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

[pogi]

On 10/21/2018 at 11:57 AM, Abulafia said:

What stood out for me was a general  comment from the prosecutors in the Attorney General's Office (at the end of the Lehi abuse probe).

 

"Prosecutors said that the troubling issue for the attorney general's office was not in determining that sexual abuse of some children had occurred, but rather in proving beyond any reasonable doubt who committed the abuse."’

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/27084/RELIEF-ANGER-GREET-END-OF-LEHI-SEX-ABUSE-PROBE.html

 

What stands out to me about that statement is that there really was no good evidence...

The next paragraph reads:

Quote

...the state may never know the truth of what did or didn't occur in Lehi...

Doesn't sound like they were convinced enough, as they ultimately concluded:

Quote

unless new evidence surfaces, there will be no new charges filed.

 

[Abulafia]

11 hours ago, pogi said:

What stands out to me about that statement is that there really was no good evidence...

The next paragraph reads:

Doesn't sound like they were convinced enough, as they ultimately concluded:

 

In the Lehi case, they picked out one case that was prosecutable. The information they received led to Hadfield, who always protested his innocence, but the court considered the evidence and declared him legally guilty.

 

You may think he is innocent. I don't know. But underneath the mess were still children who were exhibiting age inappropriate sexual behaviour and knowledge.

 

[Kenngo1969]

3 hours ago, Abulafia said:

... You may think he [Allan B. Hadfield] is innocent. I don't know. But underneath the mess were still children who were exhibiting age inappropriate sexual behaviour and knowledge.

 

One reason why children may exhibit "age inappropriate sexual behavior and knowledge" is because they are being abused, but that, standing alone, is insufficient evidence for a prosecutor to bring a case which he must prove beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Further, while it is true that one reason why children may exhibit "age inappropriate sexual behavior and knowledge" is because they are being abused, even "age inappropriate behavior and knowledge" in combination with physical examinations which seem to indicate children are being abused does not necessarily constitute proof of abuse beyond a reasonable doubt, since the standards for such examinations now are different than they were when the Hadfield case was prosecuted.  

Still further, even "age inappropriate sexual behavior and knowledge" combined with examination results and results of questioning which seems to indicate abuse do not necessarily constitute proof of abuse beyond a reasonable doubt, since, not only have techniques and standards for examining children physically for signs of sexual abuse been refined in the intervening years since the Hadfield case was prosecuted, techniques for questioning children regarding such abuse have also been greatly refined in the intervening years since that case was prosecuted.

I'm one of the most pro-police, pro-prosecution people you will ever meet in Cyber-space, and even I understand that there's a reason why so many people stuck by Hadfield even after he was convicted, and there's a reason why the greatest likelihood is that Hadfield would not have even been prosecuted, let alone convicted, if the accusations against him had arisen today. 

Given the refinements in questioning and in examination techniques which have occurred in the interim, there's no way to ferret out how the children came by their "age-inappropriate sexual behavior and knowledge": Was it, at least partly, from Barbara Snow, since she applauded and rewarded children who produced such accounts for their bravery?  Was it, perhaps, (at least partly) from examination techniques and/or standards employed at the time?  Was it from some other source, such (as others have pointed out) hearing it from other children or from watching their "age-inappropriate sexual behavior"?  Can age-inappropriate sexual behavior and knowledge indicate abuse?  Yes, it can, but can, standing alone, is a far cry from saying that it does do so, especially when the standard for making such a determination is "beyond a reasonable doubt."

[Abulafia]

Kengo, on this point

Was it, at least partly, from Barbara Snow, since she applauded and rewarded children who produced such accounts for their bravery? 

 

From the documentary evidence available. No. Not initially. Children were sent to ISAT because of the worries of parents. Barbara Snow had been nowhere near them at that point.

[provoman]

@Abulafia are the Miles related to accussers? 

 

Nevermind, I found the Utah law, HB279 allows suits against perps, and enablers upto 35 years after the victims 18th birthday

Edited October 23, 2018 by provoman

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, Abulafia said:

Kengo, on this point

Was it, at least partly, from Barbara Snow, since she applauded and rewarded children who produced such accounts for their bravery? 

 

From the documentary evidence available. No. Not initially. Children were sent to ISAT because of the worries of parents. Barbara Snow had been nowhere near them at that point.

