Lawsuit Re: Sex Abuse Allegations Against Daughter of Pres. Nelson and Her Husband

[Danzo]

10 minutes ago, Abulafia said:

What you and I think is irrelevant.  It's the weighting given to his expert testimony that will or won't count in a court of law. (As I understand it).

 

Actually he would not be able to testify as an expert witness since he was involved in the case.

He would only be ably to testify to what he had seen.  What he heard would probably be excluded as hearsay. He doesn't seem to be a witness and any conclusions would be something he heard from the children (hearsay) or something he heard from someone else (double hearsay). 

 

[webbles]

Here's a paper titled "A Rumor of Devils: Allegations of Satanic Child Abuse and Mormonism, 1985-1994" - https://www.cesnur.org/2001/archive/mi_mormons.htm

It gives the history of the satanic child abuse cases in Utah and southern Idaho where Mormonism is prominent.  I found it when searching for information about Alan Hadfield.  In section 2 of the paper, it talks about "first Satanic abuse scare in Utah, which took place in Lehi between 1985-1988."  This scare resulted in Alan Hadfield's conviction.  By the end of the investigation in 1987, "Dr. Snow had accused fourty adults -- almost all of them active Mormons in Lehi's Eight Ward -- to be ritual child abusers and members of a secret Satanic cult."

Quote

Both Snow and Whitehead testified against Hadfield at the 1987 trial. It was, however, clear that a sizeable share of public opinion in Utah did not believe the therapists. Some State legislators questioned whether it was wise for Utah to fund controversial institutions such as the Intermountain Sexual Abuse Treatment Center. The investigation was described as "a political nightmare" by Utah's Deputy Attorney General Paul Warner [38]. At trial, it came out that both Wayne Watson, Chief Deputy Utah County Attorney, who had witnessed through a two-way mirror one of Dr. Snow's interviews, and Judy Pugh, a colleague of Dr.Snow at the Intermountain Sexual Abuse Treatment Center, thought that Dr.Snow was coaching the children into admitting sexual and Satanic abuses that they had initially denied. A ten-year old girl testified that she had tried to persuade Dr.Snow that she had never been abused, but later had cracked under the pressure of the therapist, persuaded that Dr.Snow would not have let her go unless she agreed to accuse someone of ritual abuse [39]. Hadfield's defense attorney Dr. Stephen Golding, director of clinical psychology at the University of Utah, as an expert witness who labelled Snow's techniques as "subtly coercive and highly questionable" [40]. A nervous and confused Hadfield did not help his case when he said in Court: "If I did those things, I don't remember"

Hadfield was convicted of four first-degree counts of sodomy on a child and three second-degree counts of sexual abuse of a child by an eight-member jury on December 19, 1987. He should have been sentenced to a minimum ten years jail term with no probation. However, Utah allows probation for abusers after six months in jail (with a further possibility of work release) if they accept to place themselves in a therapy program. Although most programs would not accept a convicted abuser who, like Hadfield, maintains that he is innocent, Hadfield's case was somewhat unique. He was admitted for treatment and thereby escaped a long jail term. Hadfield's support in Lehi was massive. A rally in his support after the 1987 decision drew eight hundred persons, and a benefit banquet for his legal defense attracted around a thousand persons, including State legislators and local Mormon leaders (one of whom was Bishop Burnham, who at the beginning of the scare had been accused of sexual abuse by Hadfield himself). While in Salt Lake City Dr.Whitehead argued that such massive support for Hadfield in Lehi merely showed that the town was in fact controlled by a Satanic child-abuse ring [42]. The press believed, for the most part that Hadfield was innocent. Reporters became still more suspicious of Dr. Snow's methods when they discovered that the therapist, who had moved from Lehi, had subsequently discovered other Satanic cults guilty of extended sexual abuse in Bountiful in 1986 and in the Salt Lake City area in 1988. No charges related to a specific "Satanic" abuse were filed in Bountiful, and a fourteen months probe was quietly dropped in Salt Lake in April 1988 [43].

So the Bountiful case is actually a later case and by that time, people were already starting to suspect things weren't right with the allegations.

Edited October 9, 2018 by webbles
Posted too soon

[Abulafia]

45 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Actually he would not be able to testify as an expert witness since he was involved in the case.

He would only be ably to testify to what he had seen.  What he heard would probably be excluded as hearsay. He doesn't seem to be a witness and any conclusions would be something he heard from the children (hearsay) or something he heard from someone else (double hearsay). 

 

Are you a lawyer Danzo? I thought expert testimonies were admissible?

 

[Abulafia]

1 hour ago, webbles said:

Here's a paper titled "A Rumor of Devils: Allegations of Satanic Child Abuse and Mormonism, 1985-1994" - https://www.cesnur.org/2001/archive/mi_mormons.htm

It gives the history of the satanic child abuse cases in Utah and southern Idaho where Mormonism is prominent.  I found it when searching for information about Alan Hadfield.  In section 2 of the paper, it talks about "first Satanic abuse scare in Utah, which took place in Lehi between 1985-1988."  This scare resulted in Alan Hadfield's conviction.  By the end of the investigation in 1987, "Dr. Snow had accused fourty adults -- almost all of them active Mormons in Lehi's Eight Ward -- to be ritual child abusers and members of a secret Satanic cult."

