That’s How They Do Pants in Civil Air Patrol!

Civil Air Patrol pedophile toolCivil Air Patrol plotting tools

By Major Ross Gelding, PhD | AuxBeacon News Contributor

AuxBeacon Staffers:

Your recent story with [CAP] Maj Gen Mark Smith’s letter on Civil Air Patrol member re-screening had a picture of him with his arms outstretched. I don’t know why, but this reminded me of a bit in a 1995 episode of Friends that appears inspired by convicted Civil Air Patrol member Edward Albert Newman. No joke, that was his name. This takes some time to explain, but I will try to keep it short.

Joey’s Tailor” was a bit gag in a September 1995 episode of Friends (S02E01 The One with Ross’ New Girlfriend) that ran like this:

Chandler: Yo, paisan. Can I talk to you for a sec? Your tailor… is a very bad man!

Joey: Frankie? What are you talking about?

Ross: [Ross enters and touches Chandler on the shoulder, who flinches]
Ross: Hey, what’s going on?

Chandler
: Joey’s tailor… took advantage of me.

Ross: What?

Joey: No way. I’ve been going to the guy for 12 years.

Chandler: Oh, come on. He said he was going to do my inseam, and then he ran his hand up my leg, and then there was definite… cupping.

Joey: That’s how they do pants! First they go up one side, they move it over, then they go up the other side, they move it back, and then they do the rear.

Joey: [Chandler and Ross stare at him] What? Ross, would you tell him? Isn’t that how a tailor measures pants?

Ross: Yes. Yes, it is… In prison! What’s the matter with you?

Civil Air Patrol pedo Chaplain Tailor

How they do pants in prison and in Civil Air Patrol.

I swear to God, man, this is inspired from real life, a F[redacted]-up Civil Air Patrol Chaplain Officer that made the news just a few years prior. The current Commander of Missouri Wing Civil Air Patrol is Col John O’Neill and his Vice Commander is Lt Col Steve Aubuchon. In my opinion, both men are not moving to correct the corruption, so I really don’t care if they find out that I provided this to you in violation of gag orders. To delay my demise, please stick with my pseudonym. Here are the facts:

During 1988 and 1989, Edward Albert Newman served as acting chaplain, recruiting officer and public affairs officer of the Civil Air Patrol (CAP) in St. Charles County, Missouri. At no time during his service with CAP did appellant’s duties require him to provide uniforms to the young boys involved in the organization. In April of 1988, fourteen year old T.W. attended a CAP meeting. At this gathering, appellant asked T.W. to try on some of the uniforms in a storeroom. None of the uniforms fit. Appellant, using a tailor’s measure, proceeded to measure T.W.’s arms and the inside of his legs as T.W. stood in his underwear. While measuring, appellant’s hand went inside TW.’s underwear, touched his genitals, and lingered there for a short time. Appellant then proceeded to measure the other leg. T.W. did not report the incident, thinking it may have been an accident.

In September or October of 1988, S.F., a thirteen year old Civil Air Patrol member, stopped by appellant’s trailer to drop off a newspaper article concerning the organization. Appellant requested that S.F. try on a couple of CAP uniforms. Although S.F. asked to use the bathroom for changing, appellant insisted S.F. use appellant’s bedroom. When the pants did not fit, appellant brought out a tape measure, measuring the inside of S.F.’s thighs a number of times. In so doing, appellant’s knuckles moved inside S.F.’s underwear and against his genitals. Shocked and embarrassed, S.F. backed away and quickly left the room saying he heard his mother calling. S.F. did not report the incident at that time.

A few months later, in January of 1989, appellant contacted twelve year old M.L., a new member of Civil Air Patrol, to schedule a CAP-required, one-mile run. Appellant picked up M.L. and drove him to St. Charles West High School for the run. Although appellant told M.L. that other cadets would be running, no one else showed up. M.L. completed his mile, then accompanied appellant to his trailer for a soda. Upon arriving at the trailer, appellant asked M.L. to try on some of the CAP uniforms. M.L. asked to use the bathroom for changing, but appellant insisted he use the bedroom. After the first pair of pants did not fit, appellant pulled out the tape measure. While measuring M.L.’s inseam, appellant slid his hand under M.L.’s underwear touching his genitals. M.L. told appellant to stop. After squeezing M.L.’s genitals, appellant picked M.L. up, held him to his chest in a bear hug, twirled him around, then threw him on the bed, pinning him face down. As M.L. screamed, attempting to struggle from appellant’s grasp, appellant ran his tongue down M.L.’s bare back, turned him over and pulled M.L.’s pants and underwear down to his ankles. Appellant touched M.L.’s genitals with his tongue, stopping only after M.L. kicked him in the groin. On the drive home, appellant asked M.L. what had happened that afternoon. M.L. told appellant he had run his mile and tried on a few uniforms. Appellant informed M.L. that if anyone was told of the actual events of the afternoon, M.L.’s home would be blown up with dynamite. M.L. told no one.

Thirteen year old J.D. was also a member of Civil Air Patrol. In March of 1989, appellant came to J.D.’s home with uniform fatigues for J.D. to try on. As J.D. entered his brother’s room to try on the pants, appellant followed him. When the pants did not fit, appellant produced his tape measure and proceeded to measure J.D.’s inseam. In so doing, appellant bumped J.D.’s groin. A few weeks later when appellant showed up with more uniforms, another bout of measuring took place. Though appellant did not touch J.D. in the groin area, his hand did bump J.D. on the outside of his underwear. J.D. never reported these incidents as he didn’t feel anything had happened.

In August 1989, Mary Ruth Krueger, Captain of the St. Charles CAP, asked appellant to leave CAP. Appellant continued to attend CAP functions and in September, Krueger again told appellant he was not to be involved in CAP activities. Appellant acquiesced, yet it was not until after November 1989 that he ceased appearing at CAP-related functions.

In November of 1989, M.L. informed his father of some of appellant’s behavior. Appellant was charged by Information on May 1, 1990. Said information was later amended on July 24, 1990, charging appellant as a prior and persistent offender. A jury found appellant guilty of all six counts charged. On October 1, 1990, appellant was sentenced by the trial court as a prior and persistent offender to fifteen years each on the three counts of sodomy, seven years on deviate sexual assault in the first degree, and one year in the county jail on both counts of indecent exposure. These sentences were to run consecutively.

I’m not sh[17]ing you, the source for all the above came to light in 1992 and can be found here:
http://mo.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19920908_0014.MO.htm/qx

I don’t have the time to punch this up with artwork, but I figure you will be able to do that. Good luck with your efforts in exposing Civil Air Patrol leadership.

Sign me: Ross Gelder, PhD Major Civil Air Patrol

Related Stories:
STATE MISSOURI v. EDWARD ALBERT NEWMAN
St. Louis Post-Dispatch from St. Louis, Missouri on August 31, 1991

Be the first to comment on "That’s How They Do Pants in Civil Air Patrol!"

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*