Satanic Ritual Abuse and Satanism - Part 2
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>Everything I posted was factual
Somehow, the word "NOT" was removed from before the
word "factual".
- SOCkM
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
catherine yronwode
> "Anon" <anon...@cotse.com> wrote:
> > nguyen <aik...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > "Anon" <anon...@cotse.com> wrote:
> >
[unattributed]
> > > > > What is this flap about Acquino?
> >
[Anon]
> > > > You can read about some if it here:
> >
> > > > http://www.illusions.com/opf/Aquinoindex.htm
> >
> > > > http://www.illusions.com/opf/MAquino_frm.htm
> >
> > > > http://www5.electriciti.com/curious/
> >
[nguyen]
> > > Yes, but aren't most of the allegations some 15 years old
> > > by now?
> >
[Anon]
> > No, some of the allegations are as recent
> > as three weeks ago. Do a dejanews search on
> > Ted Gunderson and the Franklin case or
> > read the information on the sites listed
> > above a bit more carefully.
> >
> > The Aquino censorship lawsuit against Electriciti
> > is exactly three years old, and he did that
> > in an attempt to punish the person who posted
> > information about his titling and dismissal
> > (the appellate records are 8 yrs old) and
> > to keep the information off of the internet.
> > He then tried to take several web pages down
> > that had this information on it.
> >
> > That's what the flap is about.
> >
[Inspector General]
> No. That is not what this flap is all about. This is a seven-year-long
> cyber-stalking obsession growing out of Linda Blood's (Bloodworth's)
> "fatal-attraction" sexual fixation on Michael Aqino as she admitted in
> the introduction to her 1994 book The New Satanists. Curio, a.k.a.
> Karen Jones, either is Linda Bloodworth, or is someone very close to
> her. The connections are long-standing and obvious. Curio has been
> driven off several news groups and has lost several servers as a
> result of this obsession. She cites people like Kevin Filan and Ted
> Gunnerson as supporting authorities. Kevin Filan is a self-styled
> satanist wanted for questioning in a New York child abuse case, and a
> Georgia cyber-stalking case. Ted Gunnerson firmly believes that there
> was a network of tunnels used for satanic rituals under the McMartin
> PreSchool. Filan is a dangerous hooligan, Gunnerson is a nut, and
> Curio is still masturbating every night over a picture of Mikey Aqino.
> That's what this flap is all about.
Well, i remember the original case against Michael Acquino (i live in
the SF Bay Area), but the above assertion that the posts by Curio /
Karen Jones containing general and wide-ranging information about court
cases in which Satanists and people of other non-Judeo-Islamic-Christian
religions were accused or convicted of child abuse, murder, torture, and
the like did not focus on Michael Acquino in any way that was obvious to
me. Perhaps i overlooked something -- and if i did, i'd like to be
corrected on that -- but if Acquino was the target (according to
Inspector General) then why were the collected court cases about all
sorts of random, unknown people in Africa, India, and so forth?
Most of us who read usenet are sophisticated enough to recognize a
distinction between non J-I-C religions and Satanism, and between
psychopaths and non-psychopaths in ANY religion. Karen Jones / Curio's
failure to include accounts of psychopathic criminal acts committed by
Christians was a flaw in the otherwise interesting series of court
cases, but such a post -- even if programmaticaly pro-Christian by
virtue of its ommissions -- doesn't relate to a cyber-stalking of
Michael Acquino. If Karen Jones / Curio has something specific to say
about Micahel Acquino, she could have just do so. And, conversely,
since she did NOT target him, why is the Inspector General claiming
that her post was part of an anti-Acquino campaign? Is he grasping at
straws, or am i missing something important here?
Finally, there is the matter of the Inspector General's slandering of
Kevin Filan and Ted Gunnerson. The fact that Karen Jones /Curio "cites
people like [them]" is absolutely irrelevant to any possible connection
she may or may not have to Michael Acquino. The Inspector General has
lost all credibility and revealed himself to be a nut-case of the first
rank by slinging about heresay about these people. I don't know either
one of them, but i do know a smear campaign when i see one -- and that
was a pretty obvious attempt to run a low-class guilt-by-association
game on the net. It won't work, becuase "citing" someone is not (yet) a
criminal offense, nor is being "wanted for questioning" in a criminal
case. (Further, i have to ask, is Kevin wanted as an eye witness? as a
suspect? or as a character witness? Unless the Inspector General or
Kevin Filan tell us the story behind that bit of fluffy logic, the whole
thing is just hot air.)
Soap operas are interesting, i admit, but this one is short of substabce
... so far.
cat yronwode
The Inspector General
Catharine:
You've been smelling that wyanga powder again, babe! Everything I
posted was factual -- especially about Gunnerson, Filan and Blood. How
foolish can you be in the face of Curio's constant references to
Aquino?
Here's the quote from Blood's 1994 book:
The New Satanists, page 10: -- "....During the several months I
drifted around in a blind haze of love (for Aquino), I abdicated my
ability to question his ideas and actions. Now I had only my
devastated life to deal with. I spent four years in treatment for
depression. Sometimes when it felt as if the only alternative was to
kill myself, I would pick up the phone and scream abuse at Aquino's
answering machine. I didn't care whether it was a "nice" thing to do.
I felt I was fighting for my very survival. It took me a long time to
begin to live again and to get my mind to function properly. I started
to work with the new cult-monitoring organizations. . ."
Now this woman (the force behind "Curio") left her husband to follow
Aquino based on articles he wrote in sci-fi fanzines! Even when she
knew that Aquino was married. By her own admission there was no sex
between them. She freely admits that she was an obsessed "groupie" or
follower and that Aquino was never more than friendly with her. This
whole thing is so sick as to be ludicrous. It is the same syndrome as
the sick woman who broke into Brad Pitt's house and went to sleep in
his bed wearing his undershorts! -- or Stephen Kings' "Misery", if you
remember that one "Mister man!".....
Now, if "Curio" isn't Linda Blood (Bloodworth) then she must be
Linda's very, very, very close friend or sister. This woman is a sick
stalker. Please don't give her any more credence.
You certainly aren't discrediting me. Everything I've posted about
her, and Gunnerson and Filan, is fact -- ad nauseum -- and remember
your boy friend calls himself a "satanist," so take a long look close
to home. Do you want nuts like Curio coming after nagasiva? Think
about it. . .
The Inspector General
(P.S. And BTW, I have no connection with the Temple of Set,
I have never actually met Mike Aquino, and I am not a "satanist".
My interest in this is its reflection on the occult in general, and
Magick in particular. Believe it or not, we are on the same side --
Or, if not, we should be.....)
IX Corp
The Inspector General <Inspec...@worldcom.net> wrote:
>
>You've been smelling that wyanga powder again, babe! Everything I
>posted was factual -- especially about Gunnerson, Filan and Blood.
You, sir, are an idiot.
-Lupo
"The struggling for knowledge hath a pleasure in it like that of wrestling
with a fine woman" -George Savile <i...@fnord.io.com>
catherine yronwode
clear, because this is a pretty slippery situation in terms of charges
and countercharges:
> >> long cyber-stalking obsession growing out of Linda Blood's
> >> (Bloodworth's) "fatal-attraction" sexual fixation on Michael Aqino
> >> as she admitted in the introduction to her 1994 book The New
> >> Satanists. Curio, a.k.a. Karen Jones, either is Linda Bloodworth,
> >> or is someone very close to her. The connections are long-standing
> >> and obvious. Curio has been driven off several news groups and has
> >> lost several servers as a result of this obsession. She cites
> >> people like Kevin Filan and Ted Gunnerson as supporting
> >> authorities. Kevin Filan is a self-styled satanist wanted for
> >> questioning in a New York child abuse case, and a Georgia cyber-
> >> stalking case. Ted Gunnerson firmly believes that there was a
> >> network of tunnels used for satanic rituals under the McMartin
> >> PreSchool. Filan is a dangerous hooligan, Gunnerson is a nut, and
> >> Curio is still masturbating every night over a picture of Mikey
> >> Aqino. That's what this flap is all about.
> >
> >Well, i remember the original case against Michael Acquino (i live in
> >the SF Bay Area), but the above assertion that the posts by Curio /
> >Karen Jones containing general and wide-ranging information about
> >court cases in which Satanists and people of other non-Judeo-Islamic-
> >Christian religions were accused or convicted of child abuse, murder,
> >torture, and the like did not focus on Michael Acquino in any way
> >that was obvious to me. Perhaps i overlooked something -- and if i
> >did, i'd like to be corrected on that -- but if Acquino was the
> >target (according to Inspector General) then why were the collected
> >court cases about all sorts of random, unknown people in Africa,
> >India, and so forth?
> >
> >Most of us who read usenet are sophisticated enough to recognize a
> >distinction between non J-I-C religions and Satanism, and between
> >psychopaths and non-psychopaths in ANY religion. Karen Jones /
> >Curio's failure to include accounts of psychopathic criminal acts
> >committed by Christians was a flaw in the otherwise interesting
> >series of court cases, but such a post -- even if programmaticaly
> >pro-Christian by virtue of its ommissions -- doesn't relate to a
> >cyber-stalking of Michael Acquino. If Karen Jones / Curio has
> >something specific to say about Michael Acquino, she could have just
> >do so. And, conversely, since she did NOT target him, why is the
> >Inspector General claiming that her post was part of an anti-Acquino
> >campaign? Is he grasping at straws, or am i missing something
> >important here?
> >
> >Finally, there is the matter of the Inspector General's slandering of
> >Kevin Filan and Ted Gunnerson. The fact that Karen Jones /Curio
> >"cites people like [them]" is absolutely irrelevant to any possible
> >connection she may or may not have to Michael Acquino. The Inspector
> >General has lost all credibility and revealed himself to be a nut-
> >case of the first rank by slinging about heresay about these people.
> >I don't know either one of them, but i do know a smear campaign when
> >i see one -- and that was a pretty obvious attempt to run a low-class
> >guilt-by-association game on the net. It won't work, becuase "citing"
> >someone is not (yet) a criminal offense, nor is being "wanted for
> >questioning" in a criminal case. (Further, i have to ask, is Kevin
> >wanted as an eye witness? as a suspect? or as a character witness?
> >Unless the Inspector General or Kevin Filan tell us the story behind
> >that bit of fluffy logic, the whole thing is just hot air.)
> >
> >Soap operas are interesting, i admit, but this one is short of
> >substabce ... so far.
> >
> >cat yronwode
>
> Catharine:
>
> You've been smelling that wyanga powder again, babe!
Well, it's true that i took the offensive and called you a nut-case, so
i guess i deserved that silly remark.
> Everything I
> posted was factual -- especially about Gunnerson, Filan and Blood.
So? I did not say it was not. I asked for further information. I can
clip-and-copy one such request right here:
"Further, i have to ask, is Kevin
wanted as an eye witness? as a suspect?
or as a character witness?"
Please explain your charges, or i shall have no reason to believe that
you, a person who hides behind a pseudonym, is factual in speech.
> How foolish can you be in the face of Curio's constant references to
> Aquino?
I am responding to a thread in usenet in which Curio / Karen Jones did
not seem to mention Michael Acquino at all, much less on a "constant"
basis. You claim that the poster is actually someone named Linda
Bloodworth, who is obsessed with Michael Acquino -- but the poster,
Karen Jones / Curio, is obviously NOT obsessed with Acquino and never
mentioned him at all.
> Here's the quote from Blood's 1994 book:
>
> The New Satanists, page 10: -- "....During the several months I
> drifted around in a blind haze of love (for Aquino), I abdicated my
> ability to question his ideas and actions. Now I had only my
> devastated life to deal with. I spent four years in treatment for
> depression. Sometimes when it felt as if the only alternative was to
> kill myself, I would pick up the phone and scream abuse at Aquino's
> answering machine. I didn't care whether it was a "nice" thing to do.
> I felt I was fighting for my very survival. It took me a long time to
> begin to live again and to get my mind to function properly. I started
> to work with the new cult-monitoring organizations. . ."
This quote is all very well and good, but you have not yet demonstrated
a) a link between the Jones / Curio posts and mention of Acquino
b) a link between Jones / Curio and Bloodworth / Blood
And, in fact, the poster denied the link, so now we are left with only
word-against-word charges.
On your side i see no evidence.
On the side of the poster i see a fragile argument-by-lack-of-evidence:
namely, if the target of the posts was Acquino, as you claim, and the
poster is Blood / Bloodworth, who is obsessive about Acquino, as you
claim, yet no mention of him was made in the posts, then it is less
likely that Acquino's stalker (Blood / Bloodowrth) made the posts, since
they bear no signs of obsessive interest in him. .
> Now this woman (the force behind "Curio") left her husband to follow
> Aquino based on articles he wrote in sci-fi fanzines! Even when she
> knew that Aquino was married. By her own admission there was no sex
> between them. She freely admits that she was an obsessed "groupie" or
> follower and that Aquino was never more than friendly with her. This
> whole thing is so sick as to be ludicrous. It is the same syndrome as
> the sick woman who broke into Brad Pitt's house and went to sleep in
> his bed wearing his undershorts! -- or Stephen Kings' "Misery", if you
> remember that one "Mister man!".....
Oh, yes, i know those events well, the Stephen King one in particular,
as i became involved in it peripherally. And if Michael Acquino is the
target of such a stalker, i pity him. And if Linda Bloodworth is such a
stalker, i understand his plight. But the poster posing as Karen Jones /
Curio did NOT seem to be stalking Michael Acquino. So why are you
getting so lathered up?
> Now, if "Curio" isn't Linda Blood (Bloodworth) then she must be
> Linda's very, very, very close friend or sister. This woman is a sick
> stalker. Please don't give her any more credence.
I am not giving her "credence." The court reports she posted speak for
themselves. I just wonder why YOU are so convinced that Karen Jones /
Curio "must be" Linda Blood / Bloodworth's "very, very, very close
friend." I mean, you drag all this stuff in front of us, but you are not
substantiating your charges, and i really don't understand your
motivation.
Who are you? How did you get involved in this?
> You certainly aren't discrediting me. Everything I've posted about
> her, and Gunnerson and Filan, is fact -- ad nauseum --
Well, then please reply to the questions i asked. They were serious
queries. Why is Kevin Filan wanted for questioning in a child abuse case
and a cyber-stalking case? Is he hiding from the police at this time? If
he is not in hiding, why has he not yet been questioned by the police?
You are spinning a mystery here. I seek clarity.
> and remember
> your boy friend calls himself a "satanist," so take a long look close
> to home. Do you want nuts like Curio coming after nagasiva? Think
> about it. . .
No one wants nuts of any kind coming after them. But nuts don't only
target satanists. I have had my share of them too. Some people are
mentally ill and they can cause a lot of mischief.
As i said before, if Michael Acquino is being stalked, i sympathize with
him. But i saw no evidence in those posts of old court cases that
reflected stalking behaviour.
> The Inspector General
>
> (P.S. And BTW, I have no connection with the Temple of Set,
> I have never actually met Mike Aquino, and I am not a "satanist".
> My interest in this is its reflection on the occult in general, and
> Magick in particular. Believe it or not, we are on the same side --
> Or, if not, we should be.....)
I am glad to hear that you believe us to be on the same side., Very well
and good, but who are you fighting? Some person who posted a bunch of
old court cases? Why do such posts cause you to rise up with charges of
cyber-stalking? I really am serious about these questions -- i am one of
those bull-headed Taureans -- you haven't convinced me yet ... but i am
still listening.
cat yronwode
Hoodoo in Theory and Practice -- http://www.luckymojo.com/hoodoo.html
Freemasonry for Women ------- http://www.luckymojo.com/comasonry.html
No personal e-mail, please; just catch me in usenet; i read it daily.
Lucky Mojo Curio Co. http://www.luckymojo.com/luckymojocatalogue.html
Send e-mail with your street address to cata...@luckymojo.com
and receive our free 32 page catalogue of hoodoo supplies and amulets
nguyen
catherine yronwode <c...@luckymojo.com> wrote:
> I am glad to hear that you believe us to be on the same side., Very
well
> and good, but who are you fighting? Some person who posted a bunch of
> old court cases? Why do such posts cause you to rise up with charges
of
> cyber-stalking? I really am serious about these questions -- i am one
of
> those bull-headed Taureans -- you haven't convinced me yet ... but i
am
> still listening.
>
> cat yronwode
>
This Curio person posted some references in response to one of my
questions and I followed up. They seem to be copies as you say of
newspaper reports and trail transcripts that actually occurred. All of
this must be slightly embaressing for Mr. Aquino, but since it's all
factual matters of the record insofar as the documents existence and
legality are concerned (not necessarily implying that the allegations
are so) and do not seem to be libelous in nature.
Seeing this is a free country, there are no censoring mechanisms on this
ng, and that they do pertain to a self promoted celebrity and "public
personage" of magical social circles in a serious way ... as well as not
being posted in a spamming way ... they probably are actually relevant
to the "mission statement" of the ng e.g. technical and scholarly
discussion of magickal issues.
In other words i'm with you here.
--
nguyen
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Pearlz & Maggie-the-Cat
Inspector general? Inspector general of what?
Hopefully none of the people involved in this mess ever
try to enlighten anyone else.
Jeesh!
- Pearlz -
The Inspector General
<c...@luckymojo.com> wrote:
>I am preserving the entire text of what follows to keep the context
>clear, because this is a pretty slippery situation in terms of charges
>and countercharges:
>
Well, pardon me if I delete 247 lines of it for "clarity" because
you've gone around in circles, contradicted yourself and changed your
point of view a couple of times. Please understand, Curio (Karen
Jones) is not some poor innocent little newbie who just wants to be
heard -- she is one of the most obsessed cyber-stalkers on use net. If
you didn't know this, I'm sure several people have already informed
you of it. Curio is getting from you just what she wants: attention
and back-and-forth discussion. You are giving her this attention for
reasons I'll leave un-stated, except to say that they are certainly
not in the best interests of occultists, pagans, magicians, and
satanists (who, for the most part are not child-molesting monsters.)
Now, if you want to have an answer to your question about
Curio's long-standing rage against Aquino, then I suggest: You Ask Him
!!! (pardon me for shouting, be this is so obvious that it reeks.)
I don't have his e-mail anymore but I'm sure you can find it, or
somebody as bored, disgusted and fed-up with this charade as I am will
provide it for you.
He'll give you "the whole nine yards" on Curio.
I'm through discussing this with you, but if this woman
persists in spamming with this mendacious clipping file of her's on
this news group, I'll paste the quote from the Linda Blood book on
every one of them.
Once again, I have no connection with The Temple of Set, I
have never met Michael Aquino, except through correspondence, and I am
not, and never have been, a satanist.
Now you do your research. Contact Michael Aquino and find
out about Curio -- and until you do, please spare us all this endless
convoluted and contrived harping about "facts" and "innuendos." It's
transparent and borrrrrrrrrrrrrrring.
The Inspector General
IX Corp
>Curio's long-standing rage against Aquino, then I suggest: You Ask Him
>!!! (pardon me for shouting, be this is so obvious that it reeks.)
I am sure you will get as unbiased a response as you would get if you
asked Curio about Michael Aquino.
-Lupo
"The reductionist worldview is chilling and impersonal. It has to be
accepted as it is, not because we like it, but because that is the way the
world works."-Steven Weinberg <i...@io.com>
oberon
> I am preserving the entire text of what follows to keep the context
> clear, because this is a pretty slippery situation in terms of charges
> and countercharges:
> [snipped hundreds of lines]
Whether someone is wanted or not is immaterial to me. Kevin is but one of
many very serious and opinionated individuals, of which I am not the least
or best.
Posting things like that can be handled a few ways: As slander, or
defamation. Both are illegal. If I were to say that person XYZ is "a
convicted criminal who rapes babies." and the post were traced to my server
there would be legal consequences.
A. my isp would terminate my account.
B. I could be sued in civil court for privacy, slander, or defamation.
C. I might be sued in criminal court for contempt of court, fraud, or a
criminal violation of the right to privacy act that you sign when you check
out court cases.
Anyway, its up to Kevin to determine who to react.
--
- = - = -
IAU #1 SataniCon #1 EAC #-69 AA #?
http://www.dse-nets.com/~oberon
HACK_CODE;;70 65 61 63 65 0A 0A 68 61 63 6B 0A 74 68 65 0A 70 6C 61 6E 65
74h
- = - = -
2pac...@freedom.net
oberon <user...@uswest.net> wrote in message
news:39820112...@uswest.net...
> Whether someone is wanted or not is immaterial to me. Kevin is but one of
> many very serious and opinionated individuals, of which I am not the least
> or best.
> Anyway, its up to Kevin to determine who to react.
Dude, you're fairly new in these parts, right? You seem to appear
in a lot of threads making an attempt to be "fair" and "objective,"
and that's admirable, but let me suggest that there is a whole history
here that you may be only dimly aware of. The person of whom you
speak may be "serious" and "opinionated," but he is a whole lot more
besides that. It would take a long time and a lot of work on your part to
catch up on all of this and to then be able to form a worthwhile opinion
about it, but if you really want to get involved, perhaps that's what
you should do. There are resources for this available both online and
off. Otherwise, you are likely to end up looking a bit silly here.
Presumptions based on a few alt.satanism postings you've read over
the last few weeks are in this case quite inadequate.
Thanks for your time.
