The Crews’s file lawsuit against Richard Galvan and Sonia Galvan

On November 5th, 2020 The Crews’s filed a lawsuit against Richard Galvan and Sonia Galvan for Malicious Prosecution, and Intentional Infliction of Emotions Distress. You can read the lawsuit in its entirety below.

1st-amended-Petition-Galvan Download

CAUSE NO. 2020-DCL-05323

BLAINE CREWS and HANNAH CREWS Plaintiffs, § vs. §

§ 107th JUDICIAL DISTRICT

§ RICHARD GALVAN AND SONIA GALVAN §

Defendants
FIRST AMENDED PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
COME NOW BLAINE AND HANNAH CREWS (“the Crews’s) and file this their First

Amended Petition against Richard and Sonia Galvan and would respectfully show as follows:

I. DISCOVERY LEVEL AND DAMAGES

1. Due to the nature of this action and the amount in controversy, The Plaintiff states that this case will be conducted under Discovery Level 2 as defined in the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs seek damages over $200,000 but less than $1 million.

II. PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE

Plaintiffs Blaine and Hannah Crews are individuals that reside in Tarrant County, Texas
Defendants Richard Galvan and Sonia Galvan are individuals that reside in Cameron

County, Texas who may be served with citation at 15251 Sparrow, Harlingen, Texas 78552 or at 3404 Lyon Club Ct., Austin, Texas78738.
4. Subject matter jurisdiction and venue exists in this Court because the Plaintiff seeks damages that exceed this Court’s minimum jurisdictional limits and the incident in question occurred in this county. Venue is proper in Cameron County, Texas because all or a substantial portion of the occurrences and transactions at issue in this suit occurred in Cameron County, Texas.

PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED PETITION 1

§ IN THE DISTRICT COURT

§ CAMERON COUNTY, TEXAS

FILED – 11/5/2020 3:06 PM 2020-DCL-05323 / 47853588 ELVIRA S. ORTIZ
Cameron County District Clerk
By Christina Hernandez Deputy Clerk

III. FACTS

5. Hannah Crews met Richard and Sonia Galvan as friends of her family before she was a teenager. She and her family attended the Northway Bible Church in Harlingen, Texas along with the Galvans, and the families spent much time together as close friends outside of church activities. Richard Galvan was Hannah Crews’s youth pastor from the age of thirteen and at all times relevant to the facts herein. In the summer of 2007, when Hannah crews was seventeen, she suffered a traumatic break up with her high school boyfriend. Richard Galvan, as her youth pastor and family friend, offered Hannah Crews a job with his company, Orbit Broadband, and offered to counsel her about her breakup.

6. At work at Orbit Broadband, Richard Galvan would call Hannah Crews to his office on an almost daily basis to discuss her feelings and pray over her. During these visits, Richard Galvan would inquire about the details of Hannah Crews’ physical relationship with her ex-boyfriend. Richard Galvan would ask for details regarding what specific intimate acts Hannah had performed with her ex-boyfriend. Eventually, Hannah Crews was convinced to divulge to Richard Galvan that she was still a virgin and had never been sexually active with her ex-boyfriend.

7. During these counseling sessions which occurred at Richard Galvan’s office, Richard Galvan would tell Hannah Crews that her physical attachment to her ex-boyfriend was the cause of her heartbreak. Richard Galvan went on to claim to Hannah Crews that healing happens through intimacy. Richard asked Hannah to explain what she thought she needed to do to move on from her pain and trained her to respond that having sex would heal her. Once Richard Galvan conditioned this response, he offered to, “help her out with this.” Richard explained in a counseling session that, as her mentor, it would be safest if Hannah Crews had sex with him instead of someone else. After many of these conversations and sessions, Richard Galvan convinced seventeen year old Hannah Crews that he would not be taking her virginity but that she would be giving it to him because she was trusting him to help her heal spiritually and emotionally. Richard Galvan convinced Hannah Crews that it was ok to have sex with him despite her closeness to his wife Sonia Galvan, stating that Sonia Galvan would never know about the sex and Hannah Crews should not worry about hurting Sonia Galvan by having sex with him.