You ignore the entirety of my post to pick out one clause with which you disagree, which was phrased merely as a possibility anyway.  No offense, but I could understand why someone might think it's completely exhausting (and perhaps futile) to try to dialogue with you.

[kllindley]

4 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

You ignore the entirety of my post to pick out one clause with which you disagree, which was phrased merely as a possibility anyway.  No offense, but I could understand why someone might think it's completely exhausting (and perhaps futile) to try to dialogue with you.

Yep. Plus, if you dare condemn the old practices and call them part of the problem, you can look forward to being shamed and told you're unfit to work with children. It's a joy.

[Calm]

On 10/23/2018 at 6:58 AM, Abulafia said:

Kengo, on this point

Was it, at least partly, from Barbara Snow, since she applauded and rewarded children who produced such accounts for their bravery? 

 

From the documentary evidence available. No. Not initially. Children were sent to ISAT because of the worries of parents. Barbara Snow had been nowhere near them at that point.

Marion Smith was asked to or asked to give snd was accepted to give a lecture on abuse at church, so the awareness and worry about abuse was likely present in that community just as it was in many others  Parents were questioning their kids or possibly overheard talking about it by kids.  Kids talk with other kids, including older with younger.  It is possible the kids picked up knowledge from adults worried about abuse.  It is possible they picked it up from experiencing abuse.

edited for accuracy

Edited October 24, 2018 by Calm

[Abulafia]

9 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

One reason why children may exhibit "age inappropriate sexual behavior and knowledge" is because they are being abused, but that, standing alone, is insufficient evidence for a prosecutor to bring a case which he must prove beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Agreed

Further, while it is true that one reason why children may exhibit "age inappropriate sexual behavior and knowledge" is because they are being abused, even "age inappropriate behavior and knowledge" in combination with physical examinations which seem to indicate children are being abused does not necessarily constitute proof of abuse beyond a reasonable doubt, since the standards for such examinations now are different than they were when the Hadfield case was prosecuted.  

Agreed to an extent, but I trust the Dr in this instance.

Still further, even "age inappropriate sexual behavior and knowledge" combined with examination results and results of questioning which seems to indicate abuse do not necessarily constitute proof of abuse beyond a reasonable doubt, since, not only have techniques and standards for examining children physically for signs of sexual abuse been refined in the intervening years since the Hadfield case was prosecuted, techniques for questioning children regarding such abuse have also been greatly refined in the intervening years since that case was prosecuted.

Agreed

I'm one of the most pro-police, pro-prosecution people you will ever meet in Cyber-space, and even I understand that there's a reason why so many people stuck by Hadfield even after he was convicted, and there's a reason why the greatest likelihood is that Hadfield would not have even been prosecuted, let alone convicted, if the accusations against him had arisen today. 

if you listen to the 1991 Sunstone Presentation you will hear that the problem with child sexual abuse was that the Legal system tended towards leniency. 

Given the refinements in questioning and in examination techniques which have occurred in the interim, there's no way to ferret out how the children came by their "age-inappropriate sexual behavior and knowledge": Was it, at least partly, from Barbara Snow, since she applauded and rewarded children who produced such accounts for their bravery?  Was it, perhaps, (at least partly) from examination techniques and/or standards employed at the time?  Was it from some other source, such (as others have pointed out) hearing it from other children or from watching their "age-inappropriate sexual behavior"?  Can age-inappropriate sexual behavior and knowledge indicate abuse?  Yes, it can, but can, standing alone, is a far cry from saying that it does do so, especially when the standard for making such a determination is "beyond a reasonable doubt."

Already responded

 

Edited October 23, 2018 by Abulafia

[Abulafia]

https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/sunstone-1991-80-child-sexual-abuse-in-the-lds-community/

[cinepro]

It looks like there's another current connection to the era of moral panic over "recovered memories" and "ritual abuse."

Apparently there is a spiritual guru from Utah named "Teal Swan".

Gizmodo has a six-part series about her. 

The Gateway: Teal Swan

Part five investigates the connection between Teal Swan and...Barbara Snow.

Quote

Swan claims that she was a victim of satanic ritual abuse — memories of which she claims she repressed and later recovered with the help of a therapist in Salt Lake City, Utah, who encouraged her to go to the police to open an investigation in 2005. Swan’s claims include that she was once sewn into a corpse by a Mormon satanic cult.

