Keegan William Kangas

My Mistake In Believing
Keegan William Kangas

('Kvothe Kangas')
Tier III sex offender: lifetime registration 2071162 (released from prison: December 2018)


    "Prosecution: 'We are here in this courtroom this morning because of Keegan Kangas. An adult man, a sexual predator who targeted two 13 year oId girls. We are here this morning because Keegan Kangas, an adult man disregarded adult responsibilities for his own selfish purposes. We are here this morning because Keegan Kangas, an adult man, thought absolutely nothing about [the girls] H. and K. Nothing about their health. Nothing about their lives. Nothing about their futures. He thought about himself. How do we know this? Because of the evidence'."
From transcript of trial I of Keegan W. Kangas, Sault St. Marie. April 24, 2014. Vol 2/2 (pp.3,4)
   "Judge James P. Lambros: 'The conduct that you displayed is very disturbing. Not only was it troubling that you were targeting these [13-year old] girls for sexual activity. These are children themselves Mr. Kangas...And you took advantage of that situation and exploited them for sexual purposes. And when the police came to you, you tried to get out of it by giving them false identities...
   It's very troubling Mr. Kangas - the behavior you displayed and the targeting of these young children. And not only target them but to have sexual intercourse with them and then encourage them to get pregnant.
   The behavior you displayed is vile. These were children'."
From transcript of sentencing of Keegan W. Kangas, Sault St. Marie. July 29, 2014 (pp.7,8,9)

    (a) In the Summer of 2016, I responded to a request for penpals, placed by an inmate, Keegan William Kangas (born October 13, 1992), who was incarcerated in a Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) prison facility: I enjoy writing and was aware that writing to inmates can reduce recidivism. When I began communicating, using the prison email facility, I was unaware of the reason for his incarceration but almost immediately, he told me that he had been wrongly convicted in June 2014 of two CSC3 charges, i.e., sexually abusing two children (whose names are abbreviated to 'K.' and 'H.' herein to avoid public identification.)
    As he was able to convince me that he was innocent and a victim of an injustice, and also claimed to be suffering various hardships (e.g., defending himself against predators, having no visits, receiving few letters and being in poor health with inadequate medical care), I felt sorry for him and wanted to do all that I could to help him: I therefore began to send him money on a regular basis and purchase books for him. In view of what he told me, I became convinced that he was an innocent, sincere and hard-working man entrapped, through no fault of his own, in a nightmare world of a terrible injustice, and I believed what he told me about his case (although it was of little consolation, I later discovered that other people had also been deceived in much the same way and had supported him by sending him money/books, etc. - until they no longer believed his claims.)
    Until May 2017, I campaigned for his freedom (the original purpose of this webspace that I bought), and spent many hundreds of hours on this (e.g., emailing and telephoning MI attorneys to find one who would take on his case pro-bono), and a lot of my own money, e.g., I paid $140 to purchase his trial transcripts, and for his trans-Atlantic telephone calls, and financed a costly paralegal course to help him as he said that he would seek exoneration once released (I was able to cancel the course when I discovered the truth but I still lost several hundred dollars: Kangas was fully aware that I am severely disabled, in very poor health and only in receipt of a pension.)
    In the initial stages of communication, I gained the impression that he was a sensible and an intelligent individual; and while I only had his version of those events that led to his incarceration, I saw no reason to doubt what he said about being innocent of the crimes for which he had been convicted: there were no warning signs of what would follow.
    I obviously view child abuse as totally abhorrent, and particularly so, as I was sexually abused as a young child when my mother was seriously ill and I was placed in a children's home for nearly a year. Nonetheless, because of this, I also believe that no one should be accused of such a heinous offence if they are innocent, and Kangas succeeded in convincing me (as he did with others) of his innocence, and my support for him was wholly predicated on the belief that he was telling me the truth about his convictions. As far as I am concerned, there is a 'special place' in hell reserved for child abusers. In view of what I have encountered, I am singularly unimpressed with how the State of Michigan deals with those who commit such terrible crimes, and I am sure that I am not alone in having this opinion.