2pac...@freedom.net
2pac...@freedom.net
Wilderbeast
wrote:
>catherine yronwode wrote:
>
>> I am preserving the entire text of what follows to keep the context
>> clear, because this is a pretty slippery situation in terms of charges
>> and countercharges:
>> [snipped hundreds of lines]
>
>Whether someone is wanted or not is immaterial to me. Kevin is but one of
>many very serious and opinionated individuals, of which I am not the least
>or best.
>
>Posting things like that can be handled a few ways: As slander, or
>defamation. Both are illegal. If I were to say that person XYZ is "a
>convicted criminal who rapes babies." and the post were traced to my server
>there would be legal consequences.
>A. my isp would terminate my account.
>B. I could be sued in civil court for privacy, slander, or defamation.
>C. I might be sued in criminal court for contempt of court, fraud, or a
>criminal violation of the right to privacy act that you sign when you check
>out court cases.
>
>Anyway, its up to Kevin to determine who to react.
I assume you mean "how" to react? You may recall the sad case of Oscar
Wilde back in the Victorian era. The Marquis of Queensbury left his
card at Wilde's club addressed to "Oscar Wilde, posing as sodomite."
Wilde decided to sue his boy friend's father for the damage to his
reputation. However, when the case got into court, the inevitable
dirt-digging that makes any libel or slander suit a nightmare for the
plaintiff, turned so out so badly for Wilde that he was bound over to
criminal court on sodomy charges (it was a felony in England in those
days). Wilde went to the workhouse for ten years. Prison destroyed and
drastically shortened his life. Unless one is a veritable saint, suing
for libel or slander is still a nightmare -- and if the insinuations
of criminal activity one is suing for turn out to be true, then -- as
in the case of Wilde -- the plaintiff in a civil suit can suddenly
find himself the defendant in a criminal prosecution.
You see you are not quite correct. Calling someone a crook is
not illegal; it's legally actionable -- and if the guy you call a
crook sues you and proves you wrong, he collects -- if he's very, very
lucky and persistent -- only a monetary judgement. However, the nasty
catch is if he proves (or it becomes established) that you are a
crook, then you go to jail. :-( Perhaps it's not fair, but that's the
way the law works.
As you pointed out, it is up to Kevin to determine how to react.
The Inspector General
wrote:
>catherine yronwode wrote:
>
>> I am preserving the entire text of what follows to keep the context
>> clear, because this is a pretty slippery situation in terms of charges
>> and countercharges:
>> [snipped hundreds of lines]
>
>Whether someone is wanted or not is immaterial to me. Kevin is but one of
>many very serious and opinionated individuals, of which I am not the least
>or best.
>
>Posting things like that can be handled a few ways: As slander, or
>defamation. Both are illegal. If I were to say that person XYZ is "a
>convicted criminal who rapes babies." and the post were traced to my server
>there would be legal consequences.
>A. my isp would terminate my account.
>B. I could be sued in civil court for privacy, slander, or defamation.
>C. I might be sued in criminal court for contempt of court, fraud, or a
>criminal violation of the right to privacy act that you sign when you check
>out court cases.
>
>Anyway, its up to Kevin to determine who to react.
Oberon:
You are right! Kevin should sue -- but let's get him on-target, shall
we? -- And Catherine, if you had any concern for people's feelings,
why did you have to stir this up? Curio causes this kind of "misery"
everywhere she goes. She thrives on it, and you fell for it.
>news1.alsv1.occa.home.com!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!enews.sgi.com!newsxfer.eecs.umich.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp2.deja.com!nnrp1.deja.com!not-for-mail
>From: lord...@churchofsatan.org
>Newsgroups: alt.satanism
>Subject: Pedo-Filan Exposed!
>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 01:29:27 GMT
>Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
>Lines: 45
>Message-ID: <8ltc1k$fdt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.197.136.135
>X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Jul 29 01:29:27 2000 GMT
>X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT 5.0)
>X-Http-Proxy: 1.1 x68.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 64.197.136.135
>X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDsuperchub
>Xref: newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com alt.satanism:30093468
>
>I would like to draw everyone's attention (below) to an actual post by
>Kevin Filan to a fellow pedophile in a teen sex newsgroup! It is truly
>sad and ironic that Mr. Filan has spent the better part of the last two
>years promoting and fostering the belief that I have been involved in
>elicit sexual activity with minors and domestic pets. Filan, his
>friends Robert Merciless, Andre Schlesinger, John Davis, the Gilmores
>and others, members of Ms. Barton's Church of Satan, in a desperate
>attempt to galvanize their followers, have borrowed a page from
>Christian fundamentalists, blaming Lord Egan for their internal strife.
>I have become the convenient "devil" in Barton's strange, twisted,
>medieval theology.
>
>The facts speak for themselves; my police record is spotless. However,
>Mr. Filan HAS been arraigned on child abuse charges.
>
>Lord Egan
>First Church of Satan
>Salem, Massachusetts
>http://churchofsatan.org
>
>
>Subject: Re: EVERYONE READ (LIFE/DEATH)
>From: "SATAN CHRIST" <har...@ultinet.net>
>Date: 1999/05/19
>Newsgroups: alt.teens.sexuality
>
>I second the motion! So young cute teens.....
>let's see what you've got!
>
><Eupho...@webtv.net> wrote in message
>news:5724-37...@newsd-291.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
>
>>>Quick effortless foot note...<<
>
>>>Allow me to pronounce this with as much clarity possible. If there
>are any females who lurk in this NG under the illicit age of eighteen
>with private photo galleries of themselves in the buff then please by
>all means post one, or if prude, mail me directly. I'm not old enough
>for the pedophile classification although much pleasure is derived from
>teen porn.<<
catherine yronwode
>
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:54:26 -0700, oberon <user...@uswest.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >Whether someone is wanted or not is immaterial to me. Kevin is but
> >one of many very serious and opinionated individuals, of which I am
> >not the least or best.
> >
> >Posting things like that can be handled a few ways: As slander, or
> >defamation. Both are illegal. If I were to say that person XYZ is
> >"a convicted criminal who rapes babies." and the post were traced to
> >my server there would be legal consequences.
> >A. my isp would terminate my account.
> >B. I could be sued in civil court for privacy, slander, or
> >defamation.
> >C. I might be sued in criminal court for contempt of court, fraud, or
> >a criminal violation of the right to privacy act that you sign when
> >you check out court cases.
> >
> >Anyway, its up to Kevin to determine who to react.
>
> we? -- And Catherine, if you had any concern for people's feelings,
> why did you have to stir this up? Curio causes this kind of "misery"
> everywhere she goes. She thrives on it, and you fell for it.
I did not "have to stir this up," but i am interested in the subject.
First, Kevin Filan and i once briefly corresponded, and i recognized his
name. Second, as a woman and the mother of female child, i have a strong
interest in defending girls and women from sexual abuse. Such charges --
whether against Christians, Pagans, Satanists, or atheists -- ALWAYS
draw my attention.
> >From: lord...@churchofsatan.org
> >Newsgroups: alt.satanism
> >Subject: Pedo-Filan Exposed!
> >Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 01:29:27 GMT
> >Message-ID: <8ltc1k$fdt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
> >The facts speak for themselves; my police record is spotless.
> >However, Mr. Filan HAS been arraigned on child abuse charges.
> >
> >Lord Egan
> >First Church of Satan
> >Salem, Massachusetts
> >http://churchofsatan.org
Having learned long ago to not get worked up over usenet flame-wars, i
simply asked for more information. zzthanks for this refernce -- and the
charges are being made with enough conviction that i shall do a web
search for further information becuase the above material still falls
short of my journalistic standards: We have the who (Kevin Filan) and
the what (arraigned on charges of child sex abuse) but we lack the when,
where, and how (in this case, how did he do the deed -- was it the
result of internet contacts, or did he meet the child through the occult
community). And, of course, the person making the charge is using a
pseudonym, giving him or her an automatic 90-point drop in credibility.
Can you direct me to a post or web site with a FACTUAL account this
matter?
Thanks in advance,
cat
Hoodoo in Theory and Practice -- http://www.luckymojo.com/hoodoo.html
Lucky W Amulet Archive --------- http://www.luckymojo.com/luckyw.html
The Inspector General
<c...@luckymojo.com> wrote:
>Hoodoo in Theory and Practice -- http://www.luckymojo.com/hoodoo.html
>Lucky W Amulet Archive --------- http://www.luckymojo.com/luckyw.html
>
>No personal e-mail, please; just catch me in usenet; i read it daily.
From: The Office of the Inspector General
To: Catherine Yronewode
Subj: Continued investigation of Karen Jones (a.k.a "Curio")
Kevin Filan, Ted Gunnerson , et allia.
Catherine:
This letter authorizes you to conduct a complete and exhaustive
investigation of the Curio Matter, its principals and its
ramifications. You are hereby appointed Special Deputy Inspector and
all members, affiliates and denizens at large are enjoined to give you
their full cooperation in this appointed task.
You are to make a full and public report on your findings
here on this news group before the end of this year, but you and all
others are asked to withhold any more discussion of this sensitive
(and exasperating) issue until you have marshaled ALL the facts and
are ready to deliver your complete report.
With the utmost confidence in your ability to carry out
this task in an indefatigable and discreet manner, I consign this
vital work to your capable hands.
The Inspector General
catherine yronwode
>
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 03:11:31 GMT, catherine yronwode
> <c...@luckymojo.com> wrote:
> >...the charges are being made with enough conviction that i shall do
> >a web search for further information becuase the above material still
> >falls short of my journalistic standards: We have the who (Kevin
> >Filan) and the what (arraigned on charges of child sex abuse) but we
> >lack the when, where, and how (in this case, how did he do the deed
> >-- was it the result of internet contacts, or did he meet the child
> >through the occult community). And, of course, the person making the
> >charge is using a pseudonym, giving him or her an automatic 90-point
> >drop in credibility. Can you direct me to a post or web site with a
> >FACTUAL account this matter?
> >
> >Thanks in advance,
> Catherine:
>
> This letter authorizes you to conduct a complete and exhaustive
> investigation of the Curio Matter, its principals and its
> ramifications. You are hereby appointed Special Deputy Inspector and
> all members, affiliates and denizens at large are enjoined to give you
> their full cooperation in this appointed task.
Very funny -- but Curio and Aquino do not interest me much. I am more
interested in media accounts of violence to and by children (the subject
of the original post). Aquino seems perfectly capable of fighting his
own battles.
I have done a web search on Kevin Filan and child abuse and turned up
not one single site that speaks of such mattersl. All i could find that
was unusual was that Kevin's long-standing web site is now turning up a
404. So who is "Lord Egan" and why is he stating as fact that Kevin
Filan has been arraigned on charges of child abuse? Could he give us the
rest of the jouranistic "w"s -- at least the when and where?
cat yronwode
Hoodoo in Theory and Practice -- http://www.luckymojo.com/hoodoo.html
Lucky W Amulet Archive --------- http://www.luckymojo.com/luckyw.html
No personal e-mail, please; just catch me in usenet; i read it daily.
The Inspector General
<c...@luckymojo.com> wrote:
>The Inspector General wrote:
Just so you'll keep to the letter of your commission, I'm re-posting
it for you.
>
From: The Office of the Inspector General
To: Catherine Yronwode
Subj: Continued investigation of Karen Jones (a.k.a "Curio")
Kevin Filan, Ted Gunnerson , et allia.
Catherine:
This letter authorizes you to conduct a complete and exhaustive
investigation of the Curio Matter, its principals and its
ramifications. You are hereby appointed Special Deputy Inspector and
all members, affiliates and denizens at large are enjoined to give you
their full cooperation in this appointed task.
You are to make a full and public report on your findings
here on this news group before the end of this year, but you and all
others are asked to withhold any more discussion of this sensitive
(and exasperating) issue until you have marshaled ALL the facts and
are ready to deliver your complete report.
With the utmost confidence in your ability to carry out
this task in an indefatigable and discreet manner, I consign this
vital work to your capable hands.
The Inspector General
Now, get ALL the facts, get them all together, and then (and only
then) present your report. I know you can do it. I have faith in you.
The I. G.
2pac...@freedom.net
catherine yronwode <c...@luckymojo.com> wrote in message
news:39825B...@luckymojo.com...
> I have done a web search on Kevin Filan and child abuse and turned up
> not one single site that speaks of such matters
Oh well, that settles the issue then! Most child abusers put up web sites
advertising their interests, don't they?
Another twit who thinks you can find out everything there is to know via
a "web search." Good luck, Inspector.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>Now, get ALL the facts, get them all together, and then (and
only
>then) present your report.
You wouldn't know a "fact" if it bit you on your satanic ass,
you lying, theiving, good-for-nothing child molester.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
><ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Inspec...@worldcom.org (The Inspector General) wrote:
>>
>>>Now, get ALL the facts, get them all together, and then (and
>>only
>>>then) present your report.
>>
>>You wouldn't know a "fact" if it bit you on your satanic ass,
>>you lying, theiving, good-for-nothing child molester.
>>
>>- SOCkM
>
>
>I'm sure you don't realize how pathetic and childish the above
>statement is.
Sorry "Inspector" Dickehead, but I take a firm stand against
child molesters like you.
If you think that this is pathetic and childish, then so be it.
You're an idiot, so who cares what you think.
IX Corp
>
>
>oberon <user...@uswest.net> wrote in message
>news:39820112...@uswest.net...
>
>> many very serious and opinionated individuals, of which I am not the least
>> or best.
>
>in a lot of threads making an attempt to be "fair" and "objective,"
>and that's admirable, but let me suggest that there is a whole history
>here that you may be only dimly aware of. The person of whom you
>speak may be "serious" and "opinionated," but he is a whole lot more
>besides that. It would take a long time and a lot of work on your part to
>catch up on all of this and to then be able to form a worthwhile opinion
>about it, but if you really want to get involved, perhaps that's what
>you should do. There are resources for this available both online and
>off. Otherwise, you are likely to end up looking a bit silly here.
>Presumptions based on a few alt.satanism postings you've read over
>the last few weeks are in this case quite inadequate.
All she need do is ask the principles involved, Tim.
Catherine's husband has been around for longer than you've been reading
Foucault.
Re Oé…¬tat
Son_of_Chive_Mynde <ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid>
wrote:
> Inspec...@worldcom.org (The Inspector General) wrote:
>
> >Now, get ALL the facts, get them all together, and then (and
> only
> >then) present your report.
>
> You wouldn't know a "fact" if it bit you on your satanic ass,
> you lying, theiving, good-for-nothing child molester.
>
> - SOCkM
>
Lying.
Theiving.
Good for nothing.
Child molester.
Did he rape his mommy and kill his daddy, too?
Children.
Take your perversions somewhere else, please.
Re
The Inspector General
<ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>Inspec...@worldcom.org (The Inspector General) wrote:
>
>>Now, get ALL the facts, get them all together, and then (and
>only
>>then) present your report.
>
>You wouldn't know a "fact" if it bit you on your satanic ass,
>you lying, theiving, good-for-nothing child molester.
>
>- SOCkM
Son of Whoever Molested You:
I'm sure you don't realize how pathetic and childish the above
statement is. In Curio's case we have a woman sexually obsessed and
stalking a dark animus figure. In your case we seem to have a version
of the old joke about the Greek boy who left home because he didn't
like the way his father reared him -- but then went back because he
couldn't leave his brothers ('s) behind.
I pity both you and Curio, but my patience is exhausted much
quicker than my compassion. Stop making an obvious fool of yourself.
The Inspector General
starl...@bigfoot.com
<ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>Inspec...@worldcom.org (The Inspector General) wrote:
>>On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 21:06:01 -0700, Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>><ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Inspec...@worldcom.org (The Inspector General) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Now, get ALL the facts, get them all together, and then (and
>>>only
>>>>then) present your report.
>>>
>>>You wouldn't know a "fact" if it bit you on your satanic ass,
>>>you lying, theiving, good-for-nothing child molester.
>>>
>>>- SOCkM
>>
>>Son of Whoever Molested You:
>>
>>I'm sure you don't realize how pathetic and childish the above
>>statement is.
>
>Sorry "Inspector" Dickehead, but I take a firm stand against
>child molesters like you.
Kindly present some evidence that "Inspectorgeneral" is a child
molester or else shut the fuck up. You're lucky he doesn't sue you
for libel.
The Inspector General
>On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:58:15 -0700, Son_of_Chive_Mynde
><ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Inspec...@worldcom.org (The Inspector General) wrote:
>>>On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 21:06:01 -0700, Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>>><ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Inspec...@worldcom.org (The Inspector General) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Now, get ALL the facts, get them all together, and then (and
>>>>only
>>>>>then) present your report.
>>>>
>>>>You wouldn't know a "fact" if it bit you on your satanic ass,
>>>>you lying, theiving, good-for-nothing child molester.
>>>>
>>>>- SOCkM
>>>
>>>Son of Whoever Molested You:
>>>
>>>I'm sure you don't realize how pathetic and childish the above
>>>statement is.
>>
>>Sorry "Inspector" Dickehead, but I take a firm stand against
>>child molesters like you.
>
>Kindly present some evidence that "Inspectorgeneral" is a child
>molester or else shut the fuck up. You're lucky he doesn't sue you
>for libel.
>
Starlancer:
Thanks for your timely support on this one. It really is sad. This Son
of "Whatever" is self-admitedly a victim of some sort of child abuse
or molestation, so I do have a measure of sympathy for him in that
regard -- and no, I am not a child molester -- except to the extent
that this "child" believes I am "molesting" him here on alt.magick.
What he does not realize is that endless tantrums of this sort quickly
evaporate the reservoir of sympathy we all have for someone who has
suffered as a victim of this sort of crime. But this news group is
just not the place for this. we are not his therapy group, we are not
his peer group, and we are not even the group (the satanists) whom he
wants to incite a witch hunt against. He is in the wrong place with
the wrong message, and hurting whatever cause he might have in the
process.
What he does not realize is that if NAMBLA were to come on this
news group and start proselytizing their sick and perverted viewpoint,
I would be more ruthless and less sympathetic with them than I have
been with him -- or even with his stalker friend Curio. I despise
pedophiles. They ruin children's lives with their inexcusable acts --
for which there is never any justification regardless of their own
backgrounds. The excuse that: "I just can't help doing it" is no
excuse at all. Yes, this certainly is a national problem made worse by
the crazy-making policies of our government, the Orwellian attitudes
of our social service departments, the psychotherapy doctrine of
"treat the patient's delusion as if it were his reality", and
tabloid-media exploitation.
However, the bottom line in this issue is that alt.magick is
not the place for this. Such outpourings here are about as appropriate
as a hog-calling competition during a performance of Swan Lake and
just as offensive.
Kill-filling Son-of, and Curio is one way of handling them;
Ignoring them is a good idea. Complaining to their servers would also
help. Reasoning with them does no good at all.
The Inspector General
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:58:15 -0700, Son_of_Chive_Mynde
><ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Inspec...@worldcom.org (The Inspector General) wrote:
>>>On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 21:06:01 -0700, Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>>><ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Inspec...@worldcom.org (The Inspector General) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Now, get ALL the facts, get them all together, and then
(and
>>>>only
>>>>>then) present your report.
>>>>
>>>>You wouldn't know a "fact" if it bit you on your satanic ass,
>>>>you lying, theiving, good-for-nothing child molester.
>>>>
>>>>- SOCkM
>>>
>>>Son of Whoever Molested You:
>>>
>>>I'm sure you don't realize how pathetic and childish the above
>>>statement is.
>>
>>Sorry "Inspector" Dickehead, but I take a firm stand against
>>child molesters like you.
>
>Kindly present some evidence that "Inspectorgeneral" is a child
>molester or else shut the fuck up. You're lucky he doesn't sue
>you for libel.
You're a complete fool. I can say whatever I want. You can't
sue someone for libel unless you lose money from the damage that
has been done. Since "Inspector" asshole defends the
molestation of children by claiming that all children who say
that they have been molested are liars, I can only assume that
anyone who make such a wild ass claim in the face of scientific
and medical evidence to the contrary, must be a child molester.
Now, "Starlancer" kindly shut the fuck up. I'm sick of you and
Aquino's butt-boy Inspector waging SLAPP suits on anyone who
points out their obvious lies.
Anyone who denies that ritual abuse has happened and anyone who
claims that having sex with children is ok, and anyone who
claims that children make up lies about sexual abuse, is
defending child abuse and is complicit whith child abusers.
So, that makes you, Starlancer, Inspector General, and Aquino,
all duplicitous child molesters.
HAND.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>The Inspector General
Hey, asshole, I'm looking forward to your "libel" suit!
"Yer honor, my name is Inspector General, and the defendant,
Son_of_Chive_Mynde, libelled me..."
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!1
Now, FOAD, asshole.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>Inspec...@worldcom.org (The Inspector General) wrote:
>
>>The Inspector General
>
>Hey, asshole, I'm looking forward to your "libel" suit!
>
>"Yer honor, my name is Inspector General, and the defendant,
>Son_of_Chive_Mynde, libelled me..."
>
>BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!1
>
>Now, FOAD, asshole.
>
>- SOCkM
Subject: [Deprogramming] Response to Aquino Lawsuit Status:
From: curio
To: ca...@electriciti.com
Subject: Response to Aquino Lawsuit
Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 09:34:15 PDT
Having worked in many facets of the child abuse field for 10
years I've
seen all manner of atrocities committed against children and
witnessed
all types of adult games played to avoid culpability. Having
worked
inside government systems I've seen the lack of resources
allotted to
adequately investigate, let alone alleviate child abuse at it's
most
simplistic level - physical, emotional, sexual abuse and
neglect. Child
abuse is rampant. It's one of the secrets in our society that
nobody
wants to hear about.