So the Bountiful case is actually a later case and by that time, people were already starting to suspect things weren't right with the allegations.

My understanding is that responses to the allegations and how the children were interviewed was mixed. 

There are children who were victims in the Hadfield case, now adults, who maintain he sexually abused them.

Same for Bullock. 

A 1988 report from Deseret News

"

According to Parrish, there have been four law enforcement agencies, four treatment agencies and 14 therapists involved in the Lehi, Bountiful and Midvale cases. All 14 therapists separately have reported similar stories told by the 40 children who have claimed to have been involved in ritualistic sex abuse.

Parrish said most of the children have not been seen by Snow during the past two years, yet the children's stories stay the same and coincide when they talk with other therapists.

"If they were a product of her (Snow) instilling the ideas in their minds, the ideas would gradually change if they were not reinforced by the same techniques," Whitehead said. "Other therapists have not reinforced them; they have only listened to them."

[juliann]

21 hours ago, cinepro said:

Have you reviewed the notes and recordings from Snow's counseling sessions? 

Because if she didn't suggest those things, this could be notable as the one time she didn't.

Abulafia, ultimately I'm afraid I have no confidence in your knowledge of the breadth and scope of what was happening in the 1980s, and how it happened.  You are exhibiting the exact same thinking that led to so many innocent people being sent to jail. 

I have to agree. Ongoing justification of the destruction I saw in the 80s, despite everything that has been produced against it,  is making this thread very uncomfortable. I can only ask why....why join this thinking when there is so very, very little to support it, along with  proof of fabricated evidence. 

[Danzo]

54 minutes ago, Abulafia said:

Are you a lawyer Danzo? I thought expert testimonies were admissible?

 

This guy wouldn't qualify as an expert witness due to his involvement in the case. Expert witnesses generally can't testify as an expert witness when they are involved in the case. Otherwise they would be considered a normal witness.

[Abulafia]

14 minutes ago, juliann said:

I have to agree. Ongoing justification of the destruction I saw in the 80s, despite everything that has been produced against it,  is making this thread very uncomfortable. I can only ask why....why join this thinking when there is so very, very little to support it, along with  proof of fabricated evidence. 

Juliann, so do you believe that Hadfield and Bullock are innocent?

Edited October 9, 2018 by Abulafia

[cinepro]

47 minutes ago, Abulafia said:

"If they were a product of her (Snow) instilling the ideas in their minds, the ideas would gradually change if they were not reinforced by the same techniques," Whitehead said. "Other therapists have not reinforced them; they have only listened to them."

Sorry, but it all starts with Snow. 

Quote

Gavry herself said that one thing that surprised her was the support for Hadfield during the trial. Neighbors and other members of the community helped raise as much as $10,000 to help pay his legal bills. Some media reports had much of the community itself rallying against the therapist, Barbara Snow, who had brought to light the allegations against Hadfield, while others discussed a group that help raise funds for the Hadfield children's continuing therapy.

SOME INVOLVED IN LEHI ABUSE CASE PREFER TO LET THE SLEEPING DOGS LIE

(Emphasis added)

 

This information from the appeal offers more insight into what was being claimed:

Quote

[In the Hadfield case], the defense's logical strategy was to highlight the bizarre and unusual things said by the Hadfield children and by numerous other neighborhood children to their therapist Barbara Snow and to establish Barbara Snow as the likely source of accusations against defendant. In that regard, it is important to note that the record contains considerable testimony about the investigations and therapy conducted by Barbara Snow and the police in the Hadfields' immediate neighborhood for nearly a year prior to the time defendant was named as a perpetrator. Defendant himself, along with his wife, had initiated treatment of his children by Barbara Snow because of allegations by other neighborhood children about widespread sexual molestation. Eventually, in Barbara Snow's interviews with the Hadfield children and others, a total of at least fifteen adults and fifteen children were identified as participants in various unusual sexual activities, including instances of group abuse of children by adults. The activities described by the children involved satanic ritual, costumes and masks, photography equipment, men dressing in women's clothing, and frequent episodes of playing with and consuming human excrement. A specific instance of abuse related to Dr. Snow by W. and described by her at trial, for example, involved defendant's removing feces from W.'s rectum with a spoon and forcing him to play with it.

https://law.justia.com/cases/utah/supreme-court/1990/880234.html

(Emphasis added)

 

And then this interesting observation from a follow-up affidavit from Hadfield:

Quote

The affidavit details the following bizarre factual correlations between those cases and the case resulting in defendant's trial: (1) they all involve a neighborhood "sex ring" of from three to twenty families; (2) they all involve members of the same church, including a significant number of religious leaders; (3) they all involve satanic rituals and neighborhood "sex parties"; and (4) in all of the cases, children taken to Barbara Snow at ISAT for counselling have in turn identified other children and adults in the neighborhood. In addition, the affidavit claims that several nearly identical allegations exist in several of these cases. Three of the cases allegedly include prominent reference to playing with, consuming, and bathing in human excrement. Pictures drawn by some of the children in treatment with Barbara Snow in two of the cases are claimed to be identical. Men dressing in women's clothing and the use of costumes and masks were described by children in two of the cases. In three cases, the children described large groups of adults congregating for the purpose of touching naked children and referred to the use of candles and pentagrams for satanic rituals. The affidavit further alleges that no known connection exists between any of the cases except for the involvement of Barbara Snow and ISAT in the investigations and the inability of law enforcement to discover any corroborating evidence of the group activities (such as photographs, paraphernalia, etc.).