    (b) In April 2017, I began to have doubts about some of Kangas's claims, and the whole illusion that he had created was terminated abruptly on May 12, 2017 when I came into contact with C., a Michigan resident, who had also once believed his claim of innocence, but stopped doing so after seeing his old Facebook account* (to which he had given her access, apparently thinking she would not care about the evidence, or not see it as most was archived, which meant it was not easily located). This person (who had known him from his childhood and sent him money when he was first imprisoned), allowed me full access to his old Facebook account, and to my dismay, as I carefully studied it on May 12 and 13, I found a considerable amount of incriminating data.
    The last occasion I spoke with Kangas, was on May 12, 2017 when I advised him of what was happening: not surprisingly, he sounded alarmed. He made several subsequent attempts to speak with me, through the GTL prison 'phone system, on May 14 and 16, but I did not accept any of these calls. His last email to me, received on May 15,** included his recognition that I no longer believed his claim to be innocent and he said that he would 'prove' his innocence to me, but this has never been forthcoming. As I did not hear anything further, I wrote to him on June 22, 2017 detailing what I had found in his Facebook account, but I did not receive any apology or plausible explanation: in fact, to this date the only 'explanation' I have received is his half-baked assertion that all the incriminating Facebook messages were 'fake' and written by the State of Michigan's prosecutor's office (yes, he was serious!): all this displayed was his ignorance about internet activity and I have dealt with this matter, in full, in 'Kangas's smokescreen'.
    All I did receive was his ludicrous demand dated June 28, 2017, to remove this website (which is factual and fair comment, being based on nearly a year of knowing this individual, having frequent communications with him, and viewing his Facebook account in its entirety). I have detailed all the relevant chronology here (which can be substantiated) as Kangas will no doubt offer his own, dishonest variation of events...
    On perusing his Facebook account, I found messaging that revealed he knew both children very well (contradicting what he had told me), and it also confirmed the sexual abuse of both of them* (there were also references to him pursuing other under-aged girls and other serious criminality.*) Confirming what was stated in the trial, one Facebook message recorded him telling K. one of the children, that if he made her pregnant, he would be the "happiest daddy ever"* (February 8, 2013) - she was only 13 years old. In a message to H., the other child, he asks her to spend the night with him (Message to H, August 12, 2012):* this was only a short time after her 13th birthday. He later told her that she was "good in bed" (Message to H, February 5, 2013).* I also found a message in which he harangued K., because she had told someone about the sex and he warned her, almost prophetically, her action would put him in prison* (Message to K, February 11, 2013).
    As the prosecutor told the jury,

"Adult men, 20 years old, [are] trusted to vote, to go to work, to be responsible, to have and raise families, to be a dad, to be a husband. Adults take on responsibility. They don't go around and wait till somebody's 13 year old daughter is home alone and sneak into the house when mom's gone...
When you have somebody else's child and you're in charge of that child, you're expected to act like an adult. You don't expect someone that's old enough to be responsible, is going to take advantage of...a 13 year old girl and somehow get her to have sex...
The only evidence in this case is that there was sexual penetration with K. and a separate count sexual penetration of H. [and] that the person that did it is the defendant...[and] they were 13 years old, they were children: he's an adult man: he's responsible for his conduct..."
(Transcript of Trial I, April 24, 2014. Vol 2/2, pp.8,11,12)
    Kangas's own Facebook account supplies an image of his deviousness, i.e., in messaging with one of his victims, he refers to changing his appearance to appear younger, so the girl's mother will believe he is a 15-year-old boy rather than a 20 year-old adult male (Message to H, December 14, 2012).* Not content with committing sexual abuse of the two children, the Facebook account shows that he also then tried to play one girl off against the other.*
    I found the behaviour described to be grotesque, and no less grotesque was the comment made by one of the children that, after she reported the abuse to the police, Kangas had 'sent people after' her,* apparently to intimidate her into silence (Message from K., May 25, 2013). I assume he did the same with the other child who testified against him as there would be no point intimidating only one of the two witnesses.
    Additionally, in a message in Kangas's Facebook account, sent on January 10, 2013, he tells an associate that he was pursuing a girl (not one of the two girls who testified in his trial) and referring to having "bedroom time" with her: he also comments that she was under-age and because of this, they were keeping the relationship a secret.* I also found earlier Facebook messaging, written on August 15, 2009 (when Kangas was nearly 17), and this was from an anxious mother in which she complained about how he was pursuing her daughter. Even in this instance, the girl was only 13 years old*...
    In (a) above, I comment that I initially considered Kangas to be sensible and intelligent: however, in view of what I found in his Facebook account and from other sources, I came to believe that his behaviour (before and after conviction) and the frequent lying (examples below) demonstrated that while intelligent, he was immature: I found his Facebook messaging, and that of many of those who wrote to him, was akin to the behaviour of 12-year olds.
    *  The genuineness of the messages can be demonstrated by the accompanying IP addresses.
    ** The date I give for a prison email from Kangas is the date of receipt, which is not necessarily the date it was sent.