8. In subsequent counseling sessions, Richard Galvan began to “educate” Hannah Crews on various sexual acts and stimuli to get her prepared for the day she would have sex with him. After several weeks of these sessions, Richard Galvan rented a room at the La Quinta Hotel in Mercedes, Texas and instructed Hannah Crews to meet him there. This occurred at the beginning of volleyball season of Hannah Crews’s senior year of high school, in August, 2007. Richard Galvan was fearful of being discovered at the hotel. Richard Galvan convinced his youth parishioner Hannah Crews to have sex with him at La Quinta Hotel in the room he had obtained. Afterward, Hannah Crews traveled with her volleyball team to a pre-season game.

9. After exploiting Hannah Crews into having sex with him based on promises of emotional and spiritual healing, Hannah Crews’s mother discovered text messages between Hannah and Richard. Richard Galvan was confronted and told to tell his wife about the encounter. Richard stated that he had done so. Later, Hannah Crews had a conversation about the matter with Sonia Galvan, who told her it was not her fault and Richard Galvan had a problem sending, “mixed signals” to young girls. Soon after this, Richard and Sonia Galvan left their positions at Northway Bible Church. Richard subsequently told Hannah Crews that no one would believe her if she tried to tell anyone what he had done.

10. Richard Galvan subsequently visited Hannah Crews at her college during her freshmen year and tried to get her to go back a motel room with him. Hannah Crews refused. Hannah Crews subsequently learned that Richard Galvan has been inappropriate with other girls she knows. She believes that the potential remains for similar exploitive behavior to occur again between Richard Galvan and other girls. Hannah Crews is familiar with the standards in the community where Richard Galvan resides and believes that the residents of Cameron County, Texas have a public interest in preventing adults in positions of authority such as Richard from coercing and sexually exploiting and abusing young women.

11. Hannah Crews married Blaine Crews but never divulged the identity of the youth pastor that had exploited her until October, 2018. Upon learning this news and that the individual who exploited Hannah was Richard Galvan, Blaine Crews became upset. Blaine Crews called Richard Galvan and confronted him on the telephone. Hannah Crews did not direct Blaine Crews to make this call. In response to being confronted about the incidents with Hannah Crews, Richard Galvan merely responded that it happened a long time ago. Blaine Crews contacted two places where Richard Galvan would have contact with young girls, the Living Way Church and the Calvary School in Harlingen, Texas, and informed them of the incident with Hannah Crews. Hannah Crews did not contact anyone about Richard Galvan’s exploitation and did not direct Blaine Crews to do so.

12. After Blaine Crews contacted the church and school, Richard and Sonia Galvan filed suit against both Blaine and Hannah Crews for defamation per se on November 5, 2018. The Galvans sought and obtained a temporary restraining order against the Crews. The Galvans also requested, but did not receive, a separate gag order. The Galvans’ suit and request for temporary restraining order was supported by affidavits from Richard and Sonia Galvan. The Galvans’ petition included claims for defamation per se brought by both Galvans and against both Blaine and Hannah Crews. The alleged defamatory statements that formed the basis of the Galvans claims of defamation per se were Blaine Crews’s statements to the Church and School which the Galvans contended were statements that Richard Galvan, “manipulated and seduced Hannah Crews.” Incredibly, the Galvans’ petition and supporting affidavits did not allege that these statements were false and did not even allege that Richard Galvan did not have sex with Hannah Crews when she was in high school and he was her pastor. Likewise, the Galvans’ petition did not identify any allegedly defamatory statements against Sonia Galvan or any allegedly defamatory statements made by Hannah Crews. Despite claiming defamation per se without any allegation of false statement by Blaine Crews, the Galvans sought no less than $335,000 in relation to their defamation per se claims against both Blaine and Hannah Crews.

