Liars are experts in chopping logic and missing the truth slightly — “Did God say not to eat from any tree?” In order to pin a liar down, words must be defined in the most careful manner available. In this context, the only man who needs to be more precise than a liar is the man who would catch the liar. Douglas Wilson¹

Idaho code defines anyone under the age of sixteen-years old as a “child.” Idaho code does not distinguish between two-day-old children and fifteen-year-old children. Whether he/she was born yesterday or sings “Sixteen Candles” tomorrow, a child is a child. Further, Idaho code protects all children, including those who are “beautiful & striking” and who may be “about eight inches taller” than the man who rapes them. One size fits all. If a person sexually molests someone between birth and 16-years old, only one statute applies: Title 18, Chapter 15, subsection 18-508:

LEWD CONDUCT WITH MINOR CHILD UNDER SIXTEEN. Any person who shall commit any lewd or lascivious act or acts upon or with the body or any part or member thereof of a minor child under the age of sixteen (16) years, including but not limited to, genital-genital contact, oral-genital contact, anal-genital contact, oral-anal contact, manual-anal contact, or manual-genital contact, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex, or who shall involve such minor child in any act of bestiality or sado-masochism as defined in section 18-1507, Idaho Code, when any of such acts are done with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust or passions or sexual desires of such person, such minor child, or third party, shall be guilty of a felony and shall be imprisoned in the state prison for a term of not more than life.

To be redundant, the Idaho legislature has not enacted a law called “sexual behavior with a girl who was below the age of consent,” contra Doug Wilson. However, Idaho does have a statute that prohibits sexual behavior with a girl who is below the age of consent; it is called Idaho code § 18-1506: LEWD CONDUCT WITH MINOR CHILD UNDER SIXTEEN, which is the name of the law that Doug Wilson refuses to use in association with Jamin Wight. Additionally, if a person solicits sex from a child under the age of 16 years — even if the child is tall, beautiful, and striking — they violate Idaho code § 18-1506, which states:

SEXUAL ABUSE OF A CHILD UNDER THE AGE OF SIXTEEN YEARS.
(1) It is a felony for any person eighteen (18) years of age or older, with the intent to gratify the lust, passions, or sexual desire of the actor, minor child or third party, to:

(a) Solicit a minor child under the age of sixteen (16) years to participate in a sexual act;
(b) Cause or have sexual contact with such minor child, not amounting to lewd conduct as defined in section 18-1508, Idaho Code;
(c) Make any photographic or electronic recording of such minor child; or
(d) Induce, cause or permit a minor child to witness an act of sexual conduct.

(2) For the purposes of this section “solicit” means any written, verbal, or physical act which is intended to communicate to such minor child the desire of the actor or third party to participate in a sexual act or participate in sexual foreplay, by the means of sexual contact, photographing or observing such minor child engaged in sexual contact.
(3) For the purposes of this section “sexual contact” means any physical contact between such minor child and any person, which is caused by the actor, or the actor causing such minor child to have self contact.
(4) For the purposes of this section “sexual conduct” means human masturbation, sexual intercourse, sadomasochistic abuse, or any touching of the genitals or pubic areas of the human male or female, or the breasts of the female, whether alone or between members of the same or opposite sex or between humans and animals in an act of apparent sexual stimulation or gratification.
(5) Any person guilty of a violation of the provisions of this section shall be imprisoned in the state prison for a period not to exceed twenty-five (25) years.

Twenty-four-year-old Jamin Wight confessed in writing that he committed lewd & lascivious acts on the body of fourteen-year-old Natalie Greenfield with the intent of arousing, appealing to, and gratifying his lust, passions, and sexual desires; and 24-year-old Jamin Wight confessed in writing that he solicited 14-year-old Natalie to participate in sexual acts. Therefore, according to the state of Idaho, Jamin Wight violated Idaho statutes 18-508 & 18-1506. No other laws apply.

The maximum penalty for Lewd Conduct is “state prison for a term of not more than life,” and the maximum penalty for Sexual Abuse of a Child is “not to exceed twenty-five (25) years” in state prison. The state charged Mr. Wight with two counts of Lewd Conduct (18-508) and one count of Sexual Abuse of a Child (18-506), which equaled a maximum possible sentence of two life terms plus 25 years in prison. Doug Wilson calculated these numbers and determined the punishment too hard for the crime, and on August 22, 2005, he informed the court in writing that he would “labor” to ensure Jamin Wight did not suffer “injustice.”

In this letter Mr. Wilson floated the words “sexual behavior” for the first time and he neglected to use the terms “abuse,” “lewd conduct,” and “child.” He addressed his statement to Officer Green of the Moscow Police Department. In the following excerpt he states his objective:

“We have told him that it is appropriate for him to obtain legal representation . . . to ensure that the punishment given to him is not draconian or disproportionate. . . . I am in a position where I . . . believe that it requires that I labor to see that justice really is done to Jamin (at the same time excluding injustice through severe penalties). . .” (Letter to Officer Green, emphasis added)²

The words “injustice through severe penalties” define the words “justice really is done to Jamin.” And when you strip away all the blame-shifting, restatements, contradictions, obfuscations, and misleading rhetoric from Doug Wilson’s nonsense, one point stands out: He resolved to protect Jamin Wight from paying the lawful penalty for Lewd Conduct With Minor Child Under Sixteen³ & Sexual Abuse of a Child Under the Age of Sixteen Years — the two crimes he will not identify by name in relation to his disciple. Instead, he calls Mr. Wight’s criminal offenses “sexual behavior.” And at the October 27, 2015, Christ Church HOH meeting, Doug Wilson tipped his hand by prorating Natalie’s responsibility for her rape at “three times” (3×), which is an opinion he has never included in any of his written statements.

Doug Wilson flimflams Jamin Wight’s crimes because Doug Wilson has never thought that Jamin Wight committed rape. He never thought Mr. Wight abused a child. And if we take his written words at face value, he never believed — and still does not believe — the felon violated any state law when he violated Natalie.

---

¹ Douglas Wilson & Doug Jones, Angels in the Architecture: A Protestant Vision for Middle Earth (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 1998), 193.
² Readers should not ignore Mr. Wilson’s use of the word “labor” to Officer Green. One member of Team Truth strongly suspects that Doug Wilson used Kirk funds to help pay for Jamin Wight’s criminal defense lawyer, James Siebe, who is arguably the best attorney on the Palouse that specializes in felonies. Jamin Wight could afford James Siebe in 2005–06 but not in 2013–14, when Mr. Siebe dissolved his relationship with Mr. Wight and left his former client to the public defender’s office. And before anyone scoffs, do not forget that Doug Wilson used Kirk funds to pay off the illegal gambling debts of Kirk officers’ children. Therefore, the argument would be that if Mr. Wilson was willing to illegally disperse Kirk funds to resolve a financial dispute in a criminal enterprise, then it follows he would be willing to use Kirk funds, legally or illegally, to defend his Greyfriars’ acolyte from a punishment he deemed “draconian,” “disproportionate,” and “severe.” More evidence exists to support this theory but I do not have permission to disclose it yet. And I should note that two members of Team Truth now suspect this.
³ Mr. Wilson had the same goal for serial pedophile Steven Sitler when he urged Judge Stegner to mete a limited sentence on behalf of the unrepentant reprobate.