(i) I found no indication of any change in his attitude. Beginning some ten years ago when (as stated above) on August 15, 2009 (Kangas was nearly 17), a mother wrote to him, complaining about his pursuit of her 13-year old daughter. Then, in 2012, when aged 20, his Facebook records how he asked J., a friend, whether he was getting any 'bitches' (October 19, 2012). Then, in 2013 (the year when Kangas became 21 years old), the Facebook accounts records him telling B. (also convicted for a sexual offence against an underage girl), they should 'hit up' some 'bitches' (February 7, 2013). This details Kangas then saying he wanted someone who hadn't been 'hit' for a while, and 'tight n young', and adds the 'bitch betta shave' (February 8, 2013).
And in the case of the years following, i.e., his Facebook messages and emails written by him while in prison, I saw no evidence that his attitude towards girls/young women had changed.
(ii) The points made by the Prosecutor during Kangas's trial coincided with my findings about Kangas:
"[He] took advantage of two 13 year olds...took advantage of them for his purposes, selfishly, not thinking about what this would do to them...
Mr Kangas didn't take any steps. Didn't use a condom. Didn't try to prevent disease or pregnancy. This is a 13 year old girl...[She] says how upset he was [when] she wasn't going to be the mother of his first child. Meanwhile, he's having sex with another [13-year old] girl..."
(Transcript of Trial 1, April 23, 2014. Vol.1/2, p78, 2/2, p13)

    (c) The messaging in Kangas's old Facebook account not only referred to the sexual abuse, but the appalling treatment of the two children. In fact, I had already encountered his attitude towards the girls, e.g., by his complaint, "why did this girl go to the school nurse and not just steal a pregnancy test, or buy one for christsakes?" (Email to me, January 31, 2017). In other words, he believed the girls should have selected a solution that did not cause him problems (when both girls approached the school nurse about a possible pregnancy (and subsequently, chlamydia), the nurse rightly informed the police). This was an instance of Kangas 'burying his head in the sand', an act that he would repeat on other occasions. The Facebook messaging includes one of his victims actually telling Kangas that she thought she might be pregnant and was seeing the school nurse the next day, but instead of offering comfort or support to the troubled girl, he does not suggest anything but simply responds with a nonchalant "oh damn" (Messaging with K, March 4, 2013).
    As the prosecutor noted,
"This is a 13 year old girl. He didn't say I'd like to raise a child with you. I'd like to be a dad. I'd like to be a parent. I'd like to provide for you. I'd like to help you. I'd like to support you as a mom. He didn't even ask her ahead of time if she wanted to be a mom."
(Transcript of Trial I, April 24, 2014. Vol 2/2, p.13)
    Kangas chose to plead not guilty so there had to be a trial and both children had to intimately describe the crimes to a courtroom of strangers, resulting in one child being reduced to tears. No wonder the prosecution told the jury:
"Keep in mind the bravery and courage it took 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."
(Transcript of Trial 2, June 19, 2014. Vol 2/2, p.18)
    It is noticeable that while in prison Kangas had much to say on the matter, he chose not to personally give his testimony or any evidence during the trials: indeed, in America, a defendant has the right not to testify, but in view of the seriousness of the allegations and the weight of evidence, some would find it extraordinary that he chose to remain silent if he were innocent. As noted in Barbara Babcock's article Introduction: Taking the Stand, "It is almost impossible to see the defendant as a deserving person unless he testifies..." (p.5). Therefore, I presume his decision not to give evidence was because he knew that he would be unable to stand up to the questioning of the prosecution. The need for him to give testimony was even more apparent in view of the prosecution calling seven witnesses, but there was not even one for his defence...
    Kangas repeatedly told me that four prosecution witnesses had all lied when they said he was found by Police at his workplace in Sault Ste. Marie, late at night on February 9, 2013, under some blankets with a 13-year old girl. However, on reading his Facebook account, I found messages, by him and others, confirming that the witnesses were telling the truth. I even found messaging between him and his attorney, and other persons, when he told them about this visit by the Police (Please see article 'The 911 calls' for more information.) Therefore, on reading his Facebook account, I was suddenly confronted with the stark reality that he had repeatedly lied to me - about almost everything regarding his case - and I had wasted so much of my time, energy and resources on this matter. He continued to claim he was innocent (by offering 'red herrings' and leapfrogging pseudo-arguments), but could not provide a believable solution for the presence of evidence (and he continued to blame others for his predicament and make outlandish allegations).
    As I mention above, I was not the only person who was successfully deceived by this individual: as C., another victim, said to me (May 13, 2017):
"He suckered me in and I allowed him to do so. My energy, time and money could have been better spent on my children but he fed me his sap lines that he was innocent. It's almost sickening how much he has people convinced of his innocence.
He is a smooth talker...and knows how to act and what to say. Meanwhile, he's been guilty all along and doesn't feel an oz of remorse and blames these girls...He preys on people with big hearts. I was so saddened when I saw the way you were so adamant in sticking up for him and I knew he had you sucked in. Typically I wouldn't care and I would let that type of thing go. But I could tell you had literally sunk your time and money into a person who has lied to you and just used you the entire time."