However, that investigation came to a halt when it was discovered that Swan’s therapist was at the center of several nearly identical — and similarly questionable — allegations of satanic ritual abuse in Utah during the throes of the Satanic Panic.

 

You must listen to that podcast (episode #5) if you want to understand how Barbara Snow does what she does.

Edited October 23, 2018 by cinepro

[cinepro]

Just now, Abulafia said:

https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/sunstone-1991-80-child-sexual-abuse-in-the-lds-community/

You need to distinguish between artifacts from that era, and about that era.  We understand that at the time, people thought all that stuff was real, and some people still do to this day.

[Abulafia]

20 minutes ago, cinepro said:

You need to distinguish between artifacts from that era, and about that era.  We understand that at the time, people thought all that stuff was real, and some people still do to this day.

And you need to stop being so darned condescending Cinepro. Of course I can distinguish between the two.

 

Have you listened to the podcast? No. I thought not. Otherwise you wouldn't have made such an ignorant comment.

[cinepro]

And here's a relevant presentation that goes into more detail on false memories. 

Start watching at 28:00 to hear her take on the Satanic Ritual Abuse memories, and learn about how researchers have figured out how to implant false memories in people themselves:

 

 

 

Edited October 24, 2018 by cinepro

[cinepro]

1 hour ago, Abulafia said:

And you need to stop being so darned condescending Cinepro. Of course I can distinguish between the two.

 

Have you listened to the podcast? No. I thought not. Otherwise you wouldn't have made such an ignorant comment.

Well, let's see:

Quote

The panel will explore ways to identity and treat victims and perpetrators. It will discuss typical Church and parental responses to reported abuse, examine the presence of neighborhood sex rings in Utah, outline help which is available, and offer suggestions for more effective ways of dealing with this illness in our society.

Can you let us know if, when they "examine" the issue, they talk about the probability that there are no "neighborhood sex rings" in Utah and the claims from the children are a product of leading and overzealous therapists?  Do they even acknowledge it as a possibility?

If not, I stand by my presumption that it is an artifact from inside the moral panic, and isn't helpful to understanding what was really going on, since we all agree and understand that people really believed it was going on back then.

 

Edit to add: Someone appears to ask a question about innocent people getting convicted around 1:19:00, and the issue of false convictions is mentioned. The moderator (possibly Marion Smith herself?) says that lying is "mostly a problem in custody cases", so there is definitely a false sense of certainty in the reliability of the accusations at that point. 

Edited October 23, 2018 by cinepro

[Abulafia]

1 hour ago, cinepro said:

Well, let's see:

Can you let us know if, when they "examine" the issue, they talk about the probability that there are no "neighborhood sex rings" in Utah and the claims from the children are a product of leading and overzealous therapists?  Do they even acknowledge it as a possibility?

If not, I stand by my presumption that it is an artifact from inside the moral panic, and isn't helpful to understanding what was really going on, since we all agree and understand that people really believed it was going on back then.

Your presumption is wrong.

[cinepro]

And here's Teal telling her story...(2:28 - "How many children did you watch him kill?"...."Probably...five")

 

[kllindley]

1 hour ago, Abulafia said:

Your presumption is wrong.

How is it possible for a source in 1991 not be an artifact from within the historical context? Including Marion Smith herself, nonetheless? 

 

[Judd]

This kind of reminds me of the original photo of the Loche Ness Monster. It would be like, even after it coming out as a hoax, saying it doesn’t matter that it was a hoax, and look at all the other evidence from the hysteria that it unleashed.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Abulafia said:

Your presumption is wrong.

It is certainly possible we are misunderstanding you as your posts are pretty short and not particularly nuanced (lacking in detail about what you think) at this point (and I get not having time and/or desire to invest in posting when it feels repetitive).

The general impression you are giving to me is you are concluding any alleged evidence of abuse should be assumed to be at least credible until specifically disproven, judging evidence as credible even when details are lacking as to what kind of evidence it is (and those of us challenging your comments believe some forms of alleged evidence have been proven to lack credibility and therefore categorically shouldn't be appealed to at all...though I may be projecting my own conclusions on others).  

You may not believe that, but if not you might want to provide more info on what you are thinking.