(Emphasis added)

 

So we're left with a few odd choices:

Either Barbara Snow just happened to find herself living and working in one of the few suburbs in the world where such events were happening, during the limited few years that such things were happening, and she alone was uniquely qualified to identify and help prosecute the perpetrators.

Or such events are common across American and the world, and except for the cases discovered and prosecuted with the help of Snow, kids are continuing to be made to consume human excrement and get abused by groups of parents and teenagers who dress up and have sex parties which they video tape.  And they probably continued all over the country (and world) to this day.

Or, Barbara Snow thought such events were occurring in her area, and unintentionally elicited the stories from children who were brought to her and accused innocent people of unspeakable crimes, all the while assuming she was saving the community from great evil.

Who knows.  Maybe there are still witches in Salem?

 

 

[cinepro]

I also recommend the article, which puts everything into context:

A Rumor of Devils: Allegations of Satanic Child Abuse and Mormonism, 1985-1994

I think this quote from Whitehead is my favorite:

Quote

While in Salt Lake City Dr.Whitehead argued that such massive support for Hadfield in Lehi merely showed that the town was in fact controlled by a Satanic child-abuse ring.

The quote is from the January 13, 1988 Deseret News.  If anyone can find it, I'd love to see the full context.

Edited October 9, 2018 by cinepro

[Abulafia]

Thanks Cinepro. Been reading that today.

[Abulafia]

Cinepro.  I think that's too simplistic a reading of the events. 

I think sexual abuse eliciting Religious motifs does actually occur and is more likely to occur in communities that subscribe to such beliefs. 

I think there are and always be s*x rings. Groups of people with similar proclivities.  The case for which I was a juror involved at least 5 other men who were either already imprisoned or were being tried separately.  In these cases, the tools used to silence was violence plain and simple. Physical violence mixed with manipulation. 

I hated to think there were people who would do that to kids, but there are.

But all that being said, other than the initial interviews with Snow, the children in this case saw other therapists, so we would have to assume bad faith on their part too.  And the children, all the victims, are now adults who maintain that what happened to them was real.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rain]

2 hours ago, Abulafia said:

My understanding is that responses to the allegations and how the children were interviewed was mixed. 

There are children who were victims in the Hadfield case, now adults, who maintain he sexually abused them.

Same for Bullock. 

A 1988 report from Deseret News

"

According to Parrish, there have been four law enforcement agencies, four treatment agencies and 14 therapists involved in the Lehi, Bountiful and Midvale cases. All 14 therapists separately have reported similar stories told by the 40 children who have claimed to have been involved in ritualistic sex abuse.

Parrish said most of the children have not been seen by Snow during the past two years, yet the children's stories stay the same and coincide when they talk with other therapists.

"If they were a product of her (Snow) instilling the ideas in their minds, the ideas would gradually change if they were not reinforced by the same techniques," Whitehead said. "Other therapists have not reinforced them; they have only listened to them."

I don't have any idea about Hadfield's guilt or not. Maybe he did it. Maybe he didn't. 

The idea, though, that the adults still maintain that they were abused does nothing for me.

When I was 4 I lived in a trailer court. One night I clearly remember Chitty Chitty Bang Bang big on TV. The wind was really blowing and rocking the trailer. We discovered that there were wolves running around the court terrorizing those few who were out during to tornado watch.

Years later I was thinking about it and realized it just didn't make sense so I asked mom about it. It didn't make sense that wild wolves were running around in the middle of the city of Chicago. Sure enough mom confirmed that there were no wolves. She doesn't know where I got that from.

Decades later I can still remember the wolves outside. Logically I know that didn't happen, but if there wasn't so simple that logic unraveled I would still claim today that it did happen. 

So it gives me no qualms that the children still maintain abuse happened. Yes, if abuse happened it makes sense they still say it does, but if these "recovered" memores never happened it also makes sense they still maintain them.

 

Edited October 9, 2018 by Rain

[cinepro]

4 minutes ago, Abulafia said:

But all that being said, other than the initial interviews with Snow, the children in this case saw other therapists, so we would have to assume bad faith on their part too.  And the children, all the victims, are now adults who maintain that what happened to them was real.

You're making assumptions about therapists and how adults perceive childhood memories that might not be true.

[Calm]

Quote

But all that being said, other than the initial interviews with Snow, the children in this case saw other therapists, so we would have to assume bad faith on their part too.  And the children, all the victims, are now adults who maintain that what happened to them was

Except no one is assuming bad faith as far as I can tell, just bad judgment and bad methodology.  If someone starts out with the wrong assumptions, they will usually come to wrong conclusions.

For awhile, there was massive acceptance by therapists and law enforcement personnel of widespread Satanic abuse and its variations.  The article I linked to earlier by Lanning talked about this.  They were having conferences training each other in 'proper' investigation techniques, so hardly surprising that other therapists found the same thing once the pattern of belief was implanted in both the children and the therapists.  These therapists most likely knew the children had made the accusations before they saw them, medical professionals---good ones at least in my experience---want to know the history of treatment for new patients.  If they were chosen to be witnesses, they would be informed why they were needed most likely.

