called activism takes a few different forms. She has a website where she informs us that she’s written a couple of books. She has tried speaking in churches, but they apparently didn’t respond with what she considered proper enthusiasm, so she went to the prisons. She seems to have spent much of her life in prisons, either preaching or visiting.
Her blog had been pretty silent, but she revved it up again in an odd way. She decided to target one particular person, and do a whole series of articles basically defaming her repeatedly.
Much of what she’s had to say can be summarized with “Linda Fossen doesn’t like Beth Murschell.” She just slings mud at her with little to nothing in the way of evidence to support anything she claims, but I’m going to address the last two of these rants and pretty much ignore the others.
The Demon-Haunted World of Linda Fossen
Linda Fossen’s theology embraces what we referred to when I was a Christian as the “charismatic movement.” And not just its fringes. She is immersed in it. Raised a Baptist (at least after her parents got “saved” when she was about six), she dove into the whole speaking-in-tongues getting-slain-in-the-spirit faith-healing world of charismatic Christianity during her first year out of high school.
And all that is fine, I suppose. Believing that you get a special message from “God” in a language you’ve never learned isn’t really very far from believing that a guy walked on water, so I don’t really differentiate between the types of woo that religious people accept, provided that their illusions remain their own and don’t intrude into my life. However…
This kind of emotionally charged religion makes the believer feel special. All religion does that to some extent, but none more so than the charismatic Jesus-gives-me-a-special-language type.
Heady stuff. “I am on a mission from God.” God is sending her to do something special.
God is directing her every step. God is telling her what to say. God is working in her to make sure she has the correct data and that she recognizes it as correct.
And if she’s not sure, she prays and God causes her to speak in a special language, so she knows it’s him talking with her.
How could she possibly be wrong? Ever? About anything?
So, cushioned in this lovely nest of supposed invincibility and omnipotence, it becomes an easy step to deciding that anyone who disagrees with her is necessarily disagreeing with, gasp!, God himself.
After all, didn’t Jesus say this? And isn’t every word of the Bible not only true, but totally applicable to her and to her “mission”?
Who is guiding those people who disagree? The ones who see situations differently, or believe something contrary to what she received directly from God himself? Who could possibly be leading them? After all, everyone is led by someone, isn’t that right?
Oh gee. It’s him. You know. Him.
Scary. The stuff of nightmares. The devil. A devil. A demon.
Or maybe he looks like this.
But no, we’ll ask Linda what he looks like. After all, she knows a whole lot about this. At least, she says she does.
I have laid hands on people and cast out devils from them. I have heard demons speak out loud. I know more than many Christians about demons…
Whew! That’s a good thing. For a minute there, I was scared just a teensy bit.
So, what is a demon like? Well, for starters:
One of the ways that the Holy Spirit leads us in the area of discerning of spirits is that he will give us a warning inside that something just is not right.
Oh yeah. Something is just not right. Like Beth. She wasn’t right. Actually, she didn’t agree with Linda and Cathy Harris, so something was just not right. Linda didn’t agree with Beth, so Linda “lit into her.” And then she knew. Beth was demonic.
And sure enough, there was the proof:
Beth came back and declared that she was on a “mission from God” to stop Cathy before the GRACE report came out.
Well, not exactly. What Beth said was that she was concerned that Cathy would pitch a hissy fit when the GRACE report came out and it didn’t suit her. We don’t know if that will happen or not, since it hasn’t come out yet. [Update: the report came out December 11, 2014, and as of the end of that year, Cathy Harris has been absolutely silent.] Beth is concerned about this. I’m not, since I don’t care about the GRACE report anyway, but all that is not important here.
This. This. This is what got Linda Fossen all riled up. Beth is saying here that she wants to be able to speak her mind. “They are not going to silence me this time,” she says. What does she mean? What she means is that the last time she tried to speak her mind, on her own blog, Cathy, Linda, Camille and company attacked her like pit bulls and ripped her to shreds. Linda decided she was “demonic.”
Did she do like me, and question the integrity of the whole GRACE thing? Nope.
Did she say bad things about the so-called “survivors”, and imply that they are all bad people? Nope.
She seems to have had the gall to suggest that maybe the GRACE report wasn’t the end of the world as we know it, and that maybe, just maybe, life would go on even after it came out.
This, according to our resident demon expert, is absolute proof of demon-possession.
And of course, we have a problem here, because Beth insists that she is “compelled by God” to say this stuff, and Linda is on a “mission from God” to do the exact opposite and keep people so riled up that they are almost apoplectic – and Linda has to be right because she prays in a special language.
And here we have the problem with this sort of black-and-white, demon-haunted world where Linda Fossen lives. There is no nuance here. If you do not agree with Linda Fossen, you do not agree with God himself. And if you are in disagreement with Jehovah, you are a member of Satan’s army. Hence, Beth Murschell is demon-possessed.
And then Linda does something rather astonishing. She preaches a little sermonette about herself. Oh, she keeps referring to Beth and to Jezebel, but she’s describing herself. Over and over again. It goes on for about a dozen paragraphs. She’s just looking in the mirror as she types furiously.
The main characteristic of the Jezebel spirit is an obsessive need for dominance and control of others.
The second main trait of the spirit of Jezebel is an obsessive need to have one’s own way regardless of who gets destroyed in the process.
… they claim to have a religious zeal and think of themselves as a prophet.
They have more wisdom from God, more revelation from God, more power from God.
The Jezebel spirit always has to be right.
They are pathological liars who are skillfully deceptive and very convincing.
The Jezebel spirit shows no remorse. They do not see that they are doing anything wrong.
And then she prays. Long prayer, couple of pretty long paragraphs. Probably bored the hell out of Jehovah, but he doesn’t appear to have said anything.
It must be sad, living in a demon-haunted world where you have to be frightened out of your wits enough to write long screeds about somebody who hasn’t done a thing but disagree with you about something neither of you can control even slightly. You have to be scared of this guy.
He looks peeved, doesn’t he? You would, too, if your name had been dragged through the mud for centuries.