    (d) I originally felt sorry for him as he said it was his poverty that caused his conviction, i.e., he was unable to hire his own attorney: however, on May 13, 2017, I saw an email in which he said (amongst other things) that he had spent twenty thousand dollars on drugs, and another email in which he said he had paid $1600 on jewellery (this was during the time leading up to his arrest and trial). And in his Facebook messaging, he had referred to buying clothing and a bill of "over 2 grand". The money spent would have been more than sufficient to retain his own attorney. Furthermore, with regard to the defence attorney provided, in one Facebook message (March 18, 2014), he praised her, saying she was "one of the best trial lawyers", so money, or a lack of it, was not a contributory factor of him being convicted.
    I also realized that despite all his complaints about his life before and during incarceration, he was raised in a beautiful part of the US and had positive opportunities that many people do not have. In fact, the area in which he was born and raised has been described as 'a piece of heaven on earth', a very far cry from the poor, despairing inner-city slums where many people, myself included, were born and raised (but do not end up in prison). However, despite what was available to him, he chose to pursue a route that took him to prison.
    I also became aware of two previous incidents in his life that resulted in police action. One, when he was a boy and he set fire to a neighbouring property, and then, when 17 years old, he was convicted for a drug offence. This means that with the two CSC3 charges, by the time he was 20, he had been involved in four different criminal acts: furthermore, while in prison, before the June 2014 trial that convicted him of the CSC3 charges, he was also charged with theft from another inmate (and the guilty verdict for this was confirmed by an appeal hearing). Therefore, by June 2014, he had been involved in five criminal acts (and on October 6, 2016 he admitted to me that he was on 'sanctions' as another inmate's property was found in his possession). Additionally, his Facebook account detailed serious criminal activities in addition to the sexual abuse of children.
    Apart from messages in his Facebook account that revealed the appalling treatment of girls/young women, there were messages from people who wrote and condemned him for his pursuit of under-aged girls: for example, two in January 2013, when one said she would inform the police, and the other wrote and accused him of being a paedophile. The reply to this was a nonchalant and dismissive "LOL" (this and "LMAO" appear in replies to criticisms sent to him about his behaviour with children). He usually claimed the CSC3 charges for which he was convicted referred to 'consensual sex'. This is absurd as, obviously, no child can consent to sex, and in fact, 'CSC' actually stands for 'Criminal Sexual Conduct'.

    (e) In addition to the numerous lies he told me and other people who wrote to him while in prison, his Facebook account records that one of the victims referred to his frequent lying, and his own ex-fiancée told me about this too, as did his family: even the trial Judge (see box at top of this page) mentioned his lying. In addition to his deception while on trial (and the fact he not only abused the two children but then also accused them of lying), his Facebook account included various claims that sometimes border on the fantastic.
    For example, he told various people that he had attended high school and graduated: however, this is not so (he did not gain a GED until he was in prison, and on June 6, 2009, he sent a Facebook message saying (at age 16) he had dropped out of school because he considered himself a "hippy".) He also said that he had been adopted but his family confirm this too is untrue. In respect of his financial status, he claimed in various Facebook messages that: (i)he earned $2000 a week and (ii)intended buying a $30,000 property; (iii)he was a part-owner of an auto business which he expected to generate $100,000 in the next 4 months (2013), and (iv)he would be purchasing it in its entirety; (v)he had owned his own large two-storied house, and (vi)he had also saved "over 10 grand". Furthermore, he said in a number of Facebook messages during 2013 that: (vii)a prestigious music college had accepted his application to enrol (claiming he achieved this by just submitting some videos of himself), and (viii)it had awarded him a $20,000 scholarship.
    And yet, in complete contrast to these assertions, he was classed as indigent when attending court in the first half of 2014. With regard to the college that he claimed had accepted him, its website says it only accepts applicants (1)with an "excellent academic and professional background" - but he had neither; (2)who supply an academic transcript or GED - but again, he had neither, and he did not obtain a GED until 2015 when he was in prison; (3)after they have a successful personal interview and/or audition there - but I found no record of him ever visiting the college or even making the journey there (it is located four States away from MI): there can be no doubt that he would have mentioned these events in his Facebook messaging if they had ever occurred.
    As far as I am concerned, this was nothing more than wishful thinking and not only a deception of other people, but a mode of self-deception also: furthermore, he not only lied to me about his conviction, but other matters too, e.g., he told me that he had cancer as a child, a claim that his family say is false. Consequently, in view of the Facebook content and what I was told by his family and past acquaintances, I came to the conclusion that what he told me, and indeed others, was sheer fantasy, and to me, it was both ridiculous and a waste of time for anyone to write to someone who behaves in this manner. I suspect he does it to compensate for the fact he has achieved so little with his life.
   It should be remembered that for some five years Kangas was fed, clothed and housed at the expense of the taxpayer. He also received subsidised medical care (12% of MDOC's annual $2 billion budget is spent on inmate medical care), and use of a well-stocked library and a gym, facilities of which many law-abiding MI residents can only dream. Furthermore, it is reported that an MI inmate, categorised as Level I or II (as he was in the last three years of incarceration), costs between $29,529 and $33,894 per year - paid by the State/taxpayer.