[Kenngo1969]

Re: Teal Swan,

I want to be sympathetic to the sort of allegations she has put forth; I want to give her the benefit of any reasonable doubt; abuse of the kind she describes is horrific, even absent any sort of element of purported Satanic worship.  I'll grant that it's likely that she was subjected to some pretty horrific treatment. 

All of that having been said, I find her credibility with respect to her most serious allegations suspect.  Supposedly, she witnessed the ritual sacrifice of several infants, and yet no one else before her (or, seemingly, besides her) ever said a word, no one ever raised the alarm, no one ever alerted law enforcement, child or family welfare authorities, et cetera?  No trace of even the very existence of these infants was left before Ms. Swan disclosed their tragic end?

And while I don't know that the sort of allegations Ms. Swan puts forth are on par with the sort of things one often hears put forth on late-night radio, fringe Internet sites, and other, similar venues, they do have that feel.  "Well, of course nobody else has heard!  Of course nobody else knows!  That's all part-and-parcel of the conspiracy!"   

Ms. Swan Herself: "Ritual abuse exists. [Res ipsa loquitur, or at least, ipse dixit]  If you don't want to believe it exists, you're part of the problem.  [Again, res ipsa loquitur and/or ipse dixit]

Forgive me.

Edited October 24, 2018 by Kenngo1969

[Abulafia]

13 hours ago, kllindley said:

How is it possible for a source in 1991 not be an artifact from within the historical context? Including Marion Smith herself, nonetheless? 

 

And another one who didn't bother listening to the presentation.   I linked to it because at the time there was more likely to be leniency when dealing with child abusers.. I can assure you Marion Smith was kept in check and brought to task if other panellists felt she strayed too much into unsubstantiated areas.  Most of the time. 99.9% she doesn't. 

The dynamics of this group are also exhausting Kengo.

 

Calm, I think planting false memories under hypnotic or other techniques may be possible for certain individuals  who are already mentally ill.  I'd put Teal Swan in that category  from the little I know about her.

 

But that's widely different to 6 kids who remember a father's abuse. Baby sitter abuse and a sex ring.

 

 

[Abulafia]

19 hours ago, Calm said:

Marion Smith was giving lectures on abuse at church, so the awareness and worry about abuse was present in that community and many others.  Parents were questioning their kids or possibly overheard talking about it by kids.  Kids talk with other kids, including older with younger.  It is possible the kids picked up knowledge from adults worried about abuse.  It is possible they picked it up from experiencing abuse.

CFR on this. From the records I have she gave one talk in a relief society lesson at her Bountiful Ward. She didn't appear to be doing a fireside circuit or anything like that.

[kllindley]

3 hours ago, Abulafia said:

And another one who didn't bother listening to the presentation. 

How do you get to make that declaration? Did you just assume that because I didn't agree with you, I must not have listened? Who's being condescending?

Well, I did listen, thank you. And I stand by my assessment that the entire presentation is an artifact from the historical context. 

3 hours ago, Abulafia said:

I can assure you Marion Smith was kept in check and brought to task if other panellists felt she strayed too much into unsubstantiated areas.  Most of the time. 99.9% she doesn't. 

Can you give me a time stamp of one time this happened? I just relistened to the question and answer session and did not hear her brought to task a single time. 

I did hear her claim that a prominent child psychiatrist was treating 4 different sex rings simultaneously with no one correcting that information. 

 

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Abulafia said:

And another one who didn't bother listening to the presentation.   I linked to it because at the time there was more likely to be leniency when dealing with child abusers.. I can assure you Marion Smith was kept in check and brought to task if other panellists felt she strayed too much into unsubstantiated areas.  Most of the time. 99.9% she doesn't. 

The dynamics of this group are also exhausting Kengo.

 

Calm, I think planting false memories under hypnotic or other techniques may be possible for certain individuals  who are already mentally ill.  I'd put Teal Swan in that category  from the little I know about her.

 

But that's widely different to 6 kids who remember a father's abuse. Baby sitter abuse and a sex ring.

 

 

So the McMartin case...there were normal children involved there (though it looks to be triggered by a likely disturbed adult imo, police sent out a form letter that led to parents questioning kids and reports of abuse from came them).  Does that mean in regards to their testimony, you believe it shouldn't be dismissed likely caused by the process and not actual abuse?  That there was actual abuse widely involved?

Edited October 24, 2018 by Calm