After being involved in well over 600 unique situations I've
become
familiar with many aspects of child abuse cases. I've worked
equally at
exonerating those parents who were erroneously caught in the
System as
well as seeking justice for those children who needed
protection.
Ten years ago I was introduced to a newly recognized form of
child abuse.
The labels keep changing in the professional Community but for
my
purposes I'll call it ritual abuse. Having a 17 year personal
background
in the "occult" has educated me about types of individuals who
walk this
path - from the intentionally malevolent to the benevolent - and
everything in-between. As I've heard childrens statements about
their
abuse in occult settings and seen the evidence, this form of
maltreatment
is probably the most heinous abuse imaginable. Unfortunately,
not
everyone in the System is trained to recognize this form of
maltreatment.
It became politically popular for professionals to address this
type of
crime, but presently, due to a backlash, it has become unpopular
in some
circles to discuss it.
I've read countless books and research material on this subject -
pro and
con - as well as personally gathering documentation on several
alleged
ritual abuse cases. I've reviewed the reasons for prosecutorial
failure
and carefully reviewed claims of what appeared to be false
accusation.
Both of these scenarios can be tools for learning. After
networking with many professionals around the country who worked
in
the trenches, I began to see a pattern. The pattern was one of
systematic
harassment and threats. Additionally the newspapers printed
their own
one-sided version of events despite efforts to correct this.
Several
people who became friends told me of threats they'd received and
related
their frustration and *serious* concern.
Clearly more people need to speak out on this topic. Everyone I
spoke
with who handles these cases took exception to a report by FBI
Ken
Lanning which downplayed these crimes. In fact various cults
have this
report on their web-pages
The Presidio Army Base case became known to me after meeting
several
parents and children who related their experiences. These people
gave me
newspaper articles, and internal documents supporting their
claims that
their children had been molested in the late 80's but there
appeared to
be no successful resolution for them other than a large out of
court
settlement with the Army. Some of these people are devastated to
this
day. (Journal of Orthopsychiatry article) This case evidenced a
catch-22
rapidly growing familiar to me. Statements made about occult
rituals not
being used by the prosecution due to unfamiliarity and concern
about
bringing this matter into the courtroom. I spoke to an internal
investigator who related that he believed at least 20 pre-
schoolers had
been molested. Even Ken Lanning makes public statements that
many
children were molested on the Presidio Army Base. I also began
investigating the developing pattern of some of these cases
particularly
in Northern California. Mass child molest, terrorized kids, all
making
delayed statements that were difficult to explain. I read that
Michael
Aquino - Leader of a Satanic cult had been processed out of the
Army in
"1990" (note from Carrie Dawn, notice the year stated that MA
was
processed out of the army, the same year that Zeena left the CoS
and
denounced her father) after a multi-jurisdictional
investigation. I
viewed internal CID tapes of interviews with children in various
parts of
Northern California and heard the full horror of what they
related. These
tapes will not be released to the public, but some parents were
allowed
copies which were then given to interested parties. Then I
discovered the internet and found Michael Aquino posting on
alt.satanism. Michael Aquino was a Lt. Colonel in the Army who
specialized in psychological operations.
I accessed some court documents about his case and sent away for
others
which filtered in this past year. I questioned him about these
documents
and he willingly participated in a "debate" with me. For my
purposes I
simply referred to him and his new pseudonym as the "Aquino
spokesperson." Mr. Aquino explained that no children were
molested at the
Presidio; the reason children were stating that was due to
parents
wanting to sue the army for large sums of money; therapists were
the
"true source of child abuse" as there was no such event as
ritual
molestation of children anywhere. It was all a "witch hunt"
and he was
never processed out of the Army but had been re-assigned
elsewhere along
with a Top Secret clearance although his assignment was "part-
time" due
to "illegal" actions of the CID. He tried to court-martial many
involved
in the case.
Since Aquino's version flew in the face of court documents, (See
lawsuits) stating he sued the Army with an obvious damage claim
for being
discharged, I repeatedly challenged him to prove his assertions.
I had a
real interest in discovering what the Army did on paper and what
actions
they might have taken "behind the scenes" and therefore kept an
open
mind. He was kind enough to keep responding, never with
documentation -
but dismissing me as a "fundamentalist pedophile pervert" and
later as
the net "kook."
I had accessed over 50 cases of ritual crime through legal
research and
so began posting court documents, and laws regarding ritual
abuse/crime
interspersed in-between our ongoing
debates. "Hans...@aol.com" wrote
he'd be challenging me on other cases, not just his own, as
there was "no
such event as the ritual abuse of children." I discovered that
the same
people followed me from newsgroup to newsgroup most of whom were
eventually unmasked as his associates - all debunking the
material - and
all engaging in the same mind games.
When internal court documents to Mr. Aquino's lawsuit arrived,
more
details of the case was unveiled as well as specific documents
submitted
by Aquino's lawyer, stating he had been discharged from active
reserve
duty as part of his damage claim. (Aquino's damage claim) When
faced with
this documentation, Aquino stated they didn't mean what they
said. When I
insisted the documents left no room for doubt, he began stating
that I
was a Stalker and a Libeler. As I quoted from documents and told
others
where to access them and his on-going prevarications continued,
I
answered in kind in sometimes heated debate. There were a group
of people
always playing the same game with my posts; due to that I
decided to send
the internal documents all over the internet. At this point what
Michael Aquino did or did not do in the past was not
the issue as I've always stated that he was never criminally
charged or
convicted but "titled" under an investigatory report; the issue
was why
did Michael Aquino appear to be lying about court documents in
the
present and why were my posts *such a target.*
He decided to pin various peoples identity on me and pronounced
it as
fact to the newsgroups several times. He even said he broached
the
security of the Finnish anon-remailer and they told him who I
was and
named an individual; he was "wrong."
Several people came to my attention in
sci.psychology.psychotherapy who
were also stating there was no such event as ritual abuse of
children.
One such person was John M. Price, Ph.D. Due to some remarkable
coincidences, I asked Michael Aquino whether he knew John Price.
He said
no. As one can see through the various e-mails, which I've
recently read
for the first time, John Price is a friend of Michael Aquino's
and he
appears quite eager to discover my identity. Mr. Price had a
picture of
the hypnotherapist whom Aquino was attempting to pass off as me
in his
FTP site under the name of "Curio." This was after Ms. Rothman
asked
people to leave her alone.
The situation escalated as I confronted several Ph.D's on this
newsgroup
as well as asking them why the same people stating ritual
abuse "did not
exist" also claimed that sex with children was "not always
harmful." You
will find this debate under the thread heading "John M. Price-
Satanic
Troll? UC Davis Psychologist?" Mr. Price also wrote "Satanic
troll" under
his organizational heading.
In summation, I believe this lawsuit is Michael Aquino's way of
controlling information about him and to silence somebody who is
posting
valid documention - appellate documents - regarding ritual
crime. Many
people back down from this man because of his on-ongoing lawsuit
threats.
This approach of his is nothing new. I will not disclose my
identity to
this person because I believe he is dangerous and his cult
members have
harassed me on the internet repeatedly.
When I first posted material to the Internet I explained I would
be as
forthcoming as possible about all issues except those pertaining
to
identity and location for reasons of security. I have a number
of ISP's
that I can forge posts from as well as forge to. This is done
not to
misuse the Internet but to protect my identity while posting
documented
information about ritual crime activity. Due to the problems
with
validating the source of forged posts, I did not think there
could be any
legal case against any particular ISP.
This is still the United States and I believe it is wrong to try
and
censor speech just because you don't like the message. There has
been no
"libel." At this point it is clear to me that since this Satanic
cult
leader can't explain his way around court documents he will use
every
means at his disposal to silence me.
Sincerely, Curio
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>Hail Satan!
Why not just say, Heil Hitler! Same thing, right?
>50000730 Vom followups set appropriately
>
>unattributed:
>>>>>>> What is this flap about Acquino?
>
>this is a FAQ in the alt.satanism newsgroup for which I have
>constructed a response:
>
>Q: why do the Satanists keep picking on Michael Aquino about
his brush
> with the Satanic Panic accusations?
I found this missing from your FAQ:
> there are likely a number of motivations:
>boboroshi
>Satanic Outreach Director,
>Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
You claim to be part of the "Church of Euthanasia" yet you're
still alive posting to this group. Why don't you have the
courage of your convictions, coward, and do to yourself which
you advocate doing to other people? Could it be because you're
an ignorant coward who's never helped anyone in their life?
Could it be because you advocate killing innocent people,
molesting children, and eating human flesh? Apparently from
your web site, that appears to be the case.
In article <8c8cfo$cu$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
devin_m...@hotmail.com wrote:
> From:
> UCSICOSRA
> Usenet Committe for the Scientific Investigation
> of Claims of Satanic Ritual Abuse
> devin_m...@hotmail.com
> satanic_ri...@my-deja.com
>
> To:
> CSICOP
> Box 703
> Amherst, NY, 14226
>
> Dear CSICOP and the Honorable Mr. James Randi:
>
> The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the
> Paranormal provides an invaluable service to the scientific
community.
> I would like to take a brief moment to thank you for your
incalculable
> and most invaluable contribution. Indeed, CSICOP has played a
major
> role as you describe it, by "separating fact from myth" and
battling
> the "flood of occultism and pseudoscience" that is unleashed
daily
upon
> the unsuspecting public from the mass media and other
sensationalist
> sources.
>
> Without CSCICOP and the important role your organization plays
in
> society, "normal" scientific research and the progress it
entails,
> would be stunted by the threat of pseudo-science and the
danger it
> poses to our great institutions. The necesity of CSCICOP and
its role
> in the overall fabric of the current scientific paradigm
cannot be
> emphasized enough. In the spirit of skepticism and with the
glory of
> scientific progress at hand, let me once again say thank you
for your
> continuing research efforts. You and your organization have
provided
> shining examples to all, In this vein, I can only aspire and
encourage
> others to emulate your untiring quest to promote scientific
knowledge
> and discourage superstition and the darkness of ignorance which
> threatens all honest inquires into the fundamental nature of
the
> universe.
>
> With that said, let me explain to you why I am writing your
> organization. I happened to be visiting your web site while
performing
> a research and queries on SRA - the alleged "Satanic Ritual
Abuse"
> phenomenon.
>
> Skeptic's Dictionary - satanic ritual abuse
> http://www.skepdic.com/satanrit.html
>
> I found the above URL to be helpful in my research efforts,
however I
> must sadly inform you that the information contained on this
page is
> not only inaccurate but grossly misrepresents SRA. I know that
> accuracy and the pursuit of scientific knowledge are important
> qualities CSICOP espouses, and in the name of the credibility
of
> CSICOP, it is important to acknowledge the inherent flaws of
> the "Skeptic's Dictionary" entry for SRA.
>
> The flaws in the dictionary entry for SRA on your web site are
as
> follows:
>
> 1. SRA is not an "alleged" systematic abuse of children of
satanists.
> It is a real phenomenon that can be documented by hard,
physical
> evidence, including medical and legal evidence in the public
domain
> that can be accessed by CSCICOP for further analysis. The
CSCICOP site
> (URL quoted above) claims:
>
> > Satanic ritual abuse (SRA) is the name given to the allegedly
> > systematic abuse of children by satanists.
>
> Firstly, I would like to attempt to bring you up to date on
this
> matter. While it is scientifically accurate to claim that SRA
> is "allegedly" the "systematic abuse of children by
satanists," this
> term is inaccurate when proof has been asserted and has been
brought
> forward as an authoritative body of evidence that contradicts
existing
> knowledge about SRA and directly exposes the flaws in the
underlying
> paradigm. Later in this message I will provide 68 documented
cases of
> SRA on an international scale.
>
> 2. Hard evidence of Satanic Ritual Abuse in North America has
been
> found. Your web site claims that:
>
> > No hard evidence of Satanic Ritual Abuse in North America
> > has been found.
>
> This is a glaring inaccuracy that should be removed from the
CSCICOP
> web site in the face of better evidence to the contrary. I am
in
> possesion of this evidence and I am willing to share it with
you at
> this time.
>
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/ra.htm
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/ra2.html
>
> Satanism and Ritual Case Archive
>
> 1. March 2000,
> COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, FRANKLIN
COUNTY;
> http://curio_5_.tripod.com/Ellisct.html
> Shawn Ellis, Dependent Minor Child, (Franklin County Children
Services,
> Complainant-Appellee, Carla Richardson, Respondent-Appellant).
No.
99AP-
> 725, No. 99AP-726;
> 2. August 1999;
> STATE OF OHIO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE v. KENNETH J. SMITH,
DEFENDANT-
> APPELLANT";
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/ksmithct.html
> CASE NO. 17-99-1;
> 3. August 1999, Helsinki, Finland. Jarno Sebastian Elg, Terhi
Johanna
> Tervashonka, Alleged satanists sentenced for murder,
cannibalism,"
> Associated
> Press, August 11, 1999
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/finnws.html
> 4. August 1999, State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v.
Antonio
> Jones, Defendant-Appellant.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/drugsct.html
> 5. August 1999, KIEV - Dmitry Dyomin was sentenced to death for
murder;
> his accomplices, Valentin Chelyshev and Alexei Andreyev
sentenced to
13
> and 8 yrs. in jail. AAP NEWSFEED,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/ukcannws.html
> August 4, 1999
> 6. May 1999, FORT LAUDERDALE, Florida. Darrel Wayne Harris,
held for
> attempted 1st degree murder
> "Teen charged as
> adult in stabbing that took place during satanic ritual,"
Associated
> Press,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/harisnws.html
> May 28, 1999
> 7. March 1999, Warsaw, Poland. 19-year-old arrested for cult
killings
> "Teenage cult members killed in Satanic mass," Agence
> France Presse,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/polndnws.html
> March 4, 1999.
> 8. February 1999; United States District Court For the
District of
> Nebraska;
> http://curio_5_.tripod.com/Bonaccict.html
> 9. February 1999, Edinburg, Texas. Pablo Lucio Vasquez was
sentenced
to
> death after being convicted for killing 12-year-old David
Cardenas in
> the course of a robbery. "Man Sentenced to Die for a Satanic
> Killing," The New York Times,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/vasqnws2.html
> (February 13, 1999: A20) and "Teenager certified to stand
trial as
> adult in murder of 12-year-old," AP, October 24, 1998.
> 10. April 1998, South Africa. Naledzani Mabuda and his wife
Helen
> Madidida
> confessed to killing their 23-month-old son.
> "A Sangoma couple in court for sacrificing child to ancestors,"
> Africa News Service,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/sorcnws1.html
> April 15, 1998.
> "Slayings of children may be linked to ritual murders."
> Associated Press, January 29, 1998.
> "Witch-doctors not making a killing any more: South African
healers
> say ritual murders no longer in vogue."
> The Ottawa Citizen, January 2, 1998
> 11. March 1998, STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. MICHAEL JAMES
HAYWARD,
> Appellant.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/satmus.html
> 327 Ore. 397; 963 P.2d 667; 1998 Ore. LEXIS 593.
> 12. October 1997, Equatorial Guinea. An unnamed individual was
> condemned to
> death after removing the eyes, tongue, ears and genitals of
his 10-
year-
> old female victim.
> "Ritual murderer of girl, 10, sentenced to
> death", Agence France Presse, October 3, 1997.
> "Cannibalism still common in Equatorial Guinea, Spanish expert
> claims", Deutsche Presse-Agentur, April 5, 1998.
> "Bongo Denounces Sects in Wake of Gruesome Cannibalism Tale."
> Reuters
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/canib3.html
> (Libreville) April 29, 1988.
> 13. November 1998, Pike County, Ohio. Michael Paul Dillard,
20, was
> convicted of felony child endangerment for burning a boy
during a
> satanic ritual. (Columbus Dispatch, Nov. 13, 1998)
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/dilnews.html
> 14. February 1998, Oklahoma, SEAN RICHARD SELLERS v. RONALD
WARD
UNITED
> STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7736/seller.html
> No. 97-6062; 728 P.2d 515; 809 P.2d 676; 889 P. 2d 895; Denial
of new
> trial affirmed.
> 15. April 28, 1998, LUBUK PAKAM, Indonesia Achmad Suradji, 47,
> sentenced to
> death for murdering 42 women.
> "Sorcerer gets death sentence for 42 murders," Calgary Herald,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/blkmagnws.html
> April 28, 1998,
> 16. May 1997, J. P. v. CLARENCE CARTER, COMMISSIONER OF THE
VIRGINIA
> DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/clarct.htm
> Record No. 1168-96-4 COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 24 Va. App.
707; 485
> S.E.2d 162; 1997 Va. App. LEXIS 310, Decided. True Finding of
child
> molestation affirmed.
> 17. July 1997, Eddie Lee Sexton v. State of Florida,
> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7736/sexton.html
> , No. 86,132 Trial court imposed the death penalty for murder.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/sextnws1.html
> See, St. Petersburg Times
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/sextnws2.html
> September 2, 1998
> 18. March 1998, STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee -vs- ESTELLA
SEXTON,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/mssextct.htm
> Defendant-Appellant CASE NOS: 1996CA00306, 1996CA00367 COURT OF
APPEALS
> OF OHIO, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, STARK COUNTY 1998 Ohio App.
LEXIS
> 1302, Case No. 1995CR00421.
> Ohio vs. Estella Sexton
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/mssext1.html
> 19. November 1997, India. Dharam Vir arrested for the ritual
murder of
> his
> son.
> "Man beheads son in Ritual Murder in India",
> Agence France Presse, November 14, 1997
> 20. July 1997, IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT
> KNOXVILLE,
> STATE OF TENNESSEE, Appellee, v. CHRISTA GAIL PIKE, Appellant.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/pikect.html
> C.C.A. NO. 03C01-9611-CR-00408 KNOX COUNTY HON. (First Degree
Murder-
> Death Penalty) ON APPEAL FROM THE JUDGEMENT OF THE CRIMINAL
COURT OF
> KNOX COUNTY. Conviction for first degree murder and conspiracy
to
> commit first degree murder affirmed. Death penalty affirmed.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/pikenws.html
> "Orange County woman to die for Tenn. killing,"
> THE_NEWS_&_OBSERVER April 1, 1996
> 21. May 1997, ADOPTION OF QUENTIN & others.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/quentin.html
> SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS; 424 Mass. 882; 678
N.E.2d
> 1325; 1997 Mass. LEXIS 104 DISPOSITION: Order granting
petition to
> dispense with consent to adoption of three children affirmed.
> 22. July 1996, In Interest of P.J.M,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/pgm.htm
> 926 S.W.2d 223, Missouri Court of Appeals, Termination of
Parental
> Rights Affirmed.
> 23. December 1996, Damien Wayne Echols and Charles Jason
Baldwin v.
> State
> of Arkansas,
> http://courts.state.ar.us/opinions/1996a/961223sc/cr94-928.html
> 936 S.W.2d 509, Convictions and sentencing for murder affirmed.
> 24, April 1996, Jessie Lloyd Misskelley, Jr. v. State of
Arkansas, 915
> S.W.2d, Convictions for first and second degree murder
affirmed.
> 25. February 1996, Suzanne Hughes v. Department of Social
Services
> Arlington County, Court of Appeals of Virginia,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/hughesct.html
> Termination of Parental Rights Affirmed.
> 26. October 1996, COMMONWEALTH vs. VIOLET AMIRAULT;
COMMONWEALTH vs.
> GERALD
> AMIRAULT.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/amrltct97.html
> UPDATE Aug. 18, 1999, COMMONWEALTH vs.
> CHERYL AMIRAULT LeFAVE.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/Lefavect.html
> Commonwealth v. Amirault, 399 Mass. 617 (1987)
> Commonwealth v. Amirault, 404 Mass. 221 (1989)
> From a 1989 appellate opinion
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/amirct89.html
> The judge concluded that, at the time of the defendant's
trial, there
> was an unanswered question: "How could [*18] children come to
speak of
> disturbing sexual acts if they did not suffer them?"
> 27. December 1995, Jimmie Lee Penick v. State of Indiana,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/penikct.html
> 659 N.E.2d, Conviction for murder and enhanced sentence
affirmed
> 28. November 15 1995, Steven Brian Alvarado v. State of Texas,
912
> S.W.2d
> 199, Convictions and death sentence affirmed.
> 29. August 1995, Edward Bennett v. State of Nevada, 901 P.2d
676,
> Murder
> conviction affirmed.
> 30. July 1995, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. MICHAEL ALAN PARKER,
SR.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/parkct.htm
> NO. COA94-1045 COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA 119 N.C.
App. 328;
> 459 S.E.2d 9; 1995 N.C. App. LEXIS 523 July 5, 1995, Filed.
Convictions
> for multiple counts of child molestation affirmed.
> A news article
> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7736/parknws.html
> 31. June 1995, Athens, Greece.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/greconews.html
> Satanic Cult leader Asimakis Katsoulas and 2 other members of
his
group
> were found guilty of kidnapping, raping and murdering a 30
year old
> woman and a 15 year old girl during occult ceremonies.