I don't believe anyone here is suggesting that every claim of abuse was implanted in the children's heads by Snow.  What she did was get the thing rolling, Marion Smith likely contributed as well given she was at least instructing parents how to identify if their kids had been abused, etc.  Like a snowball, once the children were convinced it was the right thing to make accusations by the reactions of Snow and their parents and others, it shouldn't be surprising that it continued.  It was the environment created by Snow and her convincing of others that led to the long, ever expanding list of accusations.

-----

And some false memories do likely fade, but others can stay bright.  My impossible forty year old memory of high school talking about the Priesthood ban being lifted, I can see the faces of the other students, exactly how the teacher stood and walked with chalk in his hand, a dark polo shirt and light coloured pants.  It was a sunny day and I remember feeling very awkward at trying to explain why the ban had been in place, though thankfully even then I was okay with saying we don't know.  I was also very grateful there was another LDS kid in the class who was much more outgoing, the class clown, in fact, and he took most of the questions.

 And yet the ban was lifted three years later.

And this is a memory I have no personal investment in or need to believe.  How important is it to the children and parents involved in what was described as decades long nightmares for their pain not to have been the result of a very unfortunate mistake?  They were encouraged to think and say horrible things about likely innocent people (the nicknames, the acting out of violence against them, calling them monsters, etc).   It makes me ill to even suggest that these children, now adults are wrong because the tragedy of what it would mean to them to have to deal with all those years of making choices and choosing to live based on the false memories and therefore misguided feelings about others and themselves as victims of abuse.  I cringe when I think they are likely reading challenges to their world view like what is happening here and it is even difficult to post my own criticisms.  My gut reaction is I hope they don't have moments of doubt that could open up new pits of despair and start a new cycle of victimization for them because hopefully at least some of them have learned to manage the pain from the belief they were victimized by so many, but there are others who have and are victimized by being accused where they are likely innocent.  Therefore the truth, as much as possible, needs to be the most important consideration.

Edited October 9, 2018 by Calm

[cinepro]

33 minutes ago, Calm said:

It makes me ill to even suggest that these children, now adults are wrong because the tragedy of what it would mean to them to have to deal with all those years of making choices and choosing to live based on the false memories and therefore misguided feelings about others and themselves as victims of abuse.

This book is one story about a woman who realized what had happened:

 

Quote

Meredith Maran lived a daughter's nightmare: she accused her father of sexual abuse, then realized, nearly too late, that he was innocent.

During the 1980s and 1990s, tens of thousands of Americans became convinced that they had repressed memories of childhood sexual abuse, and then, decades later, recovered those memories in therapy.

Journalist, mother, and daughter Meredith Maran was one of them. Her accusation and estrangement from her father caused her sons to grow up without their only grandfather, divided her family into those who believed her and those who didn't, and led her to isolate herself on "Planet Incest," where "survivors" devoted their lives, and life savings, to recovering memories of events that had never occurred.

Maran unveils her family's devastation and ultimate redemption against the backdrop of the sex-abuse scandals, beginning with the infamous McMartin preschool trial, that sent hundreds of innocents to jail—several of whom remain imprisoned today.

Exploring the psychological, cultural, and neuroscientific causes of this modern American witch-hunt, My Lie asks: how could so many people come to believe the same lie at the same time? What has neuroscience discovered about the brain's capacity to create false memories and encode false beliefs? What are the "big lies" gaining traction in American culture today—and how can we keep them from taking hold?

My Lie: A True Story of False Memory

 

[Abulafia]

2 hours ago, cinepro said:

You're making assumptions about therapists and how adults perceive childhood memories that might not be true.

Look, just to make it clear (again) I don't know whether the Miles are guilty or innocent.  That's for a court to decide if it ever gets that far and is not dismissed. The suit that has been filed will be considered on its merits or lack thereof. 

The reason this is being tried in the court of public opinion is because the Miles Lawyer decided to make their names public thus outing the alleged victims and opening them up to public scrutiny. That would have been a carefully considered move on the part of the Lawyers imho.

There are such strong feelings in this board going one way, and as strong feelings in the opposite direction in the online world. Those views cross religious allegiances. So this isn't a Mormon/ex Mormon thing. Ex Mormons who lived through this are as skeptical as many here, and yet there are also survivors from those areas who continue to validate at least some of the claims that were made.. Mostly that they were abused, that religious elements could be introduced to manipulate them, that group abuse occurred in many cases, and that their memories are not false but remain clear, intense and traumatic. 

 

 

 

[webbles]

5 hours ago, cinepro said:

I also recommend the article, which puts everything into context:

A Rumor of Devils: Allegations of Satanic Child Abuse and Mormonism, 1985-1994

I think this quote from Whitehead is my favorite:

The quote is from the January 13, 1988 Deseret News.  If anyone can find it, I'd love to see the full context.

You can read the article at https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=Aul-kAQHnToC&dat=19880113&printsec=frontpage&hl=en

It is on the front page and then on page 4

I couldn't find that exact quote so it looks to be a summary.  Most of the quotes from him are on page 4.  One that is close to the summary is (I assume it is one quote but it is broken up into three paragraphs so I kept the paragraphs here):

Quote

It's a close community and that might explain in part the community reaction. But if one accepts the fact, as I do, that there are a lot of people involved, then some of them have a major invested interest.