13. The Crews’s filed a motion to dismiss the Galvans defamation per se claims under the Texas Citizens Participation Act (“Anti-Slapp MTD”). The Anti-Slapp MTD was filed on December 12, 2018. Supporting the Motion to Dismiss were the affidavits of Hannah Crews and Blaine Crews which were considered by the trial court in their entirety and introduced without objection by Plaintiffs’ counsel. The trial court denied the Crews’s Anti-Slapp MTD and an appeal was taken to the Thirteenth court of appeals. On October 13, 2019, the 13th Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded the case for judgment consistent with its opinions. The Court of Appeals that Richard Galvan had sex with Hannah Crews in 2007 while counseling her as her youth pastor and that, as such, Hannah could not legally consent to same.

14. Following the appeal, Richard Galvan acknowledged in this suit that he had sex with Hannah Crews in 2007 as originally stated by the Crews’s in this matter. As such, the Galvan’s entire defamation claim was not based on a false and defamatory statement, but on true events of which both Richard and Sonia Galvan had actual knowledge prior to filing suit. Moreover, the Galvans executed verifications and affidavits in support of their pleadings that stated under oath that they contended Hannah Crews’s allegations were false. This was confirmed by their attorneys during the dismissal and appeals process. During this entire time, the Galvans knew these facts were true but alleged they were false for the ulterior purpose of attempting to silence Mr. Galvan’s sexual assault victim, Hannah Crews. These actions by the Galvans were undertaken at their insistence and with actual malice toward the Crews’s. The Galvans intended to cause emotional distress and mental anguish by silencing the delayed outcry of a sexual assault victim of Mr. Galvan. The Galvans have continued their attempts to silence Mr. Galvan’s sexual assault victim in 2020, opposing the lifting or modification of the injunction, which was sought under false pretenses with the motive of preventing Mr. Galvan’s victim from being to talk about his sexual assault even after the court of appeals finding of fact.

15. Following a hearing on June 9, 2020, the Galvans’ defamation claims, originally supported by their false affidavits, were dismissed with prejudice.

IV. CAUSE OF ACTION: MALICIOUS CIVIL PROSECUTION

16. The institution of the defamation suit and the Galvan’s actions in obtaining a temporary restraining order under false pretenses, continuing to allege the falsity of something they knew to be true was perpetrated with malice towards the Crews’s. The Galvans knew at the time they filed suit that they did not have probable cause to pursue a defamation claims over statements they knew were true. Despite this, they proceeded to restrain the Crews freedom and even continued this following the conclusion of the appeal, all with malice towards the Crews’s. The Galvan’s proceeding was terminated by the 13th court of appeals and judgment against the Galvan’s

dismissing their defamation claims will be entered by this court consistent with the appeals decision in this matter. The Galvans’ malicious prosecution of their claims has proximately caused special and actual damages to the Crews’s. The Galvans’ malicious prosecution of their claims has also caused damages including litigation expenses, attorney’s fees, severe mental and emotional pain and anguish in the past and in the future for which they sue herein. As such the Crews seek recovery for the damages by the Galvans as a proximate result of their malicious prosecution of their claims which they knew were based on false denial of the Richard Galvan’s sexual assault of Hannah Crews.

V. CAUSE OF ACTION: INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

17. The Galvans actions to stifle and silence Hannah Crews were undertaken with the intention and knowledge that they would cause a high degree of distress to the Crews’s. Suing the victim of your sexual assault for damages for telling the truth while swearing under oath that it did not occur is the definition of extreme and outrageous conduct beyond all bounds of personal decency. Further, the Galvans’ suit was not legally permissible as it was based on the untruth that Richard Galvan did not sexually assault Hannah Crews in 2007 and, had they confessed to the truth of the matter as the outset, the Galvans defamation claim would not have been allowed. Thus, the Galvans’ actions, as detailed above, proximately caused severe mental and emotional distress to the Crews for which they sue herein. The Crews also seek exemplary damages related to the Galvans infliction of emotional distress.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Plaintiffs respectfully request that they recover the following:

Judgment for damages against Defendant for damages as alleged herein;
Pre-judgment interest as provided by law;
Post-judgment interest as provided by law;
Reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees;
Costs of suit; and
Such other and further relief to which Plaintiff may be justly entitled in law and/or equity. VI.
Request For Disclosure

Pursuant to Rule 194 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff requests that Defendant disclose, within 50 days of the service of this request, the information and material described in Rule 194.2(a) – (1).

Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ C. Davis Chapman C. Davis chapman
State Bar No. 00798101 P.O. Box 387

Fort Worth, Texas 76101 (817) 781-0211
(682) 334-7306 – Facsimile

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS BLAINE AND HANNAH CREWS

Why did Pastors Bill Moore and Anne Moore refuse to speak about Richard and Sonia Galvan and South Texas FCA block our messages ?

The So uth Texas Fellowship of Christian Athletes was notified about Richard Galvan’s prior sexual deviant behavior, as well as Bill Moore and Anne Moore of Livingway Family Church in Brownsville, TX. Richard Galvan served on the board for the FCA and was a member of Livingway Family Church, who according to the Melissa Barrera-Sosa (executive assistant to Bill and Anne Moore) was “a very active member”. The South Texas FCA blocked Blaine from being able to send messages via FB, nor would they speak to him over the phone about the serious allegations. He attempted to reach Nathan Jones (Multi Area Director) and Catherine Bain (Administrative Assistant). Bain also seems to run their FB page, and assumptively is who blocked Blaine from being able to send messages. The National FCA did take the matters serious enough and spoke to the Crews’s Attorney, but none of the leaders at the local level would.

The same can be said of Pastors Bill and Anne Moore of Livingway Family Church in Brownsville, TX who not only refused to speak about the matters, but their executive assistant Melissa Barrera- Sosa filed a sworn affidavit attempting to assist the Galvans by claiming Blaine went from “cordial to upset” when he was notified the pastors wouldn’t speak to him. That would be a normal emotion if an attempt to speak to the head pastors of a church (that assumptively has many young women who attend) refused to speak to you about matters that may protect said young women. It should have been at the very least a simple phone call from the pastors to hear the truth of these allegations for themselves. Instead, Bill Moore and Anne Moore not only refused to speak to the Crews’s or their attorney about the sexaul assault (which was criminal in nature), they seem to have allowed their assistant to assist Richard Galvan and Sonia Galvan by filing an affidavit (shown below). Oddly enough, when the Crews’s attorney called Living Way Family Church and spoke to one of the church secretaries, she said Bill and Anne Moore weren’t familiar with the Galvans. This is a lie. Richard Galvan admitted in his depositions that Bill Moore called him and text him regarding this situation multiple times. Their assistant Melissa Barrera- Sosa also states in her affidavit that the Bill Moore and Anne Moore met with Richard Galvan and Sonia Galvan. The truth is it seems The Moore’s are trying to cover for a sexual predator, or simply ignoring the truth. Either way, they are failing to do what is necessary to protect the young women of their church. The church has also deleted several comments on their social media platforms regarding the information, and Anne Moore blocked Blaine on social media.

Ideally, when you call to notify a church or school organization about something as disturbing and criminal as what Richard Galvan did to a 17 year old girl they would take the matters extremely serious. When we send our young people to school, or church, we expect the leaders or anyone in authority to be properly vetted for the protection of the students and young people. Also, it should be expected that matters are taken seriously by leadership when an attempt to speak the truth about the sexual assault of a teenage girl occurs. Pastors Bill and Anne Moore should be ashamed of themselves, as well as the behavior of the South Texas FCA. Even after the 13th Court of Appeals Opinion stating it was a matter of public concern, as well as admissions by Richard and Sonia Galvan’s own depositions neither the Administration from the South Texas FCA nor Pastors Bill and Anne more have yet to respond or reach out to the Crews’s or their attorney for comments.

