Kangas's victims, and the 'suppressed' medical evidence
Until 12 May, it had never been clear why the two 13-year old girls reported the sex to the schoolnurse and inevitably involved
the police. Kangas said it was because they were jealous that he had become engaged (on 5 March 2013). In fact, on reading through the Facebook messages
on 12 May, it appeared that each girl was distressed with his lying and how he had used them. In sum, they reacted against his arrogant indifference (One of
the two girls makes specific reference to Kangas's repeated lying to her, something to which an ex-girlfriend also refers).
Apart from him referring to a positive test result for chlamydia when messaging his attorney, and lambasting a woman for
infecting him with it, he even told me (and no doubt, many others) that the medical document he submitted confirmed that he had never had this infection but the document was 'suppressed' (see his quote in Section 3), and he had no idea why this was. In fact, as stated earlier, I saw a message in which his attorney tells him that the medical document would not be submitted and there is no indication of Kangas making an objection to this (Please see 'Looking at Kangas's 'suppressed' evidence (etc.)' for more information about the supposed medical 'evidence').
In the upshot, he constantly presents a picture of people being against him and that his many supposed misfortunes arise from this, and he has no one 'supporting' him, when all that has happened to him is the direct result of his arrogance, continuing dishonesty and criminal risk-taking behaviour. It should not be overlooked that because Kangas did not plead guilty (as he obviously should have done), the two girls were forced to appear in court on two occasions and talk about the experience, including intimate details, in front of strangers. The court transcript records that one girl broke down in tears after giving her testimony. It is disturbing that Kangas saw fit to behave in such a way that the two girls were subjected to this experience. Indeed, the prosecuting attorney made
reference to this when he addressed the jury:
"One thing that I would ask you to consider when you deliberate. Keep in mind the bravery and courage
it took [for] the girls to testify. They're with one individual that did not display bravery and courage. That's the
defendant, Mr. Kangas. The girls were brave. He was a coward".
One complaint that Kangas made to me was that either girl could have purchased an inexpensive pregnancy-testing kit from numerous high street shops rather than approaching the school nurse, who rightly contacted the police. In other words, he believed the girls should have selected a solution that did not cause him any problems. In fact, the Facebook messaging includes one of the girls telling Kangas that she was seeing the schoolnurse the next day regarding a possible pregnancy, but instead of proposing she obtains a kit from a shop, he does not suggest anything at all but simply responds with a nonchalant "oh damn" (Facebook messaging with K., 4 March 2013). This was an example of Kangas not dealing with a serious problem he had created,
(Trial 2, 19 June 2014. Part 2 of 2, p18)
No less disturbing is how Kangas reacted on 8 February 2013, when one of the girls said she thought she might be pregnant and Kangas replies to her: "if u was the mother of my child. id b the happiest daddy ever". She was 13.
I have to admit that from March/April 2017, a number of issues arose that prompted me to wonder if there were aspects of Kangas's personality that did not coincide with the image he had presented to me, and I began to notice the difference between what Kangas said and what Kangas did. The revelation of the old Facebook messages demonstrated that my increasing concern was justified.