> 32. December 1994, IN THE MATTER OF: HEATHER BARKER, NEGLECTED
CHILD,
> COURT
> OF APPEALS OF OHIO,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/heathct.html
> SEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, HARRISON COUNTY, LEXIS 6100,
Juvenile
Court
> Decision to Grant Permanent Custody to DHS Affirmed
> 33. April 1994, In Re: Chrystal and Tasha, Superior Court of
> Connecticut,
> Juvenile Matters,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/crystct.html
> ,Lexis 1061. Termination of Parental Rights Affirmed
> 34. February 1987, The Finders Case: In early Feb. 1987
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/findnsw.htm
> six children were taken into custody in Tallahassee, Florida.
> Customs Reports
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/findcst.htm
> See December 27, 1993, U.S. News and World Report
> 35. November 1993, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RICKIE JAY
GADDIS,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/gaddisct.
> Appellant NO. 00561 PITTSBURGH, 1993 SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
432
> Pa. Super. 523; 639 A.2d 462; 1994 Pa. Super. LEXIS 963,
Argued March
> 22, 1994, FILED
> See,"Pa. couple is charged with torturing children; Police say
> neighbors also took part in abuse," The Atlanta Journal and
> Constitution,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/johnstnws.htm
> November 26, 1991 and "Pennsylvania Couple Charged With
Brutalizing
> Their Children," The Washington Post, November 26, 1991:
A8; "Parents
> charged with Torturing their Children", Associated Press, Nov.
25,
1991
> 36. May 19 1993, State of Tennesse v. Gary June Caughron, 855
S.W.2d
> 526,
> Conviction and death penalty affirmed.
> 37. July 1991, San Francisco, California. Michael A. Aquino v.
Michael
> P.W.
> Stone, Secretary of the Army, 768 F.Supp. 529;
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/johnstnws.htm
> 957 F.2d 139,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/wests.html
> Dismissal of lawsuit affirmed.
> The Presidio Day Care Case
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/armies1.html
> 38. Sept. 1988, Santa Rosa, Calif. People v. Daryl T. Ball,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/thrailct.html
> Court No. 14750-C, Pleaded no contest to lewd and lascivious
acts with
> 6 child victims.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/thrailnws.html
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/trailpredator.html
> 39. October 1992, Earnest v. State,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/ernstct.htm
> Supreme Court of Georgia, 422 S.E.2d, Conviction for murder
affirmed.
> 40. April 1992, In the Matter of the Welfare of J. M. P.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/jmpct.html
> C9-91-1899, COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, Lexis 436.
Termination of
> Parental Rights Affirmed.
> 41. December 14, 1992, State of Texas vs. Phil Stanley Rogers,
Case
NO.
> 18,738,
> http://curio_5_.tripod.com/rogersind.html
> pleaded guilty to: Indecency with a Child Younger than 17 years
> Committed During The Course Of A Ritual
> 42. July 1992 Stephan v. State,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/stephct.html
> Court of Appeals of Georgia, 422 S.E.2d 25, Conviction for
Aggravated
> Assault Reversed and Remanded.
> 43. November 26, 1992, People of Texas v. Frances and Daniel
Keller,
> Case
> #924217, Convicted for aggravated assault on a child. Both of
their
> convictions were upheld on appeal, Oct. 26, 1994, Appeal No. 3-
92-604-
> CR
> News articles
> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7736/franews.html
> Civil suit
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/nashct.htm
> 44. March 1992, Orlando, FL. Margie Wright pleaded no contest
to three
> charges of attempted sexual battery and two charges of
attempted lewd
> acts and was sentenced to 5 1/2 years in prison. Jim Wright was
> convicted of raping and fondling five children.
> See, "Convict's Wife Sentenced for Trying to Molest
Kids",Orlando
> Sentinel Tribune May 9, 1992; "A Family Fears That Satanic
Cult will
> try to Silence their Sons,(Orlando Sentinel Tribune,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/wrigtnws.html
> August 10, 1991; "Child Abuse Suspect Trades Testimony for
Lesser
> Charges", Orlando Sentinel Tribune, January 31, 1992
> 45, March 1991, STATE MISSOURI v. THERON REED ROLAND COURT OF
APPEALS
> OF
> MISSOURI,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/rolandct.html
> WESTERN DISTRICT, No. WD 40883, 808 S.W.2d 855, STATE OF
MISSOURI,
> RESPONDENT, First degree murder conviction affirmed.
> 46. January 1992, THE STATE OF WASHINGTON V. Paul Ross Ingram,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/ingramct.htm
> NO. 13613-9-II Division Two, Confession to sexual molestation
and 20
> yr. exceptional sentence affirmed.
> See News articles and the Clemency Board Transcripts,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/ingclm.html
> See, "Felons hope for a parting gift from Lowry" Seattle
> Times, Dec. 12, 1996
> 47. November 1991, Florida Joseph Pottgen v. State of Florida,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/potgct.html
> 589 So.2d 390, Reversed and Remanded.
> 48. April 1991, Montana. State of Montana v. Leon Lloyd
Whitcher,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/whitcct.html
> 810 P2d 751, Conviction Affirmed.
> 49. July 1991, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Jason L. Enders,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/endersct.html
> et al, 407 Pa. Superior Ct. 201, Conviction Affirmed.
> 50. The People of the State of Illinois, v. Andrew Kokoraleis,
No.
> 65229,
> Supreme Court of Illinois, 547 N.E.2d 202. Conviction for
murder and
> death penalty affirmed.
> News articles
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/korknws.htm
> 51. June 1985, San Francisco, Calif., People v. Cliff St.
Joseph,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/stjosct.html
> 226 Cal. App. 3d 289, Dec. 17, 1990, Conviction for first
degree
murder
> perpetrated by torture affirmed; No. C-92-1523 EFL
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/clifappealct.html
> UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA
> 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19425 - habeas petition denied.
> 52. January 1990, West Africa. Nine people arrested for ritual
murder
> and
> cannibalism.
> See, "Sierra Leone Police Arrest Nine for Ritual Murder of
Girl",
> Reuters, January 29, 1990.
> 53. February 1990, Utah. STATE of Utah v. Alan B. HADFIELD,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/hadct.html
> 788 P2d 506 Convictions for sodomy and child molest; remanded
back to
> court for evidentiary hearing.
> A documentary was made of this case.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/hadftape.html
> 54. March 1994, State of North Carolina v. Patrick S. Figured,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/figuredct.html
> 446 S.E.2d 838, Convictions affirmed for first-degree sexual
offenses
> involving 3 children.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/fignews.html
> 55. April 1989, Harold Glenn Smith v. The State of Texas,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/harldct.html
> No. B14-86-00659-CR, Lexis 794, Conviction for murder affirmed.
> 56. 1989, New York. Monika Beerle, a dancer in New York was
> dismembered by
> her boyfriend, Daniel Rakowitz. He was found not guilty by
reason of
> insanity. In 1992, Randy Charles Easterday, 27, was charged as
a
> participant in the crime. Reportedly, Monika's boyfriend was
involved
> in a satanic cult and he had served a human finger in soup to
homeless
> people.
> 57. November 1989, Gibreville, Gabon. Mba Ntem was found
guilty and
> sentenced to death for murder and leading cannibalism rites.
> See, Associated Press, November 26, 1989.
> 58. December 1988, State of Ohio. v. John L. Fryman,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/frymct.htm
> Case No. CA87-10-125, Lexis 5296, Conviction for murder
affirmed
> 59. November 1988, Singapore. Three cult members hanged for
murder
> See, "Three Singaporeans Hanged for Cult Murder of Children",
> Reuters, November 25, 1988
> 60. July 1988, New York, In the Matter of DANIEL "DD"
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/ddct.htm
> et al., Alleged to be Abused and Neglected Children, 530
N.Y.S.2d 314,
> July 7, 1988. Finding of Neglect Affirmed.
> 61. August 1986, State of Maine v. Scott Waterhouse.
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/waterct.html
> 513 A.2d 862, Murder conviction affirmed
> 62. February 1986, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, v. Frank G.
Costal,
> Jr.,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/costct.htm
> 505 A.2d 337, Murder conviction affirmed.
> 63. May 1982, William Smith v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
436
> N.E.2d
> 377, Immunity for witness was affirmed.
> 64. March 1986, Commonwealth of Massachussetts v. Carl H. Drew,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/drewct.html
> 489 N.E.2d 1233, Murder conviction affirmed.
> 65. December 1983, Detroit, Michigan. Arzell Jones was
convicted of
> first-
> degree criminal sexual conduct, single counts of kidnapping
and using
a
> firearm during a felony. Linda Greene was convicted of two
counts of
> first-degree criminal sexual conduct.
> See, "Judge Says Victim was Subjected to 'Reign of Terror' Man,
> Policewoman Guilty of Sexual Assault in Satanic Rituals,"
> Detroit Free Press, December 3, 1983.
> 66. April 1981, Dallas, Texas. Carroll Edward Cole was
sentenced to
> one
> concurrent sentence and two consecutive sentences for the
murders of
> three Dallas women.
> 67. See, "Drifter Sentenced to Three Life Terms for
Stranglings," AP,
> April 9, 1981
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/canib10.html
> 68. September 1979, Philippines. A couple were charged with
murder
> for "eating" two brothers.
> See, "A man and his wife have been charged by Philippines
police with
> eating two brothers." Reuters, September 20, 1979
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/canib11.html
>
> CONTINUED TO PART TWO OF OPEN LETTER TO CSICOP AND USENET
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
> UCSICOSRA
> Usenet Committe for the Scientific Investigation
> of Claims of Satanic Ritual Abuse
> devin_m...@hotmail.com
> satanic_ri...@my-deja.com
>
> To:
> CSICOP
> Box 703
> Amherst, NY, 14226
>
> http://www.skepdic.com/satanrit.html
>
> RECAP
>
> The flaws in the dictionary entry for SRA on your web site are
as
> follows:
>
> 1. SRA is not an "alleged" systematic abuse of children of
satanists.
> It is a real phenomenon that can be documented by hard,
physical
> evidence, including medical and legal evidence in the public
domain
provided
> 68 documented references of SRA for CSICOP to independently
evaluate
> in PART ONE of this letter.
>
> 2. Hard evidence of Satanic Ritual Abuse in North America has
been
>
> 3. Allegations of satanic ritual abuse have merit. There
presently
> exists unequivocal evidence for satnic ritual abuse. Your web
site
> (URL referenced above) makes the following false claim:
>
> > A four-year study in the early 1990s found the allegations of
satanic
> > ritual abuse to be without merit. The study was conducted by
> > University of California at Davis psychology professors Gail
S.
> > Goodman and Phillip R. Shaver, in conjunction with Jianjian
Qin of
UC
> > Davis and Bette I. Bottoms of the University of Illinois at
Chicago.
> > Their study was supported by the National Center on Child
Abuse and
> > Neglect. The researchers investigated more than 12,000
accusations
> > and surveyed more than 11,000 psychiatric, social service
and law
> > enforcement personnel. The researchers could find no
unequivocal
> > evidence for a single case of satanic cult ritual abuse.
>
> In the spirit of free inquiry and skepticism, the question
that needs
> to be asked is the following: What background in "ritual
abuse"
> research do the authors of the quoted study possess? CSICOP
claims
> that Goodman and Shaver are "psychology professors" but does
not
> elaborate on their research qualifications. CSICOP does,
however,
> provide a URL for Dr. Shaver:
>
> http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/Shaver/default.html
>
> This site links to the following site:
>
> http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/Shaver/home.html
>
> "Dr. Shaver conducts research in two principal areas: close
> relationships and emotions."
>
> So, Satanic Ritual Abuse is NOT a research specialty of Dr.
Shaver,
yet
> CSICOP pretends that this is the case.
>
> Further research into the background of Dr. Shaver reveals
that he has
> authored only THREE papers on ritual abuse (remember his
primary
> research interest is NOT ritual abuse but CLOSE RELATIONSHIPS
and
> EMOTIONS) and yet, Dr. Shaver has given SIX MAJOR
presentations on a
> topic he is admittedly NOT an "expert" in or a primary
investigative
> researcher!
>
> Here is the following evidence for my claim:
>
> Curriculum Vitae
> http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/Shaver/ps_cv.html
>
> Papers
>
> 1. Bottoms, B. L., Shaver, P. R., & Goodman, G. S. (1996). An
analysis
> of ritualistic and religion-related child abuse allegations.
Law and
> Human Behavior, 20, 1-34.
>
> 2. Goodman, G. S., Quas, J. A., Bottoms, B. L., Qin, J.,
Shaver, P.
> R., Orcutt, H., & Shapiro, C. (1997). Children’s religious
knowledge:
> Implications for understanding satanic ritual abuse
allegations.
Child
> Abuse and Neglect, 21.
>
> 3. Qin, J. J., Goodman, G. S., Bottoms, B. L., & Shaver, P. R.
> (1998). Repressed memories of ritualistic and religion-
related abuse.
> In S. Lynn & K. McConkey (Eds.), Truth in memory (pp. 260-
283). New
> York: Guilford Press.
>
> Presentations
>
> 1. Shaver, P. R. (paper presentation with G. S. Goodman, J.
J. Qin, &
> B. L. Bottoms). "Repressed memory and allegations of
ritualistic and
> religion-related child abuse." At the American Psychology and
Law
> Conference, Sante Fe, NM, March, 1994.
>
> 2. Shaver, P. R. (paper presentation with B. L. Bottoms & G.
S.
> Goodman). "Claims of ritualistic child abuse in the U.S." At
the
> American Psychology and Law Conference, Sante Fe, NM, March,
1994.
>
> 3. Quas, J. A., Goodman, G. S., Bottoms, B. L., Qin, J. J.,
Orcutt,
> H., Shapiro, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1995, June). "Developmental
> differences in children’s knowledge of ritual abuse." Poster
presented
> at the Third National Colloquium of the American Professional
Society
> on the Abuse of Children, Tucson, AZ.
>
> 4. Bottoms, B. L, Beety, K., Goodman, G. S., & Shaver, P. R.
(1996,
> February). Individual differences in therapists’ reactions to
> allegations of ritual abuse. Paper presented at the American
Psychology
> and Law Society meetings, Hilton Head, SC.
>
> 5. Shaver, P. R., Bottoms, B. L., & Goodman, G. S. (1995,
> August). "The co-creation of satanic ritual abuse."
Contribution to a
> symposium at the Convention of the American Psychological
Association,
> New York City.
>
> 6. Bottoms, B. L., Diviak, K. R., Goodman, G. S., & Shaver,
P. R.
> (1996, March). "Individual differences in therapists’
experiences with
> ritual abuse allegations." Annual meeting of the American
Psychology-
> Law Society, Hilton Head, SC.
>
> So, CSICOP's claim that "researchers could find no unequivocal
> evidence for a single case of satanic cult ritual abuse" is
based on
> researchers who are not only NOT experts in ritual abuse, but
this
> claim is bolstered by non-ritual abuse researchers who have
only
> published THREE papers on ritual abuse, yet they have spoken
publically
> about a field they have no expertise in at least SIX times!
>
> If these non-experts had bothered to do their homework, they
would
have
> found at least 68 documented references in the public domain to
Satanic
> Ritual abuse cases in which legal, medical, and scientific
evidence
> exists!
>
> Not only does this contradict CSICOP's claim that "The
researchers
> could find no unequivocal evidence for a single case of
satanic cult
> ritual abuse", but it demonstrates that these so-
called "researchers"
> are not experts in ritual-abuse.
>
> CONTINUED TO PART THREE OF OPEN LETTER TO CSICOP AND USENET
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
research
> demonstrates that the researchers who claim that SRA is
without merit
> (Goodman and Shaver)are not only NOT experts in ritual-abuse,
but they
> have published only THREE papers on this issue, all of which
ignore or
> discount 68 documented JUDICIAL cases of SRA in the public
domain,
> including 22 documented cases of SRA which can be found in the
peer-
> reviewed MEDICAL literature. (This brings us to a total of 90
cases
> that aren't supposed to exist!)
>
> 4. The claim that "there is no good evidence of a single case
of SRA"
> is without merit and is FALSE. There are at LEAST 90 "known",
> documented, judicial, and medical cases on file with US and
> international judicial systems, of which 22 documented cases
can be
> found on the (NCBI) National Center for Biotechnology web
site, which
> includes the National Library of Medicine and the (NIH)
National
> Institutes of Health databases which documented SRA claims.
>
> > Another study by Kenneth V. Lanning, a Supervisory Special
Agent at
> > the FBI Academy, published in 1992 came to the same
conclusion:
there
> > is no good evidence of a single case of SRA. Lanning has
investigated
> > SRA since 1981.
>
> The Skeptic's Dictionary provides the following URL for
reference:
>
> FBI 1992 STUDY OF CHILDHOOD RITUAL ABUSE
> http://www.religioustolerance.org/ra_rep03.htm
>
> > But the number of alleged cases began to grow and grow. We
now have
> > hundreds of victims alleging that thousands of offenders are
abusing
> > and even murdering tens of thousands of people as part of
organized
> > satanic cults, and there is little or no corroborative
evidence.
>
> Again, this is demonstratively FALSE. Not only have I posted
68
> documented SRA cases which proves that there is a MASSIVE
amount of
> corroborative evidence (since these 68 cases are the only ones
in
which
> the perpetrators were CAUGHT - imagine how many unsolved cases
exist)
> but this does not include the MASSIVE amount of pschological
research
> and SRA evidence that can be found in the peer-reviewed
literature.
> This research is based on SRA cases that were studied closely
by
> medical personnel.
>
> Why is SRA research, which is widely availible in the public
domain at
> a *government* web site ignored?
>
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
>
> Why would non-ritual abuse experts Goodman, Shaver, and FBI
Agent
> Lanning "debunk" SRA evidence which clearly exists?
>
> (You will find TWENTY-TWO DOCUMENTED CASES OF SRA IN THE
MEDICAL
> LITERATURE posted below the following quote from Curio and a
DEBUNKING
> OF FALSE-MEMORY SYNDROME. This brings the total amount of
documented
> evidence in favor of the existence of Satanic Ritual Abuse to
a grand
> total of NINETY SATANIC RITUAL ABUSE CASES that Goodman,
Shaver and
> Lanning claim DOESN'T EXIST. Apparently, these non-ritual
abuse
> experts haven't done the necessary research. Multiply this by
the
> cases that weren't prosecuted and the cases which never made
it to
peer-
> review and you've got an SRA phenomenon that deserves to be
studied
> closer by skeptics.)
>
> Curio Jones has a web site which addresses these questions:
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/
>
> > There are also larger aspects to these crimes that need
further
> > investigation. Why are there people suing therapists and
trying to
> > claim these crimes don't occur as a basis for the lawsuit
when these
> > crimes clearly do occur? Why did the federal government
initiate a
> > criminal indictment against several therapists, also
claiming there
> > is no evidence for this obvious criminal activity? What has
the
> > federal government done to investigate and publicize the
Finders
Case
> > and their alleged links to government officials? Why was the
Finders
> > group reportedly in the FBI's counter-intelligence files?
Why does
> > the False Memory Syndrome Foundation appear to be so intent
on
> > covering up information about the ritual sexual abuse of
children?
> > Why was Dr. Bennett Braun, who treated these victims,
threatened for
> > several years? Why was Pat Burgus, an alleged multiple,
claiming to
> > be a member of a satanic cult and why is she now claiming her
> > detailed statements are "false memories." What is the real
truth
here?
>
> DEBUNKING THE CLAIMS OF FALSE-MEMORY SYNDROME
>
> http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000314/hl/bhb_4.html
>
> Tuesday March 14 7:03 PM ET
> Research casts doubt on false memory syndrome
> By Patricia Reaney
>
> LONDON, Mar 14 (Reuters) -- British scientists say they have
cast
> doubts on the prevalence of False Memory Syndrome and the idea
that
> recovered memories are often bogus ones induced by therapists.
>
> The theory that memories of events which never occurred can be
> constructed by suggestion during therapy has been used
successfully as
> a defense by those accused of child abuse, to discredit
children's
> testimony.
>
> Researchers at University College London claim their study of
data
from
> 236 adults with recovered memories shows many are of true past
events.
>
> ``There is now consistent evidence that 'False Memory
Syndrome' cannot
> explain all, or even most, examples of recovered memories of
trauma,''
> the British Psychological Society said in a statement.
>
> ``There is increasing evidence that many recovered memories
cannot be
> explained by so-called False Memory Syndrome. To date there is
no
> convincing evidence for a specific False Memory Syndrome,'' Dr
Bernice
> Andrews, who conducted the study, told Reuters.
>
> ``What we've shown is that a substantial proportion of these
memories
> have been corroborated,'' she said in a telephone interview.
Contrary
> to common belief, she added, not all repressed memories are
about
> childhood sexual abuse. They can result from many types of
trauma and
> not all are recovered during therapy.
>
> ``People often come into therapy because they have started to
remember
> things that have happened in the past. In our study around a
third of
> cases were people who came into therapy after recovering
memories,''
> said Andrews.
>
> She and her colleagues interviewed 108 qualified therapists
about the
> 236 patients. They said the most common triggers for recovering
> memories were events concerning patients' own children that
they
> associated with violence or fear that they felt themselves.
>
> Less often books, videos and memory recovery techniques were
used to
> help patients recall the events.
>
> ``Therapists in the majority of cases do not use aggressive,
suggestive
> techniques to get their clients to remember things. They
(memories)
> come up just as a matter of course during therapy and are often
> accompanied by a lot of emotion as though the person is
reliving the
> event in the present,'' Andrews explained.