To protect one is to protect all.

It's a natural reaction assuming many are involved.  If many were not involved, it's very unusual that people would come to the response to this degree of one individual who has been convicted by eight impartial people.

 

[Royce]

On 10/3/2018 at 11:48 AM, smac97 said:

Here:

Wow.

Decades-old allegations of sexual abuse are deeply problematic. 

-Smac

 

Yeah, tell that to Kavanaugh.

[Abulafia]

Okay. Finally had time to finish Timeline.  Will correct if anyone spots any errors.

Timeline
1982 – Marion Smith [Psychotherapist] becomes first director of ISAT, one of the only organisations in Utah devoted to the treatment of Child Abuse.

1982 approx  - Dr. Barbara Snow [PhD Social Work] Clinical Director of ISAT.

1984 – Arvin Shreeve founds and becomes leader of the Zion Society, Ogden.

1985 – The Lehi Ritual abuse scare began when Mrs Sheila Bowers of Lehi contacted Barbara Snow concerned  by inappropriate sexual talk of her 3 children. At first a babysitter who was the daughter of the Bishop was implicated, then her parents. Snow asked to interview other children. Snow held a parent therapy group which Alan Hadfield and Rex Bowers attended. 40 adults eventually implicated. Dr. Paul Whitehead represented the Utah Psychiatric Association and supported Snow against increasing opposition to her methods and findings. 

1985 – Marion Smith was asked to give talk on abuse at church meeting.

1985 – Arden Brett Bullock's neighbour took her 4 year old boy to Barbara Snow on recommendation of Marion Smith at ISAT because she was worried about inappropriate sexual comments to two other 4 year olds. On 2nd meeting it emerges that boys have been allegedly sexually abused by 2 eight year olds, one of who is Brett Bullock's son.

1985 – December - boys in Brett Bullocks case referred to Dr Ann Tyler [Psychologist and Executive Director of the Family Support Centre] Her assessment is that all 4 boys were likely sexually abused.

1986 January – Mother 1 [Marion Smith’s daughter] heard from a neighbour that their children were being sexually abused. As precaution Mother 1 takes Jane Doe 1 to Barbara Snow at ISAT.  Initially Snow clears children of being sexually abused.  On hearing their sitter was implicated, reinterviewed one daughter for 2 hours until she provided a claim of abuse by babysitter.  Later claims she had been abused by 2 [names unknown] teenage boys as well. Mother 1 meets with bishopric who was viewed as helpful at first. Def 1 was 2nd counsellor in bishopric and was absent at this meeting.

1986 January/February - Jane Doe 1 allegedly reveals to mother that Def 1 and Def 2 held touching parties. Apostle Nelson turns up soon after and sits with daughter at sacrament meeting.

1986 January/February – Jane Doe 1 allegedly asks mother what difference was between what Def 1 and Def 2 do, and daddy’s marriage lessons.

1986 March – Mother 1 takes children to Hawaii where parents own home. Perpetrator [Bill C] is admitted to John Hopkins to begin psychiatric evaluation.

1986 April – at request of police Dr at PC hospital confirmed all 4 children of Mother 1 had been sexually abused.

1986 June – Perpetrator [Bill] is released from John Hopkins with a diagnosis of paedophilia.

1986 – sometime after June, Neal A Maxwell gives blessing to family of Perpetrator. Allegedly mentions how “perpetrators” made terrible choices. Blessed for comfort and to be able to forgive and  forget.

1986 – Through 1986 and for many years afterwards Dr. Paul Whitehead [Utah Psychiatric Association] treats perpetrator and Mother 1's children and confirms that in his opinion they were sexually abused by Perpetrator and Def 1 and Def 2.

1986 – A Utah jury convicts Brett Bullock of 3 counts child abuse, 3 count s*d*my. Feature of defence was concentration on Barbara Snow's methods.

      
1987 – trial against Alan Hadfield. Feature of defence against children’s testimonies  was the issue of Snow's methods thought to be coercive and questionable by Dr. Stephen Golding [Director of Clinical Psychiatry]

1988 – Perpetrator having never been convicted by the state or disciplined by the church, remarries. He allegedly begins abusing the children of Mother 2. [Jane Doe 3 and 4 and John Doe 2]

1989 – Brett Bullock's conviction upheld in Utah Supreme Court.

1989/1990  - Utah Supreme Court, [State vs Tuttle] hypnotherapy not reliable enough to be used in court proceedings.

1990 – Brett Bullock's petition for certiorari denied by US Supreme Court.

1990 – Pace Memo [released in 1991] up to 60 members were giving testimony that they were ritually abused. A 30 month investigation found no evidence to substantiate testimonies. Two interview methods of therapists were criticised – 1] hypnotism 2] automatic writing

1992 – Utah State Task Force on Ritual Abuse. 125 alleged cases, including a case where a mother and father admitted to sexual crimes involving the ritual sexual abuse of 3 children. Other individuals named in that case, but cannot be prosecuted because of statute of limitations.

1992 – Alvin Shreeve and Sharon Kapp of Zion Society in Ogden sentenced to 20 and 10 years including sexual abuse of children. 12 members of 100 strong group, also convicted.