    (f) In respect of his case, he told me all the prosecution witnesses had lied, but his Facebook account showed otherwise. After studying the court transcripts and reading all his emails on the matter, as well as speaking with him many times (I paid for all these (GTL) trans-Atlantic telephone calls from prison), I consider what he offers are diversions and smokescreens to try and obscure the evidence. On more than one occasion he likened both girls who gave evidence against him to the 17th century Salem accusers, and yet, in reality, the false allegations were not made by his victims, but by him.
    In an email received on February 13, 2017, he told me that on release he would seek exoneration (and if necessary, even involve the US president!), but I was mystified about why he would wait until release as he could begin this process while in prison if he really believed he could obtain this (the MI prisons have law libraries and knowledgeable inmates will assist.) However, after May 2017, I considered exoneration is impossible as the evidence shows he is guilty, there is no new evidence to support his claim, the victims' testimony was convincing and his Facebook confirmed what they said; and this is apart from the fact that all the appeals he has lodged so far have been rejected. Additionally, in July 2018 a penpal advised me that Kangas had, in 2016, admitted his crimes to him: I cannot verify the veracity of this statement, but if it is true (and I believe it is), this means the company that provides the prison emailing service will have a copy of any admission by Kangas (as it retains a copy of all emails): indeed, it will have a copy of all the emails sent by Kangas, while he was incarcerated, to which I have referred.
    In addition to him falsifying data, he asserted that medical evidence was 'suppressed' and the jury was 'threatened' to produce a guilty verdict: however, a full hearing was held on July 15, 2014 about the jury's deliberations and verdict, and the judge dismissed the complaint, giving a detailed and coherent explanation for this (in this respect, please see 'The suppressed evidence'). Apart from Kangas not substantiating the allegations he makes (and other claims he frequently advances), there is the question of why he never raised any of them in the post-trial hearings, even when he was given the direct opportunity (on more than one occasion) by the court to do so. On investigating them after I had sight of his Facebook account, I found they lacked credibility.
    Moreover, after I spent a lot of money and my own time, over many months, in contacting hundreds of MI attorneys, I found some who were willing to assist him, but, to my bewilderment, on each occasion he did not follow their advice or even contact them (after I discovered the truth, I wrote to them to apologize for wasting their time and the replies I received can be viewed here.) Information regarding his claims about supposed 'suppressed' evidence will be found here (that also details his attempt to try and minimize the seriousness of the crimes by lying about the age of both himself and his victims: this was futile as these details are readily available on the internet.)
    Another example of Kangas's time-wasting was when he stated in an email I received February 13, 2017, that he believed he was running out of time to lodge a 6.500 appeal. I was surprised at this as he had already advised me in a message received on September 22, 2016, that 'in the next few months', he intended lodging this appeal. However, in the email received on February 13, 2017, Kangas stated "Apparently there is a timeline for the habeas corpus and 6.500 appeal...[it] must be done within one calender year from the state decision. The state decision was either march or april or may. I don't remember which and can't find my copy of the decision. If it is not filed it is considered 'untimely'. This seriously damages most prisoners."
    I was bewildered that, after nearly five months, he had still not lodged the appeal, and being worried about this, I attempted to help him by ascertaining the date of the Supreme Court's decision. After spending hours making numerous, costly, trans-Atlantic telephone calls and speaking to several staff members in different MI courts, and searching the internet, I determined it was on May 24, 2016 and I advised Kangas of this - and the fact that he had over three months to prepare his 6.500 appeal. However, a while later, when I asked him about the progress he was making, he said that he had not done anything as it was 'too complicated' (which he must have already known when he sent the February 13, 2017 email regarding the time issue, and furthermore, this was despite me also offering to obtain and send him an extensive guide about preparing the motion.) So, once again, Kangas wasted my time, and as noted, I was not the only one.
    Yet another example is how the State Appellate Defender Office (SADO) showed interest in his case after many requests by myself. SADO usually only accepts cases referred to it by a judge, so the possibility that it might assist Kangas with his 6.500 appeal was very welcome news. I told him about this but to my surprise he said that he wanted to deal with the motion himself after his release: he also advised me that he wanted to lodge the motion and manage his own defence. So, once again, my time, and the achievement in getting SADO interested, were wasted.
    But this instance not only demonstrated Kangas's time-wasting but his inconsistency too as he had already said (see above) that he did not know how to process the 6.500 appeal. In addition to this, he surely lacks the ability to defend himself in a trial, and (I now realize) there is too much evidence against him. Furthermore, he had more than enough time and opportunities (e.g., the prison law library), during five years of incarceration, when he could have prepared his case to pursue it through the MI court system - and yet I saw no evidence whatsoever of this happening. Therefore, I gained the impression that while Kangas is willing to waste people's time and money on his case, it seems that he does not wish to pursue the matter himself, which makes me believe that he knows there is no possibility of success. Indeed, what would he possibly say in an appeal? (As stated, he has already lodged appeals without any success.) And, as noted below, I understand that an inmate has to admit guilt before parole is granted: if this is so, he will have admitted guilt to secure his December 2018 parole, so he can hardly now retract this.