>
> The researchers said their study cannot prove that all
recovered
> memories are true.
>
> ``You certainly can't explain all instances of people
recovering
> memories in therapy in terms of so-called False Memory
Syndrome,''
> Andrews added.
>
> TWENTY-TWO PSCHOLOGICAL CASES WHICH DISPROVE
> THE CLAIMS GOODMAN, SHAVER, AND LANNER
>
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
>
> 1. Child Abuse Negl 1995 Apr;19(4):491-505 Related Articles,
Books
> Allegations of children's involvement in ritual sexual abuse:
clinical
> experience of 20 cases. Weir IK, Wheatcroft MS
> Institute of Family Psychiatry, Ipswich, England.
>
> 2. Child Abuse Negl 1999 Sep;23(9):891-8 Related Articles,
Books
> Variables and risk factors associated with child abuse in
daycare
> settings. Schumacher RB, Carlson RS Wright State University,
College
> of Education and Human Services, Dayton, OH 45435-0001, USA.
>
> 3. Adolesc Med 1993 Oct;4(3):577-588 Related Articles, Books
> Rock Music and Music Videos. Hendren RL, Strasburger VC
>
> 4. J Clin Psychol 1998 Nov;54(7):933-43 Related Articles,
Books
> Revision of the Word Association Test for assessing
associations of
> patients reporting satanic ritual abuse in childhood. Leavitt
F,
Labott
> SM
>
> 5. Child Abuse Negl 1997 Nov;21(11):1111-30 Related Articles,
Books,
> Children's religious knowledge: implications for understanding
satanic
> ritual abuse allegations. Goodman GS, Quas JA, Bottoms BL, Qin
J,
> Shaver PR, Orcutt H, Shapiro C Department of Psychology,
University of
> California, Davis 95616-8686, USA.
>
> 6. Adolescence 1992 Winter;27(108):855-72 Related Articles,
Books
> Satanism as a response to abuse: the dynamics and treatment of
satanic
> involvement in male youths. Belitz J, Schacht A Program for
Children
> and Adolescents, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque 87131.
>
> 7. Tex Med 1991 Oct;87(10):74-6 Related Articles, Books
> High-risk adolescents and satanic cults. Ahmed MB
> Rosedale Psychiatric and Counseling Center, Fort Worth, TX
76104.
>
> 8. Adolescence 1994 Summer;29(114):461-8 Related Articles,
Books
> Clinical assessment of adolescents involved in Satanism. Clark
CM
> Residential Psychiatric Adolescent Services, CPC Intermountain
Hospital
> of Boise, Idaho 83704.
>
> 9. Adolescence 1992 Winter;27(108):901-14 Related Articles,
Books
> Satanism among adolescents: empirical and clinical
considerations.
> Steck GM, Anderson SA, Boylin WM Hartford Community Mental
Health
> Center, Connecticut.
>
> 10. Can J Psychiatry 1988 Apr;33(3):197-202 Related Articles,
Books
> Satanism in a psychiatric adolescent population. Bourget D,
Gagnon A,
> Bradford JM Forensic Psychiatry, Royal Ottawa Hospital.
>
> 11. Curationis 1998 Mar;21(1):2-7 Related Articles, Books
> [Adolescents previously involved in Satanism: mental health
problems
> experience]. [Article in Afrikaans] Heathcote H, Gmeiner A,
Poggenpoel
> M
>
> 12. N Z Med J 1998 Jun 26;111(1068):225-8 Related Articles,
Books
> Parents and other relatives accused of sexual abuse on the
basis of
> recovered memories: a New Zealand family survey. Goodyear-
Smith FA,
> Laidlaw TM, Large RG
>
> 13. J Forensic Sci 1997 Jan;42(1):32-8 Related Articles, Books
> The differential diagnosis of ritual abuse allegations.
> Bernet W, Chang DK Psychiatric Hospital at Vanderbilt,
Vanderbilt
> University, Nashville, TN, USA.
>
> 14. Child Abuse Negl 1991;15(3):175-9 Related Articles, Books
> The satanic ritual abuse controversy. Putnam FW Laboratory of
> Developmental Psychology, National Institute of Mental Health,
> Bethesda, MD 20895.
>
> 15. Child Abuse Negl 1991;15(3):163-70 Related Articles, Books
> Ritualism and child sexual abuse. Jones DP Oxford University,
Park
> Hospital for Children, England.
>
> 16. Child Abuse Negl 1991;15(3):181-9 Related Articles, Books
> Patients reporting ritual abuse in childhood: a clinical
syndrome.
> Report of 37 cases. Young WC, Sachs RG, Braun BG, Watkins RT
> National Center for the Treatment of Dissociative Disorders,
Denver,
CO
> 80220.
>
> 17. Prim Care 1993 Jun;20(2):447-58 Related Articles, Books
> Sadistic ritual abuse. An overview in detection and management.
> Young WC National Center for the Treatment of Dissociative
Disorders,
> Denver, Colorado.
>
> 18. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 1993 Dec;27(4):701, 706, 708 Related
> Articles, Books Multiple personality disorder and satanic
ritual
abuse.
> Gelb JL Comment in: Aust N Z J Psychiatry 1994 Mar;28(1):154-6
> PMID: 8135697, UI: 94183111
>
> 19. Fam Process 1984 Jun;23(2):237-49 Related Articles, Books
> The bogeyman cometh: a strategic approach for difficult
adolescents.
> O'Connor JJ, Hoorwitz AN
>
> 20. Adolescence 1992 Summer;27(106):283-93 Related Articles,
Books
> Deviant adolescent subcultures: assessment strategies and
clinical
> interventions. Clark CM Adolescent Psychiatric Services, West
Pines
> Psychiatric Hospital, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033.
>
> 21. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 1991 Mar;12(1):3-15 Related
Articles,
> Books The pathology and medicolegal aspects of sexual
activity.
> Eckert WG, Katchis S, Donovan W Milton Helpern International
Center
for
> the Forensic Sciences, Wichita State University, KS 67208.
>
> 22. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev 1999 Spring;29(3):209-19 Related
> Articles, Books An adolescent vampire cult in rural America:
clinical
> issues and case study. Miller TW, Veltkamp LJ, Kraus RF, Lane
T,
> Heister T Department of Psychiatry, College of Medicine,
University of
> Kentucky, Lexington 40536, USA.
>
> CONTINUED TO PART FOUR OF OPEN LETTER TO CSICOP AND USENET
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
devin_m...@hotmail.com wrote:
> PART FOUR OF OPEN LETTER TO USENET AND CSICOP
strawman
> definiton for SRA and proceeds to debunk his pet definition.
Even if
> we use Mr. Lanning's absurd defintion for "satanic murder",
which
> actually detracts us from ACTUAL cases of Satanic Ritual Abuse
in the
> peer-reviewed literature, Mr. Lanning's definition does not
hold up to
> scrutiny of any kind, and can be disproved with the March 1998
case,
> STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. MICHAEL JAMES HAYWARD,
> Ore. 397; 963 P.2d 667; 1998 Ore. LEXIS 593. This case
exceeds Mr.
> Lannings definition for "Satanic Murder" and disproves his
hypothesis
> that CSICOP uses to discredit SRA.
>
> > Mr. Lanning defines a satanic murder as "one committed by
two or
more
> > individuals who rationally plan the crime and whose primary
> > motivation is to fulfill a prescribed satanic ritual calling
for the
> > murder." Using this definition he has been unable to
identify even
> > one documented satanic murder in the United States.
>
> Keywords, "...in the United States".
>
> First of all, Mr. Lanning's pet definition (strawman) does not
hold up
> under closer examination. The topic is SATANIC RITUAL ABUSE,
> not "SATANIC MURDER". So, Mr. Lanning deliberately changes
the rules
> of evidence by distorting the topic of SRA. Satanic Ritual
Abuse is
> not necessarily Satanic Murder, while Satanic Murder IS most
probably
> SRA. But let's play Mr. Lannning's game, shall we?
>
> Since I only need one case to disprove Mr. Lanning's
definition, the
> following case exceeds Mr. Lanning's false strawman
requirements for
so-
> called Satanic Murder in the US:
>
> 1. March 1998, STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. MICHAEL JAMES
HAYWARD,
> http://members.tripod.com/~Curio_5_/satmus.html
> On April 10, 1994, four people, three of whom considered
themselves to
> be satanists and members of a "Death-Metal" band, listened to
their
> Death-Metal music which included lyrics to "The Pick-Axe
Murders," An
> Experiment in Homicide," "Hammer smashed face," Meat Hook
> Sodomy," "Gutted," and "Living Dissection." They planned their
crime
> and went to a Dari Mart store, killed a female clerk and
brutally beat
> another one. The evidence of "Death-metal" music and Satanism
was
> admitted into court testimony and was upheld because it
partially
> explain the motive for the crime and the motive for the degree
of
> brutality.
>
> CONTINUED TO PART FIVE OF OPEN LETTER TO CSICOP AND USENET
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
devin_m...@hotmail.com wrote:
> PART FIVE OF OPEN LETTER TO CSICOP AND USENET
>
> From:
> UCSICOSRA
> Usenet Committe for the Scientific Investigation
> of Claims of Satanic Ritual Abuse
> devin_m...@hotmail.com
> satanic_ri...@my-deja.com
>
> To:
> CSICOP
> Box 703
> Amherst, NY, 14226
>
> Re: Skeptic's Dictionary - satanic ritual abuse
> http://www.skepdic.com/satanrit.html
>
> RECAP
>
> The flaws in the dictionary entry for SRA on your web site are
as
> follows:
>
> 1. SRA is not an "alleged" systematic abuse of children of
satanists.
> It is a real phenomenon that can be documented by hard,
physical
> evidence, including medical and legal evidence in the public
domain
provided
> 68 documented references of SRA for CSCICOP to independently
strawman
> definiton for SRA and proceeds to debunk his pet definition.
Even if
> we use Mr. Lanning's absurd defintion for "satanic murder",
which
> actually detracts us from ACTUAL cases of Satanic Ritual Abuse
in the
> peer-reviewed literature, Mr. Lanning's definition does not
hold up to
> scrutiny of any kind, and can be disproved with the March 1998
case,
> Ore. 397; 963 P.2d 667; 1998 Ore. LEXIS 593. This case
exceeds Mr.
> Lannings definition for "Satanic Murder" and disproves his
hypothesis
> that CSICOP uses to discredit SRA.
>
district
> attorneys, police and parents. While this may be true for 75%
of all
> SRA claims, this does not apply to 25% of all cases, and in
fact, this
> claim is FALSE when documented medical and judicial evidence
for SRA
is
> reviewed.
>
> > If there are thousands of baseless accusations, how do they
> > originate? Most of them are said to originate with children.
Since
> > there is a widespread belief that children wouldn't make up
stories
> > of eating other children or being forced to have sex with
giraffes
> > after flying in an airplane while they were supposed to be
in day
> > care, the stories are often taken at face value by naive
prosecutors,
> > therapists, police officers and parents. Yet, the
researchers found
> > that children are unlikely to invent stories of satanic
ritual abuse
> > on their own. So, where do the stories come from? They
probably come
> > from the therapists, the district attorneys, police and
parents.
> > There is ample evidence that therapists and law enforcement
personnel
> > encourage and reward children for accepting the suggestions
of
> > bizarre abusive behavior. They also discourage truth by
refusing to
> > accept no for an answer, forcing children to undergo
interrogations
> > until the interrogator gets what he or she is after.
>
> It is sad that CSICOP refuses to examine the 90 or so
documented cases
> involving Satanic Ritual abuse that disprove the non-ritual
abuse
> expert claims of Goodman, Shaver, and Lanning.
>
> Why does CSICOP defend the flawed, biased, and distorted
research of
> non-experts?
>
> Why does CSICOP promote inaccuracies and disinformation when
the
> medical evidence at NIH, and the judicial and medical evidence
> contradicts the claims of researchers who aren't schooled in
ritual
> abuse?
>
> Why does CSICOP deliberately ignore evidence that contradicts
the
> survivors of SRA?
>
> Why does CSICOP deliberately ignore the evidence of the people
who
> have been victims of Satanic murders?
>
> Why does CSICOP deliberately ignore the evidence of the people
who
> have been sexually and psychologically abused in bizarre
Satanic
Ritual
> Abuse cases?
>
> Please explain, Mr. Randi, why CSICOP turns a blind eye toward
SRA and
> distorts the memory of the murdered victims of Satanic Ritual
Abuse?
>
> I appreciate your time and your attempts to correct any
inaccuracies
> that CSICOP willingly or unwillingly has condoned in the past.
>
> Perhaps CSICOP will see this as an opportunity to finally get
to the
> bottom of this important issue since CSICOP explicitly claims
on their
> web page that they "(separate)fact from myth in the flood of
occultism
> and pseudoscience on the scene today."
>
> If CSICOP's claims are true, then why has CSCICOP separated
the facts
> from the study of Satanic Ritual Abuse and replaced these
facts with
> myths?
>
> Sincerely and with great respect,
>
> Devin McAndrews
> UCSICOSRA
> Usenet Committe for the Scientific Investigation
> of Claims of Satanic Ritual Abuse
> devin_m...@hotmail.com
> satanic_ri...@my-deja.com
satanic ritual abuse satanic ritual abuse satanic ritual abuse
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
the following article. It appeared in the September, 1997 issue
of American Psychologist, vol. 52, #9, pp. 997-1006. This
electronic reprint is provided solely for personal use. For any
other use that involves copyright issues, please contact the
American Psychological Association.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SCIENCE AS CAREFUL QUESTIONING: ARE CLAIMS OF A FALSE MEMORY
SYNDROME EPIDEMIC BASED ON EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE?
Kenneth S. Pope, Ph.D., ABPP
"Memory, Abuse, and Science: Questioning Claims About the False
Memory Syndrome Epidemic" (Pope, September 1996) suggested that
recent claims about the existence of an alleged false memory
syndrome (FMS) epidemic and its possible causes and consequences
deserve careful scientific evaluation. The article's approach
was "not to provide a simplified set of supposed answers or
support a sense of certitude but rather to suggest that an
essential task of psychologists is careful, informed, and
comprehensive questioning" (Pope, 1996, p. 957).
The article examined various claims about this supposed epidemic
and suggested "types of questions that psychologists may find
useful in evaluating these. . . claims" (p. 957).
The premise of the article (Pope, 1996) was that psychology
rests on science and that claims--no matter how popular,
authoritative, or institutionalized--must be dispassionately
examined in light of the empirical evidence available to support
them. If psychology is a scientific discipline, then claims by
FMS proponents should be subject to the same scrutiny and held
to the same scientific standards as those that are routinely
applied to other claims. The article concluded by emphasizing
this responsibility:
Science works best when claims and hypotheses can be continually
questioned. That which tends to disallow doubt and discredit
anyone who disagrees is unlikely to foster the scientific
venture or promote public policies and clinical practices based
on Scientific principles. Each scientific claim should prevail
or fall on its research validation and logic. (Pope, 1996, p.
971)
A CONTROVERSIAL TOPIC
I appreciate that many readers took the time to write comments
on my article (Pope, 1996) and that those comments chosen for
publication are five from those whose claims were discussed in
my article as well as five from those who engage in questioning
those claims. It is possible that this controversy's deep
divisions are reflected in characterizations of my article and
its approach: one set of letters confining themselves to such
descriptions as "thoughtful" and "careful" (Spiegel, 1997, this
issue), "scholarly" (Alpert, 1997, this issue), "admirably
reasoned and thorough" (Gold, 1997, this issue),
and "scientific" and "bringing reason and civility into an
emotionally charged . . . debate" (Saakvitne, Pratt, & Pearlman,
1997, this issue); the other seasoning positive comments with
use of such terms as "deep disdain" (P. Freyd, 1997, this
issue), "pious" (Pendergrast, 1997, this issue), "outrageous"
(P. Freyd. 1997), "verged close to ad hominem" (Kihlstrom, 1997,
this issue), "an effort to mislead people" (Poole, Lindsay,
Memon, & Bull, 1997, this issue), and defamation of over one
million people (P. Freyd. 1997; for an example of a more extreme
response and its aftermath, see also "Correction Notice and
Apology," 1997.
PSYCHOLOGY'S SCIENTIFIC FOUNDATION:
EMPIRICAL VALIDATION FOR ASSESSMENT APPROACHES
Responding briefly to comments about my article (Pope, 1996),
I'd like to start by emphasizing fundamental areas of agreement.
Kihlstrom (1997) advocates a close relationship between science
and practice and emphasizes the importance of clinical
psychology being firmly based on scientifically validated
principles and techniques. As I stated in my article, I firmly
agree with this view of psychology as a scientific discipline.
Theory and practice must rest on empirical validation. "Claims
grounded most firmly in the scientific tradition are those
emerging from hypotheses that are falsifiable. Scientists bear
an essential responsibility to examine primary data, research
methodology, assumptions, and inferences" (Pope, 1996, p. 971).
Kihlstrom (1997) criticizes the use of assessment concepts, such
as Blume's (1990) checklist, to conclude that child abuse
occurred. Kihlstrom and I are in solid agreement that to rely on
such approaches is scientifically impermissible if they lack
empirical validation. "Psychology bases claims regarding the
effectiveness of an intervention or the accuracy of assessments
or predictions on impartial, systematic investigation . . .
[and] refrain[s] from making claims for validity that are not
supported by empirical evidence" (Pope, Butcher, & Seelen, 1993,
p. 168). The use of unvalidated "signs" to conclude that
childhood sexual abuse occurred is impermissible in
psychological assessment (Pope & Vasquez, 1991, pp. 55-56).
Various assessment instruments may have been validated for other
purposes, but they still lack validation with regard to abuse.
Whenever standardized psychological tests are used as part of an
assessment, it is essential that the tests be adequately normed
for the relevant population and adequately validated for the
task to which they are put. Unfortunately, standardized tests
may often be misused in the area of sexual abuse. Especially in
forensic assessments but also in other contexts, a test or test
battery may be put faith as showing that a person did
experienced a certain instance of abuse or did not experience a
certain form of abuse . . .all in the complete absence of any
successful attempt to validate the test or test battery for that
purpose. (Pope, 1994, pp. 106-107; see also Pope, Butcher. &
Seelen, 1993, in press)
IS THERE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE VALIDATING FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME?
Claims by FMS proponents should not be exempt from these
fundamental requirements of psychological science. Did Kihlstrom
present adequate (or any) empirical evidence validating his use
of the formal diagnosis of FMS, which, as my article (Pope,
1996) noted, he defined and which has been set forth in the
False Memory Syndrome Foundation's (FMSF's) brochure and amicus
briefs? Kihlstrom (1994) claimed that there is a
False Memory Syndrome -- a condition in which a person's
identity and interpersonal relationships are centered around a
memory of traumatic experience which is objectively false but in
which the person strongly believes. Note that the syndrome is
not charac-terized by false memories as such. We all have
memories that are inaccurate. Rather, the syndrome may be
diagnosed when the memory is so deeply engrained that it orients
the individual's entire personality and lifestyle, in turn
disrupting all sorts of other adaptive behaviors. The analogy to
personality disorder is intentional. False Memory Syndrome is
especially destructive because the person assiduously avoids
confrontation with any evidence that might challenge the memory.
Thus it takes on a life of its own, encapsulated, and resistant
to correction. The person may become so focused on the memory
that he or she may be effectively distracted from coping with
the real problems in his or her life. (p. 2; Kihlstrom, 1996;
also cited in FMSF, 1995a. 1995b, 1995c, 1997a)
Kihlstrom (1997) mistakenly indicates that Carstensen et al.
(1993) and I (Pope, 1996) questioned the use of FMS diagnosis
because they believed that only the medical profession should
use the term syndrome or because the word syndrome should be re-
served exclusively for disorders approved by a majority of the
American Psychiatric Association. Neither Carstensen et al.'s
statement nor my article made any reference to such notions.
Rather, as was explicitly stated in the major heading for that
section of my article ("False Memory Syndrome: Claims of a
Scientifically Validated Syndrome and Epidemic"), the essential
question is whether there is any empirical validation for
Kihlstrom's diagnostic construct.
Although there seems to be a never ending stream of popular
books whose titles use the word syndrome preceded by some
fictional character's name or some scientific language,
psychological science requires more. Psychology requires that
diagnostic categories be empirically validated. The validity of
this diagnosis can be evaluated scientifically only if Kihlstrom
reports the methodology and research data of empirical vali-
dation. For example, how did he select the sample of patients
from whom this diagnosis was supposedly derived, how many did he
select, how did he determine whether they met all the diagnostic
criteria, and so on?
My article (Pope, 1996) was clear and specific in its focus on
such questions. Beginning on page 959, I suggested additional
questions useful in evaluating the empirical validation on which
this diagnosis supposedly rests. For example, what methodology
did Kihlstrom and other researchers use to determine in each
case that the memory was "objectively false" (Kihlstrom, 1994,
p.2)? What methodology was used to assess an "entire personality
and lifestyle" (Kihlstrom, 1994, p. 2)? When claims are made
about a new diagnosis, it is the responsibility of psychologists
to obtain from those who make the claims an adequately detailed
description of the methodology and data on which the claims are
based and to evaluate the degree to which a diagnostic construct
that has allegedly reached epidemic proportions rests solidly on
adequate empirical validation.