1992 – Richard G. Scott, apostle, gives talk noting that false allegations are a sin.

1992 – Brett Bullock files writ of habeas corpus on basis  he had ineffective counsel in jury trial.

1995 – Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4 allegedly tell Mother 2 that perpetrator had sexually abused them as children. Police contacted perpetrator who fled Utah only to return where, at his mother’s house, he commits suicide.

1995 – Attorney General Report: Ritual Crime in the State of Utah. Investigation, Analysis and a look forward – Conclusion was testimony only evidence. No evidence of homicide.

1996 – 4 day Magisrate evidential hearing on habeas corpus case Brett Bullock.

1999 – District Court denies all Brett Bullocks claims.

2002- Brett Bullock's appeal is denied.

 

Edited October 12, 2018 by Abulafia

[Calm]

Quote

1986 January – Mother 1 [Marion Smith’s daughter] heard from a neighbour that their children were being sexually abused. As precaution Mother 1 takes Jane Doe 1 to Barbara Snow at ISAT, who acknowledges she had been abused by babysitter and 2 [names unknown] teenage boys. Mother 1 meets with bishopric who were helpful at first. Def 1 was 2nd counsellor in bishopric and was absent at this meeting

I would rewrite the above to say:

1986 January – Mother 1 [Marion Smith’s daughter] heard from a neighbour that their children were being sexually abused. As precaution Mother 1 takes Jane Doe 1 to Barbara Snow at ISAT.  Initially Snow clears children of being sexually abused.  On hearing their sitter was implicated, reinterviewed one daughter for 2 hours until she provided a claim of abuse by babysitter.  Later claims she had been abused by 2 [names unknown] teenage boys as well. Mother 1 meets with bishopric who was viewed as helpful at first. Def 1 was 2nd counsellor in bishopric and was absent at this meeting

-----

There are some other comments that are written as assuming a claim is a fact, but not quite obsessive enough to point these out right now.    maybe later.

Thank you for doing this.

Edited October 12, 2018 by Calm

[Abulafia]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

I would rewrite the above to say:

1986 January – Mother 1 [Marion Smith’s daughter] heard from a neighbour that their children were being sexually abused. As precaution Mother 1 takes Jane Doe 1 to Barbara Snow at ISAT.  Initially Snow clears children of being sexually abused.  On hearing their sitter was implicated, reinterviewed one daughter for 2 hours until she provided a claim of abuse by babysitter.  Later claims she had been abused by 2 [names unknown] teenage boys as well. Mother 1 meets with bishopric who was viewed as helpful at first. Def 1 was 2nd counsellor in bishopric and was absent at this meeting

-----

There are some other comments that are written as assuming a claim is a fact, but not quite obsessive enough to point these out right now.    maybe later.

Thank you for doing this.

Ok, done. Spaced out writing to make more sense and included term allegedly for items that remain unproven. I think I got them all. 

[Abulafia]

A few features have emerged in my understanding of these issues. 

1. What was the impact of polygamous groups (like those of Alvin Shreeve, and later Warren Jeffs, where the theology and culture supports the abuse of children), on the wider society and fears of organised groups that sexually abused children?

2. Kristy Johnson, who was allegedly abused by her father notes that he worked with a McConkie at BYU, and shared an office. He had allegedly adopted the theology that God had physical s*xual relations with a very young Mary, his daughter in LDS thinking. Have these ideas given justification to fathers who abuse their daughters?

3. Why were Alan Hadfield and Brett Bullock prosecuted, whilst the perpetrator (Bill C) was let off?

Edited October 12, 2018 by Abulafia

[Calm]

As to 3) iirc all the therapists he went to labeled him as not dangerous 

And weren’t the children not allowed to testify?  Without their testimony, not much of a case, especially if there were other names floating about a defense lawyer could point to for reasonable doubt. Medical evidence of abuse (if strong enough not to be questioned on its own) cannot be used to identify abuser unless dna is present and obviously nothing available in this case due to time lapsed  

Just guessing. 

Edited October 12, 2018 by Calm

[Abulafia]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

As to 3) iirc all the therapists he went to labeled him as not dangerous 

And weren’t the children not allowed to testify?  Without their testimony, not much of a case, especially if there were other names floating about a defense lawyer could point to for reasonable doubt. Medical evidence of abuse (if strong enough not to be questioned on its own) cannot be used to identify abuser unless dna is present and obviously nothing available in this case due to time lapsed  

Just guessing. 

Yeah. I think John Hopkins specifically noted that he posed no threat despite his diagnosis of paedophilia.  

Yet the children had been medically assessed as having been sexually abused.

From the timeline

"1986 April – at request of police Dr at PC hospital confirmed all 4 children of Mother 1 had been sexually abused." Yet Marion Smith notes that allegedly, the police weren't interested in pursuing this case. Was that because the Mother 1 had already made it known that she didn't want the children testifying, so they didn't have a case to proceed with, or could they have proceeded with Snow, Whitehead, Ann Tyler and the Dr. at the P.C. hospital without the video testimony of the children? 

When did the practice of videoing children come in to place? In either Hadfield (1987) or Bullock's case (1986) the children gave testimony via video.