*UPDATE*

After two years of ignoring the facts Livingway sent Blaine a FB message. It speaks for itself. Following the message and “threat” they blocked Blaine from being able to respond, as did the Youth Pastor of Livingway – Ryan Moore. So, the 13th Court of Appeals has deemed the actions of Richard Galvan a matter of public concern, Richard and Sonia’s depositions have admissions of criminal behavior and lies, and Livingway Family Church believes since they didn’t know the Galvan’s when the events took place, it’s none of their business… and we should let it go. The church is supposed to be a place of protection. Also remember- they filed an affidavit in support of the Galvan’s, and now want to act like they’ve had no part in this. They are hiding the truth, and trying to brush it under a rug.

This is the reason sexual predators are able to get away with their actions. Churches like Livingway are clearly only concerned with one thing… and it’s not protecting their young women.

Transcripts from Richard Galvans deposition below in which he acknowledges Pastor Bill Moore took his phone call, as well as called him back after Blaine attempted to reach him regarding Richard’s sexual assault, and criminal behavior. Yet, The Moore’s tried to act like they didn’t really know the Galvans. Oddly enough, Richard admits he called and told Bill Moore that Blaine threatened his children (not true). Richard later admitted in his deposition that was a lie. So- both pastors Bill and Anne Moore know the truth, they just refuse to acknowledge it.

Why would Bill Moore speak to an admitted sexual predator, but not the person speaking the truth regarding the allegations in an attempt to warn him that there was a sexual deviant in his church? Shouldn’t a pastor be concerned enough about the young women in his congregation to at least pick up the phone and call someone trying to speak about something like this? Instead, he has still to this day refused to speak to the Crews’s.

I want this to be clear. I have no ill feelings towards any of Richard or Sonia Galvans children, nor is it their fault that their father is a predator, and their mother is a lying enabler. They are innocent parties. However, Livingway Family Church hired their daughter on staff, and decided it would be a good idea to use her for a video regarding fasting. It wouldn’t normally be an issue, but the fact that there is ANY attempt by this “church” to allow the words “growing up my parents (Richard and Sonia Galvan) did this with us” to be promoted publicly in some way to show them in a good light is abhorrent.

Pastors Bill and Anne Moore have spent years completely silent regarding the truth, and in fact have never once publicly apologized for their lack of concern regarding a predator in their church. Now, it’s clear to say who’s side they are on, and it isn’t the side of truth.

The fact that they would allow a statement to be made by the daughter of a known predator (who the court had already deemed a matter of public concern) and her mother (who was caught in multiple counts of perjury in her deposition) is an attempt to suppress the truth and involvement surrounding the factual allegations made regarding the assault and subsequent lawsuit filed by the Galvans against Richards victim. This is not a real church.

Livingway Family Church posted the above video to their instagram page featuring Richard and Sonia Galvan’s daughter Elliana. Even after the courts determined Richard’s actions were a matter of public concern, they have yet to ever speak to The Crews’s, yet they will allow the daughter of a rapist to praise her parents for being Godly.

See below for the Affidavit of Melissa Barrera-Sosa, Executive Assistant for Livingway Family Church, as well as screenshots from the FCA showing they blocked Blaine from being able to send messages.

Clearly, Blaine was attempting to notify the pastors of Livingway Bill and Anne Moore. He became upset when they refused to speak about the matters. Why are Bill and Anne Moore, along with Melissa-Barerra Sosa attempting to assist a sexual predator?

Bill Moore posted a video to his instagram account about “cleaning your house”. He made comments about how we need to deal with all the things hidden, and make room for God. Well, immediately after posting this comment Blaine was blocked and the comment was deleted. This is the Moore’s M.O. They will tell you to clean your closet out, but block, and delete anyone who is exposing theirs.

What do you expect though when the pastors of a church (after having the knowledge of the events) block the truth tellers, and follow the predators.