IS THERE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE VALIDATING DE RIVERA'S CHECKLIST?
De Rivera (1997, this issue) sets forth a checklist of seven
criteria "to establish the innocence of families accused on the
basis of recovered memories" (p. 996). De Rivera's checklist
emerged from interviews with nine families who had contacted
FMSF. "In order to select a representative sample of families
who had contacted the FMS Foundation, the investigator chose a
telephone area code and contacted all families within that code
who met [certain] criteria" (de Rivera, 1994, p. 149). The
investigator conducted one interview of several hours duration
with each pair of parents, one or both of whom had been accused.
The person who claimed to have been abused and who made the
allegations that were being evaluated was not interviewed.
De Rivera (1994) demonstrated scientific responsibility by
presenting adequate, specific information about his methodology
of a kind that is too often missing from claims by FMS
proponents. Regardless of agreement or disagreement with de
Rivera's approach, rationale, or conclusions, readers understand
clearly how many participants were selected, how they were
selected, and how data were obtained from them. Informed dis-
cussion can address the question, Does this seven-point
checklist demonstrate adequate empirical validity to justify its
use to establish that a parent did not abuse a child? Does the
process set forth as validating the checklista process in which
no information is obtained from the person who claims to have
been abused and no evidence is sought beyond statements of those
who claim to have been falsely accusedmeet minimal scientific
criteria for validation? It is possible to imagine a situation
involving a false memory of abuse that meets none of these seven
criteria or a situation involving an accurate memory of abuse
that meets all seven. More important is that this checklist is
unsupported by any validation study in which whether or not the
abuse occurred has been adequately verified.
IS THERE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE VALIDATING POOLE ET AL.'S CHECKLIST?
Poole et al. (1997) provide a third example of a construct
lacking empirical validation. Their constellation of practices
and beliefs, which was used to conclude that 25% of their
respondents were "memory-focused," supposedly
demonstrated "evidence that a sizable minority of highly trained
psychotherapists have used potentially risky 'memory focused'
approaches" (Lindsay, 1995, p. 282). Although they correctly
critique the use of unvalidated checklists to indicate a history
of sexual abuse as a "hodgepodge of alleged 'indicators'"(Poole
et al., 1997, p. 991), they themselves used an unvalidated
checklistcomposed of their selection of eclectic therapeutic
practices that allegedly might implant false recollections of
abuse in therapy patients. As Olio (1996) noted,
There are no validation studies for this constellation of
reported beliefs and practices, therefore no way to determine
what is actually being measured by the Poole, Lindsay et al.
constellationnor the outcome(s) of particular beliefs and
techniques. (p. 288)
THE RATIONALE AND IMPLICATIONS OF NOT SUSPECTING CHILD ABUSE
Although Kihlstrom (1997) and I agree that psychological
concepts must be empirically validated, we disagree on other
important matters. For example, in my article (Pope, 1996), I
discussed Kihlstrom's (1995) position that "it is not
permissible to infer, or frankly even to suspect, a history of
abuse in people who present symptoms of abuse." He claimed that
it is impermissible "even to suspect" because there is no
specific association between any symptom and child abuse and
because to do so would constitute the logical error of affirming
the consequent. When Kihlstrom (1995) wrote that clinicians must
not suspect child abuse no matter what the symptoms, he confused
the syllogistic proof of deduction with the formation of
diagnostic hypotheses. (For a discussion of the affirming the
consequent fallacy in assessment, see Pope & Brown, 1996; Pope,
Butcher, & Seelen, 1993.)
Assessment, particularly in the early stages, requires
clinicians to begin forming hypotheses based on incomplete data.
Additional data provide evidence helping to contradict, support,
or refine initial hypotheses as well as suggesting new
hypotheses. Clinicians conducting an assessment may legitimately
form suspicions about numerous diagnostic, etiologic, or
prognostic possibilities. Diverse options may be added to
the "rule out" list during the process of differential
diagnosis. This process of professional decision making in the
face of uncertainty is one for which there is extensive research
and theory (e.g., Bell, Raiffa, & Tversky, 1988; Dowie &
Elstein, 1988; Kahneman, Slovic, & Tversky, 1982; Pope, Butcher,
& Seelen, 1993: Wolf, Gruppen, & Billi, 1985). A set of
information may form an adequate, reasonable basis for
suspecting a patient may have been abused while forming an inad-
equate, fallacious basis for determining that abuse must have
occurred.
This essential distinction between deductive proof and
provisional hypotheses can be illustrated by a collection of
presenting symptoms such as dizziness, shortness of breath,
heaviness in the chest, and an aching arm or jaw. No qualified
health care provider would accept these symptoms as proof that
the person was having a heart attack. None of the symptoms have
a specific or pathognomonic relationship with a heart attack;
the symptoms, singly or in combination, can be caused by an
almost infinite variety of psychological or physical phenomena.
But is it not only permissible but also responsible practice for
a heath care worker to suspect a heart attack as a possible
cause and to address this hypothesis during differential
diagnosis?
If presenting symptoms must never lead clinicians to include a
child abuse hypothesis as part of the process of differential
diagnosis, then we are taken back to the age in which presenting
symptoms per se never led to a provisional hypothesis of child
abuse and additional data were not sought that might contradict,
support, or refine the hypothesis. For example, Caffey (1946)
described cases in which infants' presenting symptoms were
chronic blood clots in the brain and broken arms and legs.
Parents and others volunteered no reports of any trauma,
intentional or accidental, that might have caused these
symptoms. Caffey voiced clinicians' bafflement at what might
have caused these symptoms. Should clinicians be prohibited from
suspecting that one possible cause of such presenting symptoms
in infants might be child abuse? Discussing Kihlstrom's (1995)
claim that clinicians must never suspect a history of child
abuse on the basis of the patient's presenting symptoms, Olio
(1995) presented a hypothetical example: a 3-5-year-old girl,
one of whose presenting symptoms is infection by the gonococcus
bacterium, Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Presenting symptoms may
legitimately form the basis for a suspicion that a patient may
have a history of child abuse. For a more detailed discussion,
see Pope and Brown (1996).
Laws on reporting child abuse focus on the distinction between
syllogistic proof of deduction and the formation of diagnostic
hypotheses. As noted in my article (Pope, 1996), reviews of
state laws suggest that almost 50% use a form of the verb
suspect (e.g., "suspect that a child has been abused") in
legislation requiring therapists to report suspected child abuse
(Kalichman, 1993). Authoritative claims that it is impermissible
to form suspicions based on presenting symptoms may have serious
implications for whether clinicians file reports pursuant to
these laws.
DO PEOPLE EVER RECOVER MEMORIES OF REPEATED
CHILD ABUSE THAT ACTUALLY OCCURRED?
Pendergrast (1997) states that the real scientific question is
whether what he calls "massive repression" of child abuse is
possible. He claims that there is "no good science to back up
such an assertion, and I could not find even one clear-cut
corroborated case of massive repression in my research"
(Pendergrast, 1997, p. 990). Pendergrast's conclusion is similar
to that stated by FMSF as early as 1992 in its discussion of
legal aspects of FMS: "Psychiatrists advising the Foundation
members seem to be unanimous in the belief that memories of such
atrocities cannot be repressed. Horrible incidents of childhood
are remembered" (FMSF, 1992a, p. 2). Similarly, in argument to
the court, FMSF (1997a) claimed that no known cognitive
mechanism is considered capable of even contributing to an
amnesia of a traumatic event: "Although a broad range of
mechanisms are known to produce various kinds of memory
disturbance and have been examined by memory researchers and
theorists, none are, at present, considered capable of
contributing to a supposed amnesia for traumatic events" (p.
17). Fraser (1997) wrote that one consequence of the work of
FMSF is "that many . . . members of the public have been
persuaded to believe that all recovered memories are bogus" (p.
D14).
Repression is, of course, but one possible cognitive process
that might affect access to memories of child abuse (Gleaves,
1996). Contrary to the FMSF claims, other theoretical models
have also been hypothesized to account for amnesia for child
abuse experiences (for discussion of research-based models, see,
e.g., J. J. Freyd, 1996 [for additional information on J. J.
Freyd's betrayal-trauma model, see Fraser, 1997]; Pope, 1995b;
Pope & Brown, 1996).
It is important, however, to distinguish between two related but
distinctly different questions: (a) whether people can lose
access to the memories of repeated child abuse and later recover
accurate memories of the abuse, and (b) if such a phenomenon
occurs, what theoretical model might explain the phenomenon? As
discussed in detail by Pope and Brown (1996), many phenomena
have been observed and recognized scientifically for which the
underlying explanatory mechanisms are still unknown. For
example, the asymmetrical U-shaped curve describing the primacy
and recency effects of serial recall has been recognized for
more than a century. Stigler (1978) observed that.
nine years before the publication of H. Ebbinghaus's (1885) book
on memory, an American physicist, F. E. Nipher, published brief
accounts of his own investigations on this topic. . . . Nipher,
who used series of numbers rather than nonsense syllables as the
meaningless material to be memorized, . . . found 2 memory
curves; a binomial relationship for the distribution of memory
errors within 6-digit numbers, and a logarithmic relationship
for the decay of memory over time. (p. 1)
But even such a seemingly simple, well-researched, and robust
phenomenon as this off-center U in serial recall, Murdock (1995)
noted, is one for which
we still have no completely satisfactory theory or model to
explain. . . . Nipher himself applied a simple binomial model
for these data, the same type of probability model one would use
for . . . coin tosses . . . . However, such a model is more
descriptive than explanatory, and cognitive psychologists would
like to know what mental processes underlie the "coin tosses."
(p. 110)
Whether access to memories of child abuse can be blocked for a
matter of years is an empirical question. In a recent article,
Scheflin and Brown (1996) reviewed 25 studies of amnesia for
childhood sexual abuse and concluded that all
demonstrate amnesia in a subpopulation including recent studies
with design improvements such as random sampling and prospective
designs that address weaknesses in earlier studies. A reasonable
conclusion is that amnesia for CSA [childhood sexual abuse] is a
robust finding across studies using very different samples and
methods of assessment. Studies addressing the accuracy of
recovered abuse memories show that recovered abuse memories are
no more or no less accurate than continuous memories for abuse.
(p. 143; see also Fraser, 1997)
THE GOLDEN GOOSE, HUCKSTERISM, AND THERAPISTS MILKING THE SYSTEM
Pendergrast (1997) takes issue with the following sentence in my
article: "A relatively recent set of claims hold that many
therapistsfor reasons as diverse as well-meaning naivete, greed,
incompetence, and zealotrysuggest a history of childhood sexual
abuse to clients who have no actual abuse history" (Pope, 1996,
p. 957). He writes, "Contrary to Pope's (1996) implication, I do
not believe that such therapists are motivated primarily by
money. Those I interviewed were, in general, well-meaning,
compassionate people" (Pendergrast, 1997, p. 989). The decision
to include "greed" in my article was based on a number of
published sources, including statements such as the following
from Pendergrast's (1995) own book:
Recovered-memory therapy in all its variations, is a lucrative
pursuit [italics in original]. The repressed-memory craze has
proved to be a bonanza. . . . As long as insurance companies
continue to pay for questionable diagnoses of "post-traumatic
stress disorder" or "multiple personality," therapists will
continue to milk the system for all it's worth. . . .Some
advertisements follow in the grand American tradition of
hucksterism. . . . Unfortunately, inventive True Believer
therapists in search of lucrative repressed memories are already
finding ways around the system. . . . It isn't difficult to
predict that therapists will diagnose such golden-goose clients
with massive amounts of repressed memories that will require
years of expensive therapy to root out. (pp. 504-509)
TECHNIQUES AND BELIEFS, OR MISINFORMATION?
Poole et al. (1997) respond to a detailed critique of their work
presented by Olio in the summer 1996 issue of the Journal of
Psychiatry & Law, a special issue devoted to original research
reports, review articles, and legal analyses in the area of
recovered memories. Olio addressed in careful detail the issues
that Poole et al. raise in their comment.
In an effort to assess the use of potentially risky practices in
psychotherapy, Poole, Lindsay, Memon, and Bull (1995) focused on
the use of particular therapeutic techniques by therapists who
report certain beliefs. They assume that therapists who hold
these beliefs practice differently than therapists (even those
who use similar techniques) who do not hold these beliefs and
that these differences in practice create greater risk for the
production of illusory memories of childhood abuse.
This emphasis on therapists' attitudes and the use of particular
techniques may be misplaced. A review of the scientific research
on the misinformation effect seems to indi-cate that memory
reports become distorted when misinformation is systematically
and repeatedly supplied by the interviewer (Brown, 1995).
Therefore, it may not be the use of a specific technique per se
(such as the so-called memory recovery techniques) nor the
presence of a specific belief by the thera-pist that
independently causes a risk for the creation of illusory
memories of childhood abuse. (For a study of the suggestibility
of those who reported recovering memories of childhood abuse as
compared with those who did not make such reports, see Leavitt,
1997.)
A recent review of studies using guided imagery may offer
important data that are useful in considering this issue (Brown,
Scheflin, & Hammond, in press). Brown et al. reported that 2
studies that used repeated questioning (not repeated misleading
questioning) without guided imagery showed a slight increase in
additional information with little or no increase in the error
rate. The 12 studies that used guided imagery with a free-recall
format yielded an 11%-96% gain in new information about the
target event without a significant increase in the memory error
rate, whereas the 4 studies that combined the use of guided
imagery with the inclusion of systematic misinformation about
the content of the reported event showed a substantial increase
in the memory error rate.
There is no empirical evidence that the diverse and dissimilar
techniques enumerated in Poole et al.'s (1995) checklist are
differentially associated with systematically supplying false or
misleading misinformation about child abuse. Poole et al.
included no measures to assess whether respondents used
interviewing practices that included supplying false or
misleading information about a nonexistent history of child
abuse. With no validation studies supporting their checklist of
supposedly risky behaviors, there is no scientific basis for
determining which respondents did or did not engage in behaviors
that would tend to elicit reports of false memories of child
abuse from at least some patients. Poole et al. did not use a 2
x 2 model (see Pope, 1996) necessary to determine whether
patients with whom these techniques were used produced
significantly more or less reports of false abuse memories than
those patients not encountering these behaviors (or than people
who were not in therapy). Poole et al. offered no information
concerning whether the reports of recovered memories of abuse by
any of the patients were valid (i.e., described abuse that
actually occurred) or invalid.
ESTIMATING FREQUENCIES AND INFERRING CAUSALITY
Poole et al. (1997) acknowledge that their "data . . . do not
provide a basis for estimating the frequency of therapy-induced
illusory memories of abuse" and claim that "we have not used our
data elsewhere as the basis for calculating one" (p. 990) and
make no claim that "memory-focused" clinicians "used approaches
that put their clients at risk" (p. 992). Elsewhere, however,
Lindsay and Poole (1995) wrote,
The debate about recovered memories must also be viewed in its
numerical context. In our view there are solid grounds to fear
that tens of thousands of people have developed illusory
memories or false beliefs about CSA through suggestive memory
recovery techniques and ancillary practices in psychotherapy,
self-help, or group therapy. (p. 464)
Similarly, Lindsay (1995) wrote that Poole et al.'s (1995) data
provide "evidence that a sizable minority of highly trained
psychotherapists (on the order of l0%-25%) have used potentially
risky 'memory focused' approaches" (p. 282). He claimed that "at
no time in history have so many therapists used such a panoply
of risky memory recovery techniques in attempts to help clients
recover suspected hidden memories of CSA" (p. 283). Lindsay and
Read (1994) claimed that these approaches "constitute a grave
risk for the creation of illusory memories" (p. 327). (For a
discussion of the 25% figure, see the following section
entitled "Exaggerated Claims, Chilling Effects, and Dangerous
Therapists.")
In Poole et al.'s (1995) article, they claimed that the study
demonstrated that these therapeutic interventions could produce
specific negative effects in terminating family
relationships: "Our survey . . . indicates these interventions
can have serious implications for clients (e.g., lead some
clients to terminate relations with their fathers)" (p. 434).
Similarly, all abuse reported by therapists as having been
recalled during the course of therapy (Poole et al., 1995, p.
431) was claimed by the authors to represent memories of abuse
caused by therapy (p. 432), which Olio (1996) observed is a form
of the post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this, therefore because
of this) fallacy. Poole et al.'s methodology relied on an
unvalidated checklist to assess self-reports based on
retrospective memories over the past years to produce a valid
and reliable measure of consequences for patients (e.g., leading
to recovery of false memories of abuse, terminating
relationships with fathers) as they were specifically caused by
therapist behaviors.
EXAGGERATED CLAIMS, CHILLING EFFECTS, AND DANGEROUS THERAPISTS
Poole et al. (1997) now acknowledge that "exaggerated claims
about false memories may have a chilling effect on victim
advocacy and support" (p. 992) and express regret about their
use of the language of causation. Yet, it is a serious problem
when an article claims that its methodology and data establish
such conclusions and enters the peer-reviewed literature without
a subsequent erratum notice. The claims may become insti-
tutionalized in the scientific and forensic literature. For
example, Pendergrast (1995) wrote.
Poole and Lindsay's survey indicated that 25 percent of doctoral-
level therapists constitute True Believers . . . . Taking that
25 percent figure as accurate . . . we arrive at 62,500 True
Believer therapists . . . . Using simple math (62,500 True
Believers x 50 clients x 34 percent who recover memories), we
arrive at over 1 million cases of "recovered memories" each
year . . . . In short . . . there are millions of cases
of "recovered memories," each of which represents shattered
lives and destroyed families. If two-and-a-half-million women
(well over one percent of the U.S. population) identify
themselves as "Survivors," then one out of every 25 families has
been affected. (p. 491)
Using similar calculations, FMSF Scientific and Professional
Advisory Board member Crews (1995) claimed that "it is hard to
form even a rough idea of the number of persuaded clients . . .
a conservative guess would be a million persons since 1988
alone" (p. 160). In an article whose title and text
metaphorically refer to therapists using these techniques
as "accidental executioners," Loftus, Milo, and Paddock (1995)
used Poole et al.'s (1995) claims as a basis for concluding that
as many as 25% of clinicians "may be using techniques that are
risky if not dangerous" (p. 304).
Therapists who continued to use such allegedly "dangerous"
therapy techniques were themselves termed dangerous. For ex-
ample, Utrecht University professor Onno van der Hart's plan to
lecture in Israel on his treatment of adults who suffered child
abuse met international opposition.
Members of the US False Memory Syndrome Foundation and
psychologists in various parts of the world charged that van der
Hart and his colleagues were "very dangerous." His critics
charged that van der Hart's techniques represented a "harmful
and unscientific method of pseudotherapy that must be seen as a
threat to psychology in Israel. This 'therapy' makes the patient
dependent on the therapist by inventing multiple personalities,
false memories and accusations, which have already destroyed
tens of thousands of families in the US." (Siegel-Itzkovich,
1996, p. 7)
The previous paragraphs contain two examples of the widely cited
description of 25% of therapists or clinicians. That statistic
can be found in Poole et al's (1995) abstract, which refers
specifically to "25% of the respondents" (p. 426). It is worth
noting that the description did not actually apply to 25% of the
respondents to Poole et al.'s survey. The 25% statistic applied
only to a very specific subsample of the respondents. After
calculating the return rate based on returned forms, Poole et
al. excluded "38% of the respondents" (p. 428) because they did
not meet various criteria. One criterion was that the respondent
had to have conducted "psychotherapy sessions with 10 or more
adult female clients in the past 2 years" (p. 428). There was no
comparable criterion for adult male clients. (Using such a
criterion in reference to adult female clients is consistent
with the belief that women are more likely to accept
implantation of false memories that they have been sexually
abused; however, there is still no empirical evidence based on
adequate methodologyi.e., in which there is demonstrable proof
of whether the supposed abuse occurredestablishing the validity
of this belief.) In my article (Pope, 1996), I dis-cussed
differences between claims and Poole et al's data on which they
were supposedly based, of which the "25% of respondents" or "25%
of therapists" statistic is but one example (see also Olio,
1996, 1997). It is worth asking whether it is fair to
characterize a finding based on 25% of a specific and
significantly smaller subsample of respondents as if it were 25%
of the respondents and hence supposedly representative of 25% of
all therapists.
Poole et al. (1997) argue that they felt "that it was important
to take a snapshot of clinicians' attitudes and practices at
that point in history" (p. 992). However, the empirical
literature suggests that it may be wise to move away from
simplistic views of memory, particularly in this context, as a
camera or a tape recorder. Research suggests that sources of
potential bias inherent in "memory must be taken into account in
interpreting data emerging from retrospective studies" and that
not only "the usual biases of self-report" but also other
factors affecting "memory may be considerable in any form of
survey research" (Pope, 1990, p. 479; see also Pope, 1979; Pope,
Sonne, & Holroyd, 1993; Pope, Tabachnick, & Keith-Spiegel, 1987;
Pope & Vasquez, 1991, in press). In this case, generalizations
about therapists from two countries (based on 145 survey forms
from the United States and 57 from England) were made from
inferential and descriptive statistics obtained from reports of
retrospective memory of beliefs and complex events over years as
assessed by an unvalidated checklist that only a minority of the
selected sample filled out and returned (return rate = 39%) and
from which, moreover, an additional 38% of the respondents'
surveys were discarded to select a specific subsample.
