Youngstown Daily Legal News

Youth pastor who molested his congregation warrants 40-year prison term

JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News
Published: August 5, 2014

The 5th District Court of Appeals recently affirmed a 40-year prison term for a Mansfield youth pastor who sexually abused several young girls.

John Picard started working as a youth pastor at the Marion Avenue Grace Brethren Church in 1990. As part of his work, Picard and his wife had regular contact with teenage girls and young adult females in the church.

The congregation noted that Picard formed close relationships with several of the girls and often distanced them from their family and friends. He referred to the group as “the family” and admitted that he influenced where the girls lived, who they dated or married and what cars they purchased. He also spoke of getting a large piece of land where “the family” could live in a large house with separate wings and shared common areas.

Picard’s alleged transgressions came to light in 2005 when H.G. told a pastor at her new church that she had sexual relations with Picard. The new pastor relayed her allegations to the Marion Avenue church and she was called before a council of pastors.

The council initially discounted her claims while other members of “the family” supported Picard or remained silent. Many of the church members voiced concerns about Picard’s close relationships with the young women and even referred to the group as Picard’s “harem.” Nevertheless, the congregation voted to retain him.

Despite that decision, Picard resigned from the church and made plans to form his own church with members of “the family.” Those plans fell apart shortly thereafter when a second girl confessed to her husband that she had sexual relations with Picard.

Initially, the police were not concerned with relationships that allegedly took place after the girls turned 18. However, throughout the investigation, they uncovered the nature of “control and mental and spiritual coercion” Picard had over the girls and elected to include incidents that took place after they turned 18.

During the course of a jury trial in the Richland County Court of Common Pleas, H.G. explained that she moved in with her great aunt and uncle when she was 12 because her parents died. That was when she started attending the Marion Avenue church and met Picard.

When she was 16, H.G. started baby-sitting Picard’s children and the couple started kissing and fondling. Their relationship evolved when she agreed to spot him as he worked out and he had her perform oral sex on him. H.G. said Picard told her that “it wasn’t sinful because it wasn’t sex.”

He later digitally penetrated her but stopped when his son entered the room. H.G. left the area when she turned 18 but returned and had one last encounter with Picard, during which she performed oral sex on him again.

A second victim, S.S., also testified against Picard. She said she started attending the youth group in her sophomore year of high school and also baby-sat Picard’s children.

On Sundays after church, S.S. told the court, Picard would take her into his office and they would kiss and stroke each other. He told her “that being a youth pastor was difficult and he was frequently under attack, and this was a form of comfort his wife could not give him,” case summary stated.

During a mission trip in 2004, S.S. said, Picard had her perform oral sex on him multiple times.

After starting to attend the youth group, the third victim, S.W., told the court she got more involved with Picard and her relationship with her parents started to deteriorate. She said she started kissing Picard in 1995 and by the following year she considered him her best friend.

“Appellant told her that best friends engage in sexual acts with each other, claiming that the Bible states that Jonathan and David were best friends who engaged in sexual behavior together. He also told S.W. that when the Bible says a pastor should be a one-woman man that just means he can’t be with two women at the same time,” Judge Craig Baldwin wrote in his report for the court.

Picard told her his job was taxing and he needed her to “fill him back up.” The two then engaged in oral sex and sexual intercourse regularly, with him telling her that it would be a sin for her to refuse because God was protecting their relationship.

S.W. said she cried when she did not want to have sex with Picard and he told her he liked it when she cried.

G.R. was the next victim to testify and once again recounted the abuse starting after she baby-sat Picard’s children. She said they engaged in oral sex or sexual intercourse on a weekly basis and he eventually had her perform oral sex on him in the baptismal during a church sleepover.

“He told her that giving him oral sex was her God-given role as his comforter,” case summary stated.

Two more girls testified to similar activity and told the court that Picard told them it was God’s will for him to have sexual relations with them. One girl recalled him telling her that in the Biblical account of the Last Supper, John leans on Jesus and it was possible that he had contact with Jesus’ genitals. He used the story to assure her that their relationship was not different than those in the Bible.

At the close of evidence, the jury found Picard guilty of numerous charges of sexual battery and the trial court sentenced him to an aggregate term of 40 years with five years of mandatory post-release control.

On appeal, he argued that there was insufficient evidence to support six of the eight counts of sexual battery against H.G. The appellate panel determined that there was only sufficient evidence to support three of the counts and reversed five of the convictions, remanding the matter for new sentencing.

On remand, the trial court imposed the same aggregate sentence and Picard appealed to the 5th District, claiming the trial court erred by vacating counts that were already running concurrently.

“Appellant argues that it was unclear which counts were vacated by this court, and the trial court should have allowed him to elect which counts to vacate,” Judge Baldwin stated.

Upon review, however, the appellate judges found that Picard’s sentence was not related to which counts were dismissed. Rather, the trial court held a resentencing hearing, heard statements from Picard and his mother and properly chose to impose a sentence. The judges noted that all of the counts concerning H.G. were identical and it was not relevant which ones the trial court dismissed and which ones they used for sentencing. Based on that information, the three-judge appellate panel overruled his first assignment of error.

He next contended that the trial court erred in imposing the same sentence because the seriousness of his crime was substantially decreased when five of the counts were vacated.

“Although five counts were vacated, appellant remained convicted of 37 counts of sexual battery in which the victims were young girls he met through his job as a youth pastor at the church they attended,” Judge Baldwin wrote.

The judges reviewed the evidence and found that Picard used his position and his relationship with the girls to manipulate them into sexual activity.

At his resentencing, the trial court stated that Picard was in court because he was given a high calling in the church, “and he failed.” The trial judge acknowledged that everyone fails from time to time, but that Picard’s crime wasn’t a “one-time situation” where he got “overwrought.”

“This was occasions when this gentleman misused and abused his position of trust at a time when these young girls, young women, needed someone of strength and good character to provide them with a basis for living the rest of their lives. And in some ways, as I think everyone acknowledges, they were damaged to the core; that all their life, they’re going to realize that they were tricked and fooled and mistreated and abused. What they’ll make with that, I don’t know, but nor do they know. But they’ve been damaged substantially,” the trial judge stated.

The appellate judges found that such reasoning helped to justify the trial court’s sentencing decision. They also noted that Picard failed to show remorse for his actions.

“Instead, he spoke about how difficult prison had been for him and how extreme and painful the five years he had served in prison had been,” Judge Baldwin stated.

Presiding Judge Scott Gwin and Judge Sheila Farmer joined Judge Baldwin in affirming the 40-year sentence.

The case is cited State v. Picard, 2014-Ohio-2924.

[Back]