Do we know whether Hadfield or Bullock were subject to church discipline? How would one find that out?

 

 

 

[smac97]

I think this article is worth mentioning: Victims of False Accusations of Rape Need to Be Heard, Too

Some excerpts:

Quote

False accusations ruin lives and bring indescribable heartache. We hear a lot about rape and sexual assault victims, but rarely do we hear of the injustices and pain endured by those falsely accused of such crimes, the silent sufferers of cruelty and malice.

I think this points merit attention.  And repetition.

Quote

The confirmation hearings of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh have brought into focus a great divide in this country between those who choose to believe any allegation a woman makes and those who value presumption of innocence when a man is accused of rape. Many of us aren’t willing to discard due process simply because feminists demand it — we have experienced firsthand the devastation that follows in the wake of false accusations, particularly regarding rape, sexual assault, and molestation.

After America was subjected to the insanity surrounding the Kavanaugh hearings, I posted on Twitter a call to hear the stories of the falsely accused, voices that are rarely heard or respected. You can scan the many responses I received in the thread to that tweet.

These aren’t cases in which the accuser was credible but the allegations simply could not be proved, something that happens in our courtrooms across the country, to the frustration of accusers who know they are telling the truth but the perpetrator walks free. Justice is sometimes elusive despite our best efforts. The stories I’m hearing are about lies told to exert control — they’re about evil.

But we are told, over and over, that we cannot listen to these stories.  That we cannot countenance these stories.  That anything other than uncritical and reflexive acceptance of any and all allegations of sexual abuse amounts to victim-blaming, rape culture, etc.

I think we need to take allegations of sexual assault seriously.  They should be investigated.  But the presumption of innocence must be maintained in such efforts.  

There are Tom Robinsons out there.  And Mayella Ewells.

Quote

As we have seen, there are cases when a woman is automatically believed simply because she is a woman, despite having zero corroborating evidence. One such account in the news is that of Gregory Counts and VanDyke Perry, who were sentenced to decades in jail on rape and other charges despite the investigators having no physical evidence.

Mr. Perry served 11 years in prison.  Mr. Counts served 26 years.

From the linked article above: "Last month, the woman, who has not been identified, told investigators from the district attorney’s office and the Innocence Project the rape 'never happened.' Her admission came after DNA testing connected the semen found on her body to another man through an F.B.I. database."

"The rape 'never happened.'"

And this (also from the linked article): "These were the eighth and ninth convictions to be vacated since the creation of the Conviction Integrity Program in Manhattan in 2010. Similarly, the Brooklyn district attorney’s office overturned 24 convictions since 2014, and the Bronx district attorney’s office vacated three since 2016."

Back to the main article:

Quote

This lack of physical evidence sometimes happens in trials like these, but there must be some kind of supporting evidence. They didn’t have any. The prosecution’s case mostly relied on the woman’s testimony, which, as with Christine Blasey Ford’s against Kavanaugh, was full of inconsistencies.

And yet the lack of physical evidence, the lack of corroborative evidence, the inconsistencies, etc., will never be enough for som  Justice Kavanaugh will be forever branded a rapist, based solely on the unsubstantiated and uncorroborated say-so of the purported (female) victim.

Back to the article:

Quote

Several years ago, my husband was a juror in a rape trial held in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. When the jury started deliberating, only two jurors found him not guilty — my husband and another man. The other jurors were incensed and pressured them to change their verdict. My husband refused, saying the prosecutor simply had not proved her case and relied on the woman’s incoherent testimony. He was horrified when most of the other jurors said, “That’s true, but the risk is too high — we simply can’t let a potential rapist back on the streets.”

The angry jurors pummeled them for hours to change their minds, and finally the man who had stood with my husband succumbed and agreed to cast a guilty verdict. All eyes turned on my husband. He was the one holdout. The pressure was intense, but he refused to budge. He went through the case with them, pointing out holes in testimony, inconsistencies in the timeline, and the overall lack of evidence.

In light of little evidence, my husband had to presume innocence and vote not guilty. He understood that, as frustrating as it might be, it is better to let a guilty man go free than put an innocent man behind bars and ruin his life forever.

The presumption of innocence is taking a major beating these days.

Quote

We’ve heard such cases shrugged off by the media as they claim that only 2 percent of rape allegations are false, but Brent Turvey, an expert in criminal law, disagrees. In his 2017 book on the topic, he cited research, police reports, and studies to show that the number is much higher. One study even had false “sexual assault” allegations as high as 40 percent. Turvey wrote that in the 1990s, the FBI registered false accusations of “rape or attempted rape” at 8 percent. As cited in the Washington Examiner,

Quote

“There is no shortage of politicians, victims’ advocates and news articles claiming that the nationwide false report for rape and sexual assault is almost nonexistent, presenting a figure of around 2 percent,” writes  Mr. Turvey, who directs the Forensic Criminology Institute. “This figure is not only inaccurate, but also it has no basis in reality. Reporting it publicly as a valid frequency rate with any empirical basis is either scientifically negligent or fraudulent.”

By downplaying the number of false accusations, the media allow victims of this heinous act to be ignored and silenced, their reputations ruined with no recourse to find redemption. The result is depression, anger, disrupted relationships, and even suicide.

Yep.  We have seen this same "downplaying the number of false accusations" on this board.