ARE THE FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME FOUNDATION'S
CLAIMS SEFTLED AND BEYOND QUESTION?
P. Freyd (1997), FMSF's executive director, objects to my having
asked the foundation and its board to provide information about
the methodology and data supporting their claims. A fundamental
thesis of both my award address (Pope, 1995a) and my subsequent
article (Pope, 1996) was that psychology as a science requires
careful, informed, and comprehensive examination of the
empirical evidence for claims.
FMSF has highlighted its reliance on its board, emphasizing not
only that "board members make substantial donations to the
Foundation both in time and money" but also that "it is the
presence of the Advisory Board that has given our efforts
credibility" ("FMSF Advisory Board Meeting," 1993, p. 3). When
these names are listed in the False Memory Syndrome Foundation
Newsletter, the FMSF amicus briefs, and other FMSF materials,
their impressive prestige and affiliations do indeed lend
credibility to the statements in those documents. Therefore, to
ask the board about empirical evidence or practical implications
of FMSF claims or statements seems to fall squarely within the
scientific tradition of open inquiry.
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME FOUNDATION'S
CLAIMS OF A FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME EPIDEMIC
FMSF (1993) stated its fundamental purpose as follows: "FMSF is
first a research organization that is documenting the extent of
this phenomenon" (p. 7). When FMSF (1996) claimed that FMS "has
affected tens of thousands of individuals and families
worldwide," scientists and others should be able to ask to
examine the methodology used to diagnose individual cases in
what has, according to claims, reached epidemic proportions. The
same questions I suggested in both my address (Pope, 1995a) and
my article (Pope, 1996) that were applicable to Kihlstrom's
research establishing the scientific validity of this diagnosis
are applicable to FMSF's empirical evidence that so many
individuals meet the diagnostic criteria. Similar questions to
FMSF and its board would be relevant to FMSF claims that the
reports received are accurate as reported by the accused
parties:
Remember that three and a half years ago, FMSF didn't exist. A
group of 50 or so people found each other and today more than
18,000 have reported similar experiences . . . . Our stories are
true and as the saying goes "truth is stranger than fiction."
(FMSF, 1997b)
QUESTIONS ABOUT INFORMED CONSENT
The question of informed consent is an important one if those
who were diagnosed as afflicted with the supposed FMS were
clinically assessed or involved in human participants research
validating the diagnosis. If both Kihlstrom in his original work
and FMSF in its research documenting the frequency of occurrence
of the syndrome had used a methodology such as de Rivera's
(1994; i.e., the person alleged to have FMS is not interviewed
or examined; the diagnosis is made primarily on the basis of a
report from one or both parents who claim to have been falsely
accused of incest), then the informed consent of those afflicted
with the syndrome might not have been a factor. Here is the
discussion of this issue in my article:
Research involving human participants usually involves the
informed consent of the participants. For those independently
evaluating or attempting to replicate studies seeming to
validate the existence and widespread occurrence of false memory
syndrome, it would be useful if the procedures for obtaining in-
formed consentif consent was obtainedfrom people who were
diagnosed as suffering from false memory syndrome were
disclosed. It appears possible, on the basis of a reading of
materials generated by the FMSF, that some might not consider
interviewing or clinically assessing people supposedly afflicted
by false memory syndrome to be an essential component of a study
of the validity and occurrence of the syndrome. If, for this
reason, the informed consent of or even direct contact with
people diagnosed with false memory syndrome has been considered
unnecessary in documenting specific cases or the extent of the
phenomenon, it would be useful for FMSF and its Scientific and
Professional Advisory Board to report any available scientific
data about the ability to diagnose false memory syndrome without
meeting the person alleged to have the disorder. If the person
reporting the so-called memory does not participate in the
research, how do researchers conclude that the memory is
objectively false (rather than simply subjectively judged to be
false by those who have been accused)? How do researchers
determine that the center of a person's identity and
interpersonal relationships is a particular false memory without
even meeting the person? How do they examine all aspects of
personality without interviewing, evaluating, or even knowing
the person? (Pope, 1996, p. 962)
QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER DISAGREEMENT IS LEGITIMATE
The Columbia Journalism Review recently published an examination
(Stanton, 1997; see also Bowman & Mertz, 1996a, 1996b) of the
problems that the news media have encountered when questioning
FMSF claims and factors making it difficult for them to publish
material that is unacceptable to FMSF. Similarly, as I described
in my article (Pope, 1996), FMSF set forth a discussion of the
rejection of suggestions that a more balanced program at a
psychological association convention might result from
supplementing members of the FMSF board who had been invited as
speakers with scientists who might present alternatives to
FMSF's view. That discussion included the following statement:
A memory researcher told us that research academics "don't even
know what this memory debate is about. They see the evidence and
to them the science of memory is obvious." He is right.
The "science" of the "memory" is established . . . . How could a
scientific program about memory be "balanced?" The notion makes
no more sense than trying to balance a program in astronomy by
including astrologers. ("Social Political Movement," 1996) It
should be permissible to ask the FMSF board about this
position, about whether the issues as presented by FMSF are
sufficiently established that to question or disagree is no more
scientifically legitimate than endorsing a belief in astrology.
QUESTIONS ABOUT RESEARCH SUPPOSEDLY DEMONSTRATING THE EASE OF
THERAPY IMPLANTING FALSE MEMORIES OF ABUSE
As yet another example, FMSF amicus briefs stated, "The
available data indicate the relative ease with which
psychotherapy can mistakenly persuade clients that they were
sexually abused as children" (e.g., FMSF, 1995b, pp. 33-34;
1997a, p.41). When, as noted in my article (Pope, 1996), the
names and affiliations of the FMSF board members appear listed
as an appendix to such amicus briefs, it can produce a
significant impact. To evaluate the empirical evidence, if any,
that establishes the validity of this claim, it is a legitimate
and responsible scientific task to ask for the evidence.
Similarly, it is an important scientific responsibility of those
making this claim to provide their evidence so that it can be
subject to independent examination. Does Poole et al's (1995) or
any other scientific study actually establish that therapy can
easily persuade adults that they were sexually abused as chil-
dren when such abuse never occurred? To contend that such claims
are "obvious," "settled," and therefore beyond customary
scientific questioning is, as my original article discussed, not
useful.
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME FOUNDATION'S CLAIMS
CONCERNING INDIVIDUALS
Similarly, if FMSF or one of its officers or board members makes
a public or published claim about any family or individual
family member, should it not be permissible to ask for the
evidence supporting that claim? My award address (Pope, 1995a)
contains examples of but a few claims that I believe deserve
careful evaluation in light of the supporting evidence, if any.
Evaluation in light of the empirical evidence seems preferable
to reflexive acceptance and institutionalization of such claims.
To request supporting evidence seems particularly salient when a
board member makes public statements about a special
relationship to a specific family that might provide him or her
with information, access, or perspective. For example, one FMSF
board member wrote in an American Psychological Association
(APA) divisional newsletter.
At the time that Pam and Peter Freyd came to see me, I had not
been Pamela Freyd's psychiatrist for over ten years. Although
they came to see me as "patients," I stopped any therapeutic
connection with them within a month after the FMS Foundation was
formed and I was asked to be a member of the Advisory Board.
(Lief, 1994. p. 8)
QUESTIONS ABOUT FORCING PATIENTS TO CROSS PICKET LINES TO OBTAIN
SERVICES FROM THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH THE FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME
FOUNDATION
And as a final example of the legitimacy of questioning FMSF's
statements, forcing the patients of those who disagree with FMSF
to pass through picket lines to obtain legal mental health
services was a topic of my award address (Pope, 1995a) and my
article (Pope, 1996). As early as 1992 in a False Memory
Syndrome Foundation Newsletter article entitled "What Can
Families Do?" the first activity mentioned after the rhetorical
title's question was picketing (FMSF, 1992b). In his order
granting summary judgment in favor of defendant trauma therapist
Charles Whitfield, MD, whom Pamela Freyd and Peter Freyd had
sued for alleged defamation, U.S. Judge Benson Legg mentioned
many aspects of FMSF activities, including picketing. He wrote:
In response, the Freyds mounted a public campaign, challenging
the validity of such recovered memories. In 1992, they formed
the False Memory Syndrome Foundation ("FMSF"), aggressively
contesting the existence of traumatic amnesia and repressed
memories. (Resp. at 12). Plaintiffs relied on various fora to
publicize their foundation and "to debunk this preposterous
theory," including . . . the picketing of therapists' homes. [At
the time this article went to press, it was unclear whether this
decision would be appealed.] (Pamela Freyd et al. v. Charles L.
Whitfield, 1997, pp. 1-2)
It should be permissible to ask FMSF and its board, whose
prestige lends credibility to FMSF's positions and may cause a
real impact, about the consequences of such a tactic.
CAN CHILD ABUSE PERPETRATORS AND VICTIMS FALSELY REMEMBER
THAT NO ABUSE OCCURRED?
The remaining five comments underscore, deepen, and extend the
basic themes of my article (Pope, 1996). Although space
requirements permit only a brief mention of an aspect of each,
this should not reflect on their importance.
Spiegel (1997) highlights a characteristic of much literature
supporting claims about the supposed FMS epidemic: The
malleability of memory is discussed only in terms of why therapy
patients (or people who have been exposed to certain books,
movies, or other influences) are claiming to be abused when such
claims do or may represent FMS. There is no examination of the
possibility that therapists (or exposure to books, etc.) might
cause abuse victims to begin falsely remembering that they were
not abused, perpetrators to falsely remember that they are inno-
cent, and other family members who might have been aware of the
abuse to falsely remember events or information supposedly
proving that the abuse never happened. Similarly, surveys and
experimental studies may be constructed to gather data about and
discuss suggestibility or false memories only as they pertain to
those who claim to have been abused. For example, Olio (1996)
discussed ways in which research may be constructed so that it
may unintentionally shape findings to confirm the beliefs of FMS
proponents. Part of the process of careful, informed questioning
that was the fundamental theme of my article (Pope, 1996) is
that all research methodology and reports, no matter what their
purported conclusions, must be rigorously examined for potential
bias.
It is important to note the possibility that some people who
abuse children may deny that they abuse children in the absence
of false memories of innocence. That is to say, some
perpetrators may make statements they know to be untrue. For
research concerning this phenomenon among perpetrators of child-
hood sexual abuse, see Salter (1995, 1997).
THERAPISTS' BEHAVIORS, CONSEQUENCES, AND MALPRACTICE
Gold (1997) discusses the treatment decisions that clinicians
face and emphasizes the need for an empirical approach, placing
this concern within the context of the relative scarcity of well-
designed research to find out what clinicians actually do with
their patients and the consequences of those interventions. The
randomized-trial research sponsored by the National Institute of
Mental Health that Spiegel (1997) mentions provides an example
of one approach that is likely to be useful.
Well-designed research is also needed to explore how clinicians
arrive at their decisions about patients who claim to have been
abused. In my article (Pope, 1996), I suggested some specific
questions about clinicians' decision making that research could
address, such as "to what degree if at all might therapists
refrain from pursuing diagnostic leads based on presenting
symptoms because of the threat of malpractice suits?" (p. 967).
False memory proponents' statements relevant to malpractice and
the standard of care, as documented in my award address (Pope,
1995a) and my article (Pope, 1996, pp. 966-968), may have
significantly influenced therapists who provided services to
those claiming to have been abused. In presenting the results of
an APA task force study, former APA president Ron Fox noted that
the research showed that "state licensure and grievance
procedures have been used to harass and make unfounded charges
against psychologists who provide psychotherapy to abuse
victims" (Seppa, 1996, p. 12). As reported in the APA
Monitor, 'There are some groups that have taken [recovered]
memories as prima facie evidence of poor therapeutic practice,'
Fox said. Some groups have mailed out newsletters instructing
people how to make complaints to ethics boards to harass
therapists, he said" (Seppa, 1996, p. 12). Fox noted that some
clinicians have consequently altered their practice in response
to this risk and others have discontinued serving this
population.
EDUCATION
Saakvitne et al. (1997) address the issue of graduate education
in this area. Graduate schools must provide comprehensive
training based on the most recent, still evolving scientific
research. Graduate schools also must teach, model, and foster
skills in critical thinking. Rather than being taught that some
particular group's view of a topic (such as memory with regard
to childhood sexual abuse) is established, final, and beyond
serious question or disagreement, students can be encouraged to
avoid passive acceptance of authoritative claims, no matter how
prestigious or powerful the group, organization, or board
members endorsing them, in favor of active, careful, informed
questioning (Pope & Brown, 1996). They can be encouraged to seek
information about the underlying methodology and empirical data
from those who make claims. They can be invited to replicate the
empirical research on which such claims are based, to reanalyze
the raw data from the original study, and to create new models
for studying the phenomenon at issue.
This process of requesting methodology and raw data can have
surprising results. One of the researchers to request the raw
data set from the Feldman-Summers and Pope (1994) study was J.
J. Freyd. She reanalyzed the data by using a creative approach
that tested specific hypotheses relevant to her theory.
Consequently, she found significant statistical patterns that
the original authors had simply never thought to look for (J. J.
Freyd, 1996). It is through a collaborative approach, in which
methodology and data supporting claims are freely disclosed to
others, that the process of scientific questioning can flourish.
STIMULUS ANALOGY AND ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY
Alpert (1997) emphasizes the all-too-often overlooked
requirement of "ecological validity," a concept also discussed
by Gleaves and Freyd (1997, this issue), who provide examples.
The concept may be relatively easy, taught to beginning graduate
students, but it is one that may be forgotten in practice. Imag-
ine, for example, that someone, as part of an experimental
study, demonstrates that people sometimes forget some mildly
traumatic matter (e.g., either an upcoming or a recent doctor's
appointment for minor surgery) and then later remember it. It is
unlikely that this would be accepted as the existence of proof
that people lose access to memories of repeated acts of incest
and then later remember them. Even if it were presented as a
demonstration that delayed recall of repeated sexual abuse is
possible because it demonstrates the mechanism by which such
blocked memory access and subsequent recall occur, it would be
unlikely to convince serious and unbiased scientists. The study
would lack ecological validity, and the traumatic stimulus in
the study would seem to differ in significant ways from repeated
acts of incest. However, it is worth asking, as Gleaves and
Freyd do, whether the experimental studies of implanting false
memories and obtaining false confessions possess even minimal
ecological validity. For example, is confessing to actually
typing the wrong key in an experiment, an unintentional act that
takes a fraction of a second, sufficiently similar to confessing
that one has repeatedly raped one's children over a period of
years, a hardly unintentional felony, the confession to which
can result in years of imprisonment? Or is the stimulus memory
of being briefly lost in a mall when one was a child
sufficiently similar to the memory of being repeatedly raped
when one was a child?
SCIENCE AS CAREFUL QUESTIONING
P. Freyd (1997) quotes a significant passage from my award
address: "I'd like to encourage each of you to obtain the
primary data, the articles and books that I will read from, and
to read them cover-to-cover" (p. 997). I renew that
recommendation now, in the hope that reading the primary data,
articles, books, and other documents that I cited in my address
(Pope, 1995a) and my article (Pope, 1996) will enable the kind
of careful, informed, and comprehensive questioning that was my
fundamental theme.
In conclusion, I would like to place these diverse individual
issues back into the context of my original article (Pope,
1996). Because I cannot think of a better way to express it,
what follows is the conclusion of my original article.
Claims about a new diagnostic category (false memory syndrome)
reaching epidemic proportions, the ease with which extensive
autobiographical memories about trauma can be implanted, and the
large number of therapists engaging in behaviors likely to cause
false memories of trauma in their patients deserve careful
consideration.
It is important to examine carefully the evidence and logic of
the claims and to ask, what if these claims are valid? The
profound implications for individual lives, public policy, the
standard of care, clinical work, and education and training have
been compellingly set forth in books by Crews (1995), Dawes
(1994), Goldstein and Farmer (1993, 1994), Loftus and Ketcham
(1994), Ofshe and Watters (1994), Underwager and Wakefield
(1994), and Wassil-Grimm (1995).
An open, fair, and independent analysis must also allow for the
possibility that the evidence and logic do not convincingly
establish the validity of some or perhaps any such claims.
Psychologists must be prepared to examine the profound
implications for individual lives. . . . [social] policy, the
standard of care, clinical work, and education and training if
these widely accepted and institutionalized claims are invalid.
What if, for example, tens of thousands of individuals have been
wrongly diagnosed with a label lacking adequate scientific
validation?
It is equally important to examine the process by which these
claims are evaluated and institutionalized, including tactics
used to promote them. Psychologists must be as attentive to
factors that, however unintentionally, may confound the process
of consideration and discussion as they are to factors that may
confound an individual experiment. If disagreement with certain
claims is . . . [diagnosed as reflecting] impaired functioning
or serious psychopathology, the scientific process may be
subverted. If those who question, doubt, or disagree are
authoritatively characterized by professionals as hate-filled
True Believers, paranoid cultists, [unethical witch-hunters,] or
Hitler-like zealots, the process of free and independent
analysis of FMSF claims may be affected. If patients currently
seeking legal health care services from those who question or
disagree with FMSF are forced to cross picket lines to obtain
those services, . . . the privacy of their therapy is
invaded . . . . If they are diagnosed without their
participation as suffering a false memory syndrome, then their
freedom of choice may . . . [become illusory].
Claims grounded most firmly in the scientific tradition are
those emerging from hypotheses that are falsifiable. Scientists
bear an essential responsibility to examine primary data,
research methodology, assumptions, and inferences. Science works
best when claims and hypotheses can be continually questioned.
Each scientific claim should prevail or fall on its research
validation and logic. That which tends to disallow doubt and
discredit anyone who disagrees is unlikely to foster the
scientific venture or promote public policies and clinical
practices based on scientific principles. (Pope, 1996, p. 971)
REFERENCES
Alpert, J. L. (1997). Unsubstantiated claims of false memory and
essential responsibilities. American Psychologist, 52, 987.
Belt, D., Raiffa, H., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1988). Decision
making: Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive interactions.
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Blume, E. S, (1990). Secret survivors: Uncovering incest and its
aftereffects in women. New York: Wiley.
Bowman, C. 0., & Mertz, E. (1996a), A bias in the flow of
information? American Bar Association's Judges' Journal, 35, 13.
Bowman, C. G., & Mertz, E. (1996b). A dangerous direction: Legal
intervention in sexual abuse survivor therapy. Harvard Law
Review, 109, 549-639.
Brown, D. (1995). Sources of suggestion and their applicability
to psychotherapy. In J. L. Alpert (Ed.), Sexual abuse recalled
(pp.61-100). Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
Brown, D., Scheflin, A. W., & Hammond, D. C. (in press). Memory,
trauma treatment, and the law. New York: Norton.
Caffey, 1. (1946). Multiple fractures in the long bones of
infants suffering from chronic subdural hematoma. American
Journal of Roentgenology, 56, 163-173.
Carstensen, L., Gabrieli, J., Shepard, R., Levenson, R., Mason,
M., Goodman, 0., Bootzin, R., Ceci, S., Bronfenbrenner, U.,
Edelstein, B., Schober, M., Bruck, M., Keane, T., Zimering, R.,
Oltmanns, T., Gotlib, 1., & Ekman, P. (1993, March). Repressed
objectivity. APS Observer, p.23.
Correction notice and apology. (1997, Fall). Clinical
Psychology: Science and Practice, vol. 4, issue #3.
Crews, F. (1995). The memory wars: Freud's legacy in dispute.
New York: New York Review of Books.
de Rivera, J. (1994). Impact of child abuse memories on the
families of victims. Issues in Child Abuse Accusations, 6, 149-
155.
de Rivera, J. (1997). Estimating the number of false memory
syndrome cases. American Psychologist, 52, 996-997.
Dowie, J., & Elstein, A. (Eds.). (1988). Professional judgment:
A reader in clinical decision making. Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.
False Memory Syndrome Foundation. (1992a). Legal Aspects of
False Memory Syndrome. Philadelphia: Author.
False Memory Syndrome Foundation. (1992b, October 5). What can
families do? False Memory Syndrome Foundation Newsletter, p.4.
False Memory Syndrome Foundation. (1993, May 3). Important
organizational notice. False Memory Syndrome Foundation
Newsletter, p. 7.
False Memory Syndrome Foundation. (1995a). Amicus curiae brief
filed with the Supreme Court of Alabama in the case of McDuffie
v. Sellers-Bok (No. 1940524).
False Memory Syndrome Foundation. (1995b). Amicus curiae brief
filed with the Supreme Court for the State of Rhode Island in
the cases of Heroux v. Carpentier (Appeal No. 95-39) and Kelly
v. Marcantonio (Appeal No. 94-727).
False Memory Syndrome Foundation (1995c). Amicus curiae brief
filed with the Supreme Court of Texas in the case of Vesecky v.
Vesecky (No. 94-0856).
False Memory Syndrome Foundation. (1996). Information sheet and
order form for "False Memory Syndrome" video. Philadelphia:
Author.
False Memory Syndrome Foundation. (1997a). Amicus curiae brief
filed with the Supreme Court of Illinois in the case of M.E.H.
and D.M.H. v. LH. and OH. (Appeal No. 81943).
False Memory Syndrome Foundation. (1997b, July-August). Make a
difference. False Memory Syndrome Foundation Newsletter (E-mail
version).