The Galvan’s daughter speaking to students at Living Way Family Church in 2018 (around the time they were notified that Richard Galvan was a sexual predator). This was the very reason the church was called and expected to notify their church of a sexual predator in their midst. They failed to do so.

Livingway Church keeps deleting comments and anything related to Richard and Sonia Galvan. Bill and Anne Moore have refused to acknowledge and address the fact that they have had a sexual predator in their church. Even after Richard has admitted it they still refuse to address it, and are only concerned with people not knowing about it. Richard and Sonia Galvan’s daughter is a member of the youth group there.

Showing Livingway Church in Brownsville keeps deleting comments to hide the truth. A church trying to protect a sexual predator. Is this what you would want from your pastors as parents of young women? Oddly enough Melissa-Barrera Sosa is the one singing in the picture.

Shows the “message tab” removed, due to South Texas FCA blocking the ability to send messages from Blaine’s account.

Showing the “send message” tab when logged into a different account. Showing they blocked messages coming from Blaine.

Do parents have the right to know about Richard Galvan and Sonia Galvan?

Richard Galvan and Sonia Galvan claim in their depositions that they never held any type of leadership roles over youth or young people. There are sworn affidavits from pastors, board members of the church, and former church members that stated what the Galvan’s claim was and is a lie. Secondly, there are numerous news articles where Richard Galvan and Sonia Galvan were interviewed as Youth Pastors.

Should Richard or Sonia Galvan be able to have a leadership role in any capacity when it comes to youth or young people, especially young women? Do parents deserve to know the truth of Richard Galvan’s sexual past, as well as he and Sonia Galvan’s countless lies? Richard, along with being on the board for the FCA of South Texas, also participated in the HCISD school system as an “ambassador”. This is clearly a role of leadership and authority. I assume that parents of students want assurance that when they send their child to school they are around upstanding adults and teachers, and not subject to be around men like Richard Galvan, who’s past and actions speak for itself. The same can be said of Sonia Galvan, who has not only lied about her husband’s sexual assault, but has continued to enable the behavior by telling different stories throughout written and oral discovery.

Richard Galvan speaking at an FCA (Fellowship of Christian Athletes) event.

Richard Galvan as an “ambassador” at a local elementary school.

Richard Galvan speaking and listening to elementary aged children at a school

Does this look like a position of authority or leadership?

Richard Galvan “Ambassador of Learning”.

Richard Galvan with staff of elementary school.

Richard Galvan should have never been let to be around students in the community. He was and continues to be a danger to young women, as the 13th Court of Appeals in Texas as stated it remains a matter of public concern.

Richard Galvan was previously arrested for prostitution.

In his deposition on page 212, Richard Galvan was asked if he had ever been arrested in the past for prostitution. He answered “no”. He was then shown court documents, and an affidavit for Warrant and Arrest by The Crews’s attorney from the District Attorney’s office in Travis County, Texas. After looking at the documents, Richard Galvan once again denied having knowledge of these court or arrest records. His attorney then asked to take a short break to discuss with her client Richard Galvan. After the break, Richard Galvan came back and changed his story, admitted to remembering the events as well as seeing the documents, and mentioned the case had been dismissed. It is amazing what a short break can do to ones memory.

Richard Galvan was also asked whether or not the officer E. Leach (who according to the records was propositioned for oral sex) was a man or a woman. Richard Galvan’s answer was “I don’t recall”. The records indicate that Richard Galvan agreed to engage in sexual conduct for a fee. The affidavit states “Richard Galvan offered and agreed to contact between the mouth of the said Richard Galvan and the genitals of E. Leach for a fee”. It would seem that per the documents, Richard Galvan agreed to perform oral sex on the officer for $15 (Fifteen Dollars). It would also seem that Richard Galvan was the prostitute in this arrest, as he was the one offering and agreeing to perform oral sex on an undercover police officer.