Quote

One man who was falsely accused of rape told me he felt hopeless after being grilled by the police: “I left the station in emotional shambles. In the following days my depression sunk to depths as far as considering taking my own life. This was something I was completely innocent of, yet my life was about to be ruined.”

Another man said he felt shut down, defenseless before a false accusation of rape: “Aside from the right to make a statement, I was denied all of my legal rights—my employer lied about it, broke laws, and threw me out the door. Feminists claim employers don't take allegations seriously. They're lying. I attempted suicide and spent a week hospitalized.”

Other men, several in the military, have described the anguish of facing false sexual assault and rape charges — police showing up at their workplace, employers treating them as if they were guilty, onlookers believing the accusation and treating them as an outcast despite being found innocent.

A typical place in which false accusations occur, besides the workplace, is the home, especially when separated or divorced parents are fighting for custody rights. While there are many instances of actual abuse that are never proven — to the frustration of mothers or fathers who have to continue to send their children into a threatening situation — family law is rife with false allegations.

One father who contacted me shared a horrifying account that haunts his family to this day. The mother of his son accused him of sexually molesting the 4-year-old boy. She coached the child to say things the father couldn’t bear to repeat even after all this time. The allegations were found to be false, fabricated by a mother bent on manipulation and control.

“I am the ‘survivor’ (if you can call it that) of horrible, malicious, and ‘conveniently timed’ accusations of sexual assault,” he told me. “Those accusations and the storm they wrought were the most painful and traumatic events of my life, and the lives of my family. It changed us forever, and will haunt us in ways I’m sure we will never be able to fully see or understand for the rest of our lives.”

I am not a family law attorney.  To be honest, I lacked the stomach for it.  I know family law lawyers who have said that false allegations of sexual assault/abuse are very common in divorce and child custody proceedings, that such allegations are overwhelmingly made by women against men, that such allegations are extremely effective as a bargaining tool, and that there is essentially no "downside" to making false allegations because the person making them (again, overwhelmingly women) are virtually never punished in any way.

Back to the article:

Quote

The circus of the last few weeks brought up painful memories for him: “Watching what is happening to Brett Kavanaugh and his family has been traumatic, especially for me, and has brought so many old feelings and pain to the surface. And watching those carry it out, and the millions of people and hundreds of media personalities simply stand by and cheer it on, is so deeply hurtful I cannot adequately find the words to explain.”

Quote

Listening to people claim that women just need to be believed is not just silly, it’s dangerous. Ask the Duke Lacrosse team. Listening to people claim that women (or men for that matter) don’t lie about such things is such a lie in and of itself that should be patently obvious.

Listening to people claim that since this is not a court of law, and there is somehow a different standard that needs to be applied when it comes to allegations such as this is so enraging I could barely sit and listen to it without screaming at my TV or cell phone when reading it. No one who has ever been publicly accused of such things will ever believe that [sic]

Listening to people claim that Brett Kavanaugh’s anger was a sure sign of his guilt was galling. No person who has ever been falsely accused of sexual assault, especially so publicly, would be anything BUT enraged and indignant, and in particular, at those they believe are guilty of orchestrating it.

 

I think it's fair to say that men - a lot of men - are scared these days.  An allegation of sexual abuse alone is sufficient to destroy his reputation, his family, his livelihood, his life.

And we, as a society, are going along with it.  Some of us are even rooting for it.

Quote

All false accusations of criminality are wrong, but especially when they are made public. The painful effects are imprinted on the victim’s life as others have already made judgments about him. Many people speak of the bravery of Ford and how she will leave a legacy that will encourage all women to come forward with their accusations of abuse. Sadly, this isn’t her legacy. Her legacy is carved into the hearts of the Kavanaugh family — it’s a legacy of grief and unwarranted shame.

The greatest gift America can give the Kavanaugh family is to stop saying Ford is credible and to remove all shame by believing his innocence because he was never even remotely found guilty.

Ford’s allegations might be a case of simply not being able to prove something that actually happened, but given the orchestration, conflicting testimonies, contact with senators and the press instead of law enforcement, political game-playing, zero corroborating evidence, and emotional display that reeked of fakery and inauthenticity, it seems more like false accusation than failure to prove. This possibility should be further investigated to find out if she lied.

Yep.  But if she is found out to have lied, she won't be held accountable for it.  I'm laying down a marker on that.

Quote

While we should have empathy for victims, that empathy does not stop with those who suffered rape and sexual assault. It should extend to the falsely accused, because to be forced to prove that you didn’t do such an evil thing is another kind of rape — it’s rape of the soul.

We want victims of rape to feel free to come forward, but we also need to hold those who knowingly bring false accusations to account. We can all learn wisdom from ancient religious writings on this subject. One such text is from Deuteronomy:

Quote

If a false witness testifies against someone, accusing him of a crime, both parties to the dispute must stand in the presence of the LORD, before the priests and judges who are in office at that time. The judges shall investigate thoroughly and if the witness is proven to be a liar who has falsely accused his brother, you must do to him as he intended to do to his brother.

You must purge the evil from among you. Then the rest of the people will hear and be afraid, and they will never again do anything so evil among you. You must show no pity (Deuteronomy 19:16-21).

 

Well said.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited October 12, 2018 by smac97