    (g) As other people who were convinced of his supposed innocence and supported him, but came to realize they could not believe his claims, I too realized that I could not believe what he had told me about his case (or indeed much else) in his emails, and I had to accept the jury's verdict of 'guilty' was correct. Consequently, in view of this and the examples in (e) above, I realized there was no sense in continuing to write to someone who behaves like this. Obviously, if he had possessed an iota of honesty or integrity, he would have apologized for his many deceptions and repeated lying: sadly, that was too much to hope for. I came to the personal conclusion that he does not see people as human beings but rather, opportunities to be exploited.
    After I wrote to him in June 2017, advising him of what I had found, and despite the level of support I had given him for nearly a year, all I received from him was a letter of threats and demands that I delete this website: however, to this date he has not offered any believable explanation for what I (and others) found. A prisoners' welfare group forwarded this letter to me, on his behalf, and apart from this, I heard absolutely nothing further. To me this indicated that he was too much of a coward to make any direct contact (in July 2018, someone contacted me, apparently 'on his behalf', complaining about this website. I found Kangas has a tendency to get other people to intervene on his behalf rather than dealing with the problem(s) himself.)
    I appreciate his chagrin with this website, but this is simply the result of his 'past catching up with him'; and in view of his many lies and the appalling manner in which he has treated people, it was inevitable. He appears unable, or unwilling to grasp that people have the right to warn others about what they know about him, the heinous crimes for which he was convicted and his atrocious behaviour since then, so they do not have a similar experience.
    Following his incarceration (when, ironically, he has depicted himself as the target or victim of sexual pursuit), he slandered various people with serious accusations that portrayed him as a victim when they did not do as he wanted, his lies were discovered and/or they exposed him, and he did this in respect of his ex-girlfriend, myself and other penpals. For example, when his girlfriend, who supported him before and during his trial, did not do as he wished, he accused her in two emails of transmitting an STD to him, which he later admitted to me was a lie (details here).
    Another example was his email to me, received March 30, 2017: after referring to not receiving financial help for legal help (to which he was obviously not entitled in view of his guilt), he said "its obvious that they are the ones best suited to help but just don't care enough to, especially... professors D. and N. They are probably driving range rovers and living in 25,000 sq ft houses. never married no kids both gay". So, males, writing to Kangas who didn't do as he required, were labelled as 'gay'. I came to view his statements when he tried to make himself appear as a victim of sexually-related behaviour, as yet more of his lies.
    In an email dated July 11, 2017, he said "The rest [who have written] have all been old creepy perverted men trying to set up a booty call with me when I get out because I'm a "hot young boy" catfish is a guy who goes by C...I think he is another old lonely pervert..." Here, without a grain of any tangible evidence, he accuses someone who is kind enough to write to him (as he had requested) of pursuing him for sexual contact, and may be seen as yet another instance of Kangas's self-deception (in this statement he refers to himself as 'a hot young boy' when in reality, he was nearly 25 years old at the time.)
    Indeed, his claim to be such a victim is repulsive in view of the nature of his conviction and the contents of his Facebook account. In sum, I found that people who do not comply with his wishes find themselves to be victims of his false, malicious (and ludicrous) accusations. It is troubling that he not only slanders people, but he does so even though they have helped him and they are (therefore) the aggrieved party. Fortunately, because his accusations are invariably so ridiculous and ill-conceived, it is usually not difficult to demonstrate their falsity.