According to the records the charges for prostitution were in fact dismissed, due to the officer/informant being “reassigned and unavailable” for trial. It seems to be another instance of sexual misconduct where Richard Galvan was able to avoid prosecution. Clearly, Richard Galvan has had a long record of sexual deviancies and issues, as well as lying. The documents below are public record directly from the Travis County Courthouse.

Affidavit from Claude Ricks alleging Richard Galvan agreed to contact between the mouth of said Richard Galvan, and the genitals of E. Leach for a fee.

Affidavit from Patricia Barrera alleging Richard Galvan agreed to contact between the mouth of said Richard Galvan, and the genitals of E. Leach for a fee.

Affidavit for warrant of arrest and detention.

Showing the case was dismissed due to the officer being reassigned and unavailable for trial.

What Constitutes Sexual Assault in Texas?

Sexual Assault in the church is rampant. Predators like Richard Galvan are attracted to positions in the church due to the easy access to young people, as well as the “forgiving” nature of most religious people. There is a great article written by a former FBI agent Joe Navarro regarding this very thing.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/spycatcher/201404/why-predators-are-attracted-careers-in-the-clergy?fbclid=IwAR1k0xhtnZR3rpPcqu7vAaaaaHSUQOYoP3sCR19HziYY9UyuCiD1xrvP-o8

Texas Penal Code Sec. 22.011

Sexual Assault

There was no dispute or objection from Richard Galvan or Sonia Galvan that they were ministers at their church youth group. Therefore the complained of communication was “a communication made in connection with a matter of public concern,” and thus, an exercise of Blaine Crews’ right of free speech.

Here, Blaine communicated that: Richard had sex with Hannah when she was seventeen years old and prior to her senior year of high school; Richard was her youth minister and pastor; Richard Galvan sexually seduced Hannah under the pretense of spiritual healing; Richard offered Hannah help to heal spiritually and emotionally after her break up with her high school boyfriend; and Richard told Hannah she was entrusting him to help her heal by giving him her virginity. Under the Texas Penal Code, a sexual assault occurs if “the actor is a clergyman who causes the other person to submit or participate by exploiting the other person’s emotional dependency on the clergyman in the clergyman’s professional character as spiritual adviser.” TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.011(b)(10) (defining sexual assault by a clergyman)

A sexual assault under Subsection (a)(1) is without the consent of the other person if:

(1)

the actor compels the other person to submit or participate by the use of physical force, violence, or coercion;

(2)

the actor compels the other person to submit or participate by threatening to use force or violence against the other person or to cause harm to the other person, and the other person believes that the actor has the present ability to execute the threat;

(3)

the other person has not consented and the actor knows the other person is unconscious or physically unable to resist;

(4)

the actor knows that as a result of mental disease or defect the other person is at the time of the sexual assault incapable either of appraising the nature of the act or of resisting it;

(5)

the other person has not consented and the actor knows the other person is unaware that the sexual assault is occurring;

(6)

the actor has intentionally impaired the other persons power to appraise or control the other persons conduct by administering any substance without the other persons knowledge;

(7)

the actor compels the other person to submit or participate by threatening to use force or violence against any person, and the other person believes that the actor has the ability to execute the threat;

(8)

the actor is a public servant who coerces the other person to submit or participate;

(9)

the actor is a mental health services provider or a health care services provider who causes the other person, who is a patient or former patient of the actor, to submit or participate by exploiting the other persons emotional dependency on the actor;

(10)

the actor is a clergyman who causes the other person to submit or participate by exploiting the other persons emotional dependency on the clergyman in the clergymans professional character as spiritual adviser;

(11)

the actor is an employee of a facility where the other person is a resident, unless the employee and resident are formally or informally married to each other under Chapter 2 (Child in Relation to the Family), Family Code; or

(12)

the actor is a health care services provider who, in the course of performing an assisted reproduction procedure on the other person, uses human reproductive material from a donor knowing that the other person has not expressly consented to the use of material from that donor.