    (h) It became evident that I was not the only person misled by Kangas, i.e., apart from C., who allowed me access to his old Facebook account (as she had discovered the truth about him), I heard from another penpal, a young woman in the UK, on August 18, 2017, who told me that she had stopped communicating with him because she realized he was "trying to use me for sexual purposes". She added that she hoped no one else would "fall for his act like you and I did." This was a clear indication that he had not 'changed' (i.e., for the better), despite his claim that he had done so while in prison. Another example was M.R., a young woman, a penpal for a short time in late 2017, who stopped communication with Kangas after he asked her to send him revealing photographs of herself.
    Other penpals realized they were being misled by Kangas regarding his claim of innocence. An American emailed me on May 21, 2017, and said he had attempted to help Kangas but realized his time was being wasted. He commented:

"If it's any consolation, he fooled me, too. I also bought the trial transcripts and sent him books and contacted several lawyers on his behalf. Paid his phone bill. Are you my successor? I bailed on him about a year ago, after 5 months: wading through those transcripts, I had a few questions, which he evaded...I sensed we were going down the rabbit hole and that I'd been played.
I think it important that he is in jail for as long as possible, and that he be a registered sex offender after his release."
    At the sentencing on July 29, 2014, the Judge told Kangas that the sentence imposed was "to serve as a deterrent effect and an opportunity to rehabilitate your behavior and curtail this issue that you have of targeting young women" (p.9). However, I saw copies of emails that he had sent since he was imprisoned, even up to 2017, that showed he has continued to target young women; and I saw no evidence that he has changed for the better. For example, on 23 January 2017, I received an email from him saying (my italics):
"in light of what ive been through, ive been given understanding, knowledge and maybe even the power to change some things especially regarding these csc laws. answer me honestly, in light of current studies that most men and women lose their virginities around the age of 13, do you think its fair to charge and sentence a person to prison for having consentual sex with a teenager when that person him/herself is a teenager? i dont. i think it is beyond wrong.... now, i could see if it was rape or if the teenager was coerced into submission. but i can gaurentee you that 90% of those women on my facebook lost their virginity consentually around 13 years old with a guy a few years older than them. its pretty natural and normal for that to happen. no matter what the law says. would i want my 13 year old daughter to have sex at that age? no, i wouldnt condone it because i wouldnt think she'd be ready. but its clearly not my decision to make, nor the governments...even if i was guilty, who fxxing benefitted from putting me behind bars? me? my "victems"? obviously neither of us benefitted".
    It is unclear why he refers to 13-year old girls losing their virginity to 'a guy a few years older than them', as he was 20 years old at the time of the offence with both girls (in the case of one, he was 21 years old that same year). Hardly a 'teenager', or just a 'few years older'. Secondly, the supposed 'facts' offered here by Kangas are nonsense. According to the CDCP, the average age for both American males and females losing their virginity is 17.1. A report by the ground-breaking Kinsey Institute states "Average age of first intercourse, by gender, in the United States: Males: 16.8 yrs. Females: 17.2 yrs". Therefore, Kangas offers his own highly errant thinking to try and justify his appalling behaviour.
    It should be borne in mind that Kangas's conviction had no similarity with the 'Romeo & Juliet' cases that occur (e.g., the foolish 17-year old youth who, following a drunken party, wakes up in bed with his 15-year old girlfriend after having sex with her), as Kangas was an adult who pursued under-aged children.
    While incarcerated, he gained sympathy, support, gifts, money, etc., from myself and other people by claiming that he had been wrongly convicted of serious crimes against children. When I discovered that he had been correctly found guilty, I viewed this to mean that he had used, and was using his conviction, to gain support and benefit for himself: I am sure that I am not the only person who considers this to be wholly repugnant.
    I wondered why most of his family ignored him and did not offer/provide support (the only ones with whom he had any contact was his father who he had not seen for many years and a sister, both of whom, according to him, only contacted him intermittently.) Furthermore, he said that he did not receive visits from anyone. And despite several desperate pleas for support on the new Facebook account that I managed for him, his friends, acquaintances and neighbours contributed only a woeful $15 towards a fund for a defence attorney (although it's now unclear what an attorney could have possibly done). I couldn't understand the reason for this striking absence of support. I do now...

    (i) At the April 2014 plea offer hearing, Kangas was warned that if he did not 'take a plea', but chose a trial and was found guilty, he faced a sentence of up to 45 years. And yet despite the fact he declined the offer and elected for trial, and he was then found guilty, his sentence was not 45 years, but 5 as the State of Michigan released him in December 2018, a very far cry from the 45 year sentence about which he was warned.
    He claimed that he had changed for the better since his incarceration, but his repeated denials of the crimes, his lies, his threat of violence towards a penpal (threatening to kill him), his attitude and behaviour towards young women, and his beliefs concerning sex with children, invalidates this claim. Additionally, he confirmed that he was willing to lie, stating: "im going to walk into the psych eval. tomorrow and tell them exactly what they want to hear...i am not above lying to get out of prison..." (Email to me, February 3, 2017).
    Despite MDOC/the Parole Board knowing he had persistently lied to various people while in prison, denying guilt about the crimes for which he had been convicted, and received money/gifts/support from these people because of this, as well as making a written threat to kill, he was still paroled on December 12, 2018. It is difficult not to gain the impression that MDOC is doing its utmost to empty its prisons - two of its thirty-three prisons were closed in 2018 alone and many might feel that granting parole to sex offenders on their Early Release Date (ERD) is a matter for concern.
    An example of the MI Parole Board releasing sex offenders after they have only served a minimum period, can be seen with an associate of Kangas, convicted in December 2013: because of his plea offer, he was sentenced to 1.5 - 5 years. The Parole Board decided to release him, early, in 2015, but within months of being released, he obstructed justice (resulting in a further sentence of 2 - 7.5 years) and failed to register as a sex offender (resulting in a further sentence of 2 - 6 years). And yet, incredibly, even with this further incarceration, he was still released early, after two years.
    According to a 2018 report, "Michigan ranks top 5 for most sex offenders per capita", and another article reported that Michigan is not only in the 'top 15' US States with the most sex offenders, but it is also placed fourth in the list. In view of how the State of Michigan releases incarcerated sex offenders on their ERD, some might consider that those predisposed to such behaviour might not feel too discouraged from offending or re-offending. Comments from MI probation officers who deal with sex offenders include the observations that such offenders "are generally more often employed, smarter and better liars than other types of offenders,” and “you really don’t know what’s going on in their heads" and they "require close supervision because it’s hard to tell on the surface what they’re doing.”
    Some MI newspaper articles claim the public Sex Offenders Register is unfair, but it is noticeable how such articles rarely, if ever, bother to mention the lasting distress and turmoil suffered by the victims of these offenders, and of course the victims' families also. Furthermore, the articles often quote offenders who assert the registration is unfair as it extends their sentence, but this ignores how sex offenders in MI are usually released on their earliest possible release date and only serve a fraction of the maximum possible sentence. Additionally, if sex offenders object to being included on the Register, then surely the obvious solution is to not commit the offence(s) in the first place?
    Fortunately, there is legislation that recognizes the danger of sex offenders who molest children, e.g., Megan's Law (1996), Adam Walsh Act (2006), and the imposition of travelling restrictions, as reported by CNN in 2017.
   In 2020, after a number of agencies had challenged features of the Michigan Sex Offenders Registration Act (SORA), changes were made and these are detailed on the Michigan State Police website.
    In the case of Kangas's release in 2018, I understand the contents of parole hearings are confidential, but I have been advised that an inmate has to admit guilt before parole is granted. If this is so, it means that Kangas did, at long last, admit his guilt and this resulted in his December 2018 release. And the fact remains that the 'supervision conditions' for his parole, as listed on his OTIS-MDOC page, stipulate "1.5 - Treatment program (sex offender) as approved by agent". Consequently, I assume he has now abandoned his claim(s) to be innocent.
   I am sure that all right-minded people will believe that as Kangas has been released, the very least he should now do is to apologize to the two child-victims he has vilified on so many occasions, and also apologize to the people to whom he has lied, and from whom he obtained money, etc., by his lying. That, to me, is the very minimum he should do. The longer that he fails to do this, the more it appears that he has not 'changed' at all, and he is also unwilling to recognize his wrongdoings.

    (j) I sincerely hope this article, dealing with my knowledge and experience of Keegan Kangas, will serve as a 'warning buoy' and no one else will have the experience that I, and others, have done.
    Thanks to enlightened legislation, the people of Michigan, including parents and children, can now be aware of where Kangas, and people like him, who have convictions for the sexual abuse of children, reside and work. Kangas is currently categorized as a Tier III sex offender and will be registered as a sex offender for the rest of his life (registration #2071162), and required to comply with the regulations laid down for such offenders.

    Thank you for reading this.

    London, England. 2020

Index Page