Feldman-Summers, S. & Pope, K. S. (1994). The experience
of "forgetting" childhood abuse: A national survey of
psychologists. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
62, 636-639.
FMSF Advisory Board meeting: Where do we go from here? (1993,
December). False Memory Syndrome Foundation Newsletter, p. 3.
Fraser, S. (1997, January 25). Abuse wars: Whose memory matters?
Toronto Globe and Mail, p. D14.
Freyd, J. J. (1996). Betrayal trauma: The logic of forgetting
childhood abuse. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Freyd, P. (1997). Defaming one's own profession. American
Psychologist, 52, 987-988.
Gleaves, D. H. (1996). The evidence for "repression": An
examination of Holmes (1990) and the implications for the
recovered memory controversy. Journal of child Sexual Abuse, 5,
1-19.
Gleaves, D. H., & Freyd, J. J. (1997). Questioning additional
claims about the false memory syndrome epidemic. American
Psychologist, 52, 993-994.
Gold, S. N. (1997). False memory syndrome: A false dichotomy
between science and practice. American Psychologist, 52, 988-
989.
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgment
under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.
Kalichman, S. C. (1993). Mandated reporting of suspected child
abuse: Ethics, law, & policy. Washington. DC: American
Psychological Association.
Kihlstrom, J. (1994). False memory syndrome. FMS Foundation
Brochure, p. 2. Philadelphia: False Memory Syndrome Foundation.
Kihlstrom, J. (1995). On checklists. Internet posting on witch-
hunt, January 24.
Kihlstrom, J. (1996). False memory syndrome. FMS Foundation
Brochure (E-mail version). Philadelphia: False Memory Syndrome
Foundation.
Kihlstrom, J. F. (1997). Memory, abuse, and science. American
Psychologist, 52, 994-995.
Leavitt, F. (1997), False attribution of suggestibility to
explain recovered memory of Childhood abuse following extended
amnesia. Child Abuse & Neglect, 21, 265-272.
Lief, H. I. (1994). Letter to the editor. P, sychology Of Women,
21
(3), 8.
Lindsay, D. (1995). Beyond backlash, Counseling Psychologist,
23, 280-289.
Lindsay, D., & Poole, D. (1995). Remembering Childhood sexual
abuse in therapy: Psychotherapists' self-reported beliefs,
practices, and experiences. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 23, 46l-
476.
Lindsay, D., & Read, J, (1994). Psychotherapy and memories of
Childhood sexual abuse. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 8, 281-
338.
Loftus, E. F., Milo, IE., & Paddock, J. (1995), The accidental
executioner: Why psychotherapy must be informed by science,
Counseling, Psychologist, 23, 300-309.
Murdock, B. B. (1 995), Human memory in the twenty-first
century. In R. L. Solso & D. W. Massaro (Eds.), The science of
the mind (pp. 109-122). New York: Oxford University Press.
Olio, K. (1995). Het voorschrift van Kihlstrom; over de
verdenking van seksueel misbruik bij kinderen aan de hand van
hun symptomen [Kihlstrom's prescription: On the suspicion of
sexual abuse of children on the basis of their symptoms].
Directieve Terapie, 15, 194-195.
Olio, K. (1996). Are 25% of clinicians using potentially risky
therapeutic practices? A review of the logic and methodology of
the Poole, Lindsay et al. study. Journal of Psychiatry & Law,
24, 277-298.
Olio, K. (1997, December). A practical guide to trauma
treatment: Integrating recovered memory research, legal
responsibilities, and clinical realities. Invited presentation
at the Harvard Medical School Conference on Tolerating
Complexity: Phase-Oriented Treatment of Trauma and the
Challenging Patient, Boston.
Pamela Freyd et at. v. Charles L. Whitfield, (1997). Civil Case
No. L-96-627 in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Maryland, Judge's order dated July 18.
Pendergrast, M. (1995). Victims of memory: Incest accusations
and shattered lives. Hinesburg, VT: Upper Access.
Pendergrast, M. (1997). Memo to Pope: Ask the real questions,
please. American Psychologist, 52, 989-990.
Poole, D. A.. Lindsay, D. S., Memon, A., & Bull, R. (1995).
Psychotherapy and the recovery of memories of childhood sexual
abuse: U.S. and British practitioners' opinions, practices, and
experiences. Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology, 63,
426-437.
Poole, 0. A., Lindsay, D. S., Memon, A., & Bull, R. (1997). Did
Pope (1996) read a different Poole, Lindsay, Memon, and Bull
(1995)? American Psychologist, 52, 990-993.
Pope, K. S. (1979, September). Undertaking a national survey.
Paper presented at the 87th Annual Convention of the American
Psychological Association, New York.
Pope, K. S. (1990). Therapist-patient sexual involvement: A
review of the research. Clinical Psychology Review, 10, 477-490.
Pope, K. S. (1994). Sexual involvement with therapists: Patient
assessment, subsequent therapy, forensics. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Pope, K. S. (1995a, August). Memory, abuse, and strange science:
Therapy, forensics. and new research. Award for Distinguished
Contributions to Public Service address presented at the 103rd
Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, New
York. (Audiotape No. APA9S-245 available from Sound Images,
Aurora, CO; telephone: 303-649-1811.)
Pope, K. S. (1995b). What psychologists better know about
recovered memories, research, lawsuits, and the pivotal
experiment. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 2, 304-
315.
Pope, K. S. (1996). Memory, abuse, and science: Questioning
claims about the false memory syndrome epidemic. American
Psychologist, 51, 957-974.
Pope, K. S., & Brown, L. (1996). Recovered memories of abuse:
Assessment, therapy, forensics. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Pope, K. S., Butcher, J. N., & Seelen, J. (1993). The MMPI, MMPI-
2, & MMPPA in court: A practical guide for expert witnesses and
attorneys. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Pope, K. S., Butcher, J. N., & Seelen, J. (in press). The MMPI,
MMPI-2, & MMPPA in court: A practical guide for expert witnesses
and attorneys (second edition). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Pope, K. S., Sonne, J. L., & Holroyd, J. (1993). Sexual feelings
in psychotherapy: Explorations for therapists and therapists-in-
training. Washington. DC: American Psychological Association.
Pope, K. S., Tabachnick, B. G., & Keith-Spiegel, P. (1987).
Ethics of practice: The beliefs and behaviors of psychologists
as therapists. American Psychologist, 42, 993-1006.
Pope, K. S., & Vasquez, M. J. T. (1991). Ethics in psychotherapy
and counseling: A practical guide for psychologists. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pope, K. S., & Vasquez, M. J. T. (in press; to be published in
July, 1998). Ethics in psychotherapy and counseling: A practical
guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Saakvitne, K. W., Pratt, A. C., & Pearlman, L. A. (1997). Under
the mantle of science. American Psychologist, 52, 997.
Salter, A. C. (1995). Transforming trauma. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Salter, A. C. (1997). Truth, lies, and sex offenders. (Videotape
No. 81492 of the series Listening to Sex Qffenders available
from Sage Video Productions, Thousand Oaks, CA; telephone: 805-
499-0721.)
Scheflin, A.A., & Brown, D. (1996). Repressed memory or
dissociative amnesia: What the science says. Journal of
Psychiatry & Law, 24, 143-188.
Seppa, N. (1996, April). Fear of malpractice curbs some
psychologists' practice. APA Monitor, p. 12.
Siegel-Itzkovich, J. (1996, May 19). You must remember
this . . . Jerusalem Post, p.7.
Social political movement. (1996, May). False Memory Syndrome
Foundation Newsletter (E-mail version).
Spiegel, D. (1997). Memories: True and false. American
Psychologist, 52, 995-996.
Stanton, M. (1997, July-August). U-turn on memory lane. Columbia
Journalism Review, 44-49.
Stigler, S. M. (1978). Some forgotten work on memory. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 1-4.
Wolf, F., Gruppen, L., & Billi, J. (1985). Differential
diagnosis and the competing-hypothesis heuristic: A practical
approach to judgment under uncertainty and Bayesian probability.
Journal of the American Medical Association, 253, 2858-2862.
Joe Cosby
--
Joe Cosby
Here at Microsoft, drive head contention is more than just our promise
to you.
It's a way of life.
SOD of the CoE
unattributed:
>>>>>> What is this flap about Acquino?
this is a FAQ in the alt.satanism newsgroup for which I have
constructed a response:
Q: why do the Satanists keep picking on Michael Aquino about his brush
with the Satanic Panic accusations?
there are likely a number of motivations:
* vengeance -- those who have felt hurt by Michael Aquino
at the result of some action of his may feel
find it necessary to seek vengeance; this is
even lauded by LaVey as a valid motivation
to harm one's adversary.
* amusement -- many who post to alt.satanism have very little
to offer them in their private lives, despite
claims to the contrary; engaging in public
gang-bangs provides meaning and excitement in
otherwise sad and purposeless lives.
* ignorance -- like a dog tugging on a bone, many Satanists
seem to like to worry the same issues over
and over, and not because they may prove
philosophically complex, but because they
obsess over strong egos in their environment.
* stupidity -- even though LaVey wrote about its inherent
sinfulness, many of his followers are rabid
fanatics bearing imaginary standards of
honour and defense without understanding
the virtues of true individualism.
* slavemind -- locked into a pattern of Herd-following,
some Satanists cannot escape the group
membership "kinship"/"traitor" mentality
that has them bound to routines of snipe
and whine timewasting.
I'm sure there are others.
he's fine and needs no defenders. that he takes the bait is
his instruction. he must be able to type about as fast as me
and has an interest in defending his honour. if you don't like
to see the interaction, when you see it develop avoid the thread.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Anon" <anon...@cotse.com>:
>>>>> You can read about some if it here:
>>>>> http://www.illusions.com/opf/Aquinoindex.htm
>>>>> http://www.illusions.com/opf/MAquino_frm.htm
>>>>> http://www5.electriciti.com/curious/
here's what we've got archived in the Lucky Mojo Esoteric Archive:
http://www.luckymojo.com/esoteric/religion/satanism/9901.hlmssra.r
http://www.luckymojo.com/esoteric/religion/satanism/aquinointvw.txt
certainly not the complete picture, but then again my alt.satanism
interview with Curio/Karen Jones indicated to me that she was not serious
about her targetting of Aquino, had bad psychological problems, or wasn't
equipped to be more than an anti-Aquino fanatic who deserved very little
archival space. anyone who asked questions that picked on holes in her
assertions was branded as an Aquino cohort and lambasted as heatedly.
"Anon" <anon...@cotse.com>:
>>> The Aquino censorship lawsuit against Electriciti
>>> is exactly three years old, and he did that
>>> in an attempt to punish the person who posted
>>> information about his titling and dismissal
>>> (the appellate records are 8 yrs old) and
>>> to keep the information off of the internet.
>>> He then tried to take several web pages down
>>> that had this information on it.
what do you mean by "titling and dismissal"? is Aquino's claim in
the interview above indicating that
Neither Lilith nor I have ever been charged or convicted of any crime
whatever.
and that
...The investigation concluded in mid 1989. I remained in the Active
US Army Reserve until 1994, when I decided to retire and was awarded
the Meritorious Service Medal by the Secretary of the Army. I remain
today in the Retired Reserve component of the Army as a Lt Colonel.
false, by your measure?
The Inspector General <Inspec...@worldcom.org>:
>> Karen Jones, either is Linda Bloodworth, or is someone very close to
>> her. The connections are long-standing and obvious.
please elaborate on these "connections".
sri catyananda <c...@luckymojo.com>:
>...the above assertion that the posts by Curio /
>Karen Jones containing general and wide-ranging information about court
>cases in which Satanists and people of other non-Judeo-Islamic-Christian
>religions were accused or convicted of child abuse, murder, torture, and
>the like did not focus on Michael Acquino in any way that was obvious to
>me.
someone (IGgy) trying to explain the character of Curio's methods.
her obsession with Aquino was evident not too many years ago in
the alt.satanism newsgroup. of course Aquino seems also have had
an obsession in responding to her, rather than merely using a killfile.
Mr. Aquino seems to aid and abet his detractors more often than he
actually succeeds in playing them down, because he treats their slander
as if it were worthy of response.
>Perhaps i overlooked something -- and if i did, i'd like to be
>corrected on that -- but if Acquino was the target (according to
>Inspector General) then why were the collected court cases about all
>sorts of random, unknown people in Africa, India, and so forth?
oh I archived that, yes. you were reading that to me. I think that
Curio may be anti-non-Christian and may wish to discredit those
religions with which she does not agree. this is purely conjecture
on my part, as I haven't seen much of her material of late, but I
find most of her posts have a bit of fact in them yet tend toward
fanaticism in overall thrust and conclusion.
>...If Karen Jones / Curio has something specific to say
>about Micahel Acquino, she could have just do so.
she has done so in volume, though not always very coherently.
>And, conversely,
>since she did NOT target him, why is the Inspector General claiming
>that her post was part of an anti-Acquino campaign? Is he grasping at
>straws, or am i missing something important here?
let's put it this way: that IGgy considers "Lord Eagan" to be a
reliable source on matters of information is enough for me to
disregard hir as relevant. while I may administratively repost
Eagan's First Church of Satan FAQ each month, I don't find this
individual to be worthy of much attention or emphasis. he is
both ridiculous and childish in his presentation, too often
addressing what is best left as slander and ignoring real queries
regarding his ideas and person to be taken seriously.
>...[IGgy] has
>lost all credibility and revealed himself to be a nut-case of the first
>rank by slinging about heresay about these people.
probably another First Church of Satan member.
>Soap operas are interesting, i admit, but this one is short of substabce
>... so far.
most of the issues surrounding the 'evils' of Satanists presented
to alt.satanism are flimsy and do not contain enough substance to
get more than an impression of the person presenting them. I'd
compare it to the recent alt.religion.wicca squabbling between the
two love birds you mentioned to me in person. it isn't worth our
time because those who post about it aren't either coherent or
willing to document more concretely their allegations. they are
the rough equivalent of Scandal Trolls.
blessed beast!
boboroshi
Satanic Outreach Director,
Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
--
FREE HOODOO CATALOGUE! send street address to: cata...@luckymojo.com
mailto:naga...@luckymojo.com ; http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html ; mailto:bobo...@satanservice.org ; http://www.satanservice.org/
emailed replies may be posted; cc replies if response desired
nagasiva yronwode
bobo...@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE):
>>Hail Satan!
Son_of_Chive_Mynde <ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> writes:
>Why not just say, Heil Hitler!
because that's not what I mean.
>Same thing, right?
no, Hitler was a heinous historical man who was born, rose to power
in Nazi Germany, initiated WWII, and killed himself in a bunker.
Satan is many things to many people, including wild nature.
blessed beast!
boboroshi
Satanic Outreach Director,
Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
Dr. Michael A. Aquino
Hash: SHA1
THE 1986-7 PRESIDIO "SATANIC RITUAL ABUSE" EVENTS
Following the publication of the "recovered memories
of Satanic ritual abuse" book _Michelle Remembers_
in 1980, the United States and other Anglo-American
countries went through a decade of "SRA" scares and
witch-hunts. After the 1984 McMartin Preschool became
internationally publicized in one such scare, day-care
facilities generally became targets of "SRA" witch-
hunt instigators.
The epidemic extended to U.S. military services as well,
including 15 U.S. Army day-care centers and elementary
schools by 1987. In late 1986 it was the turn of the
Presidio of San Francisco.
On 9/28/86 the _San Francisco Examiner_ began a series
of 8 front-page stories sensationalizing the witch-hunts.
Approximately a month later one set of Presidio parents
claimed that their son might have been anally raped by
one of the day-care teachers, Gary Hambright, and the
scare was off and running, with scores of children being
"abuse-diagnosed" by a "play-therapist" despite not a
single published confirmation of actual physical harm to
any child. Hambright denied any "abusing" whatever, and
all of the other teachers and staff supported him.
As in other witch-hunts it made no difference: Over
the next year Hambright was suspended, indicted, charges
dropped, reindicted, charges redropped amidst a massive
media frenzy. Parents rushed to file over $84 million in
claims, as was also routine in such witch-hunts. [The
previous year a similar, highly-publicized witch-hunt at
West Point had resulted in $110 million claims.]
Left out of the Presidio claims bonanza were Christian
chaplain Larry Adams-Thompson and his wife Michele, who
had never reported their daughter Kinsey Almond for any
physical or psychological symptoms during the entire
time she had been under Hambright's supervision at the
day-care center (9/1-10/31/86). In their original 1/87
FBI interviews both A-Ts were specific about that date-
window, because Almond turned 3 on 9/1/86 and, as
confirmed by the Presidio Director of Personnel &
Community Affairs, Hambright supervised only children
age 3 and older.
Despite Almond's untouched state [on 3/12/87 Presidio
doctors examined her and pronounced her a virgin free
from any physical signs of abuse], the A-Ts placed her
in an intensive 8-month program of "play-therapy". The
same "therapist" who pronounced the scores of other
children "abused" soon pronounced Almond "abused" as well.
The A-Ts, however, were not content with just accusing
Hambright. In 6/87 Michele introduced "SRA" themes and
insinuations about me - who had been a topic of curiosity
and gossip as a famous Satanist officer throughout my
1981-86 assignment to the Presidio Headquarters - to the
"therapist". Then on 8/13/87 the A-Ts saw my wife Lilith
and myself at the Presidio post exchange and went running
to the witch-hunt investigators alleging that Almond had
accused us of kidnapping and raping her while she was
under Hambright's supervision. This quickly resulted in
an even more sensationalistic international media storm.
The San Francisco Police investigated, verified that
Lilith and I had been 3,000 miles away in Washington,
D.C. - where I was on duty every single day Almond
was at the daycare center 9/1-10/31/86 - and closed
the case with no charges accordingly.
In October 1988, however, I appeared as a panelist on a
Geraldo Rivera Halloween special. Rivera was trying to
aggravate and escalate the "SRA" witchhunt mania, and I
was speaking out against it. The broadcast came to the
attention of Senator Jesse Helms, who became enraged
that a Lt.Colonel in the Army should dare to hold a
"Satanic" religion. As Freedom of Information Act filings
later revealed, Helms then secretly contacted his close
personal friend, Secretary of the Army John Marsh, and
insisted that Marsh devise some way to destroy my career.
As my 20-year military record was without blemish [In
1987 I was the sole USAR officer in the nation selected
to attend the prestigious National Defense University/ICAF],
the only way to act on Helms' demand was to try to revive
the chaplain's scheme to threaten Lilith and myself,
apparently expecting that with sufficient intimidation
by the Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) I
would resign and "disappear". [It didn't work.]
The CID first (Jan 89) illegally forced a fulltime
active duty board to deny me a new fulltime contract on
expiration of my current one in 9/90. Six months later,
after a sham "reinvestigation", it issued a report
"titling" Lilith and myself for the chaplain's
allegations. ["Titling" is a statement by the CID that
it thinks a crime occurred.] Nevertheless the report
itself contained not a single item of "evidence" other
than the A-Ts' allegations that any crime whatever had
occurred - and either suppressed or ignored abundant
evidence of our innocence and the A-Ts' violations.
[For example, the CID tried to get around our
3,000-miles-away proof of innocence by finding out
when we *had* previously been in San Francisco -
several months before the 9-10/86 "window" - and then
(in 1989) simply revising the allegation to *that* date!
When the CID then learned that that this manufactured
redate made the A-Ts' alleged location physically
impossible, it then (in 1991) proceeded to invent a
*new* location, once again on no grounds except its
1991 predicament. Both the manufactured "redating" and
"relocating" necessarily made numerous additional
elements of the chaplain's original fabrication
impossible as well - inconvenient complications that
the CID addressed by simply ignoring them.]
What this bizarre exercise in "manufactured evidence"
*did* demonstrate was the strength of the political agenda
predetermining the CID's "reinvestigation" from the outset.
[For instance, the CID's illegal fixing of the fulltime-
duty board took place at the *beginning* of its
"reinvestigation" - half a year before it was supposedly
able to perform the evaluation of that investigation.]
Clearly an expose' that we had in fact been the innocent
victims of a cold-blooded, calculated scheme to defraud
the government - by a *Christian chaplain* - was
politically out of the question from the beginning.
My repeated demands that those responsible for the CID
action, as well as the chaplain, be court-martialed for
false official statements, manufacture of evidence,
obstruction of justice, misprision of serious offense,
attempted defrauding of the government, and several other
UCMJ and federal law violations, were similarly - and
equally illegally - suppressed. The CID's response was to
say that I was "swearing falsely" to these facts.
Nevertheless it could not - and did not - produce even
a single example of *any* such "factual falsehood" in
the documents I filed and swore to under penalty of
perjury. [Nor, of course, was I ever charged with making
even a single "false statement".]
By administrative complaint process in 1990 we were able to
have the "SRA titling" of Lilith removed. The CID refused to
remove mine - although the A-Ts had always alleged we "did
the SRA together" - because to do so would have exploded the
entire CID operation and opened a trail of serious law
violations leading to Helms and Secretary of the Army Marsh.
I next filed suit in federal court in 1990 to have the
rest of the CID report exposed and retracted. The U.S.
Privacy Act would have forced a comparison of every CID
statement in the report with the actual facts (a _de novo_
judicial review). For this reason the CID argued intensely
that its reports should be immune from _de novo_ review.
The case was filed as a Motion for Summary Judgment.
There was no jury or in-court testimony. We assumed that
the CID's legal violations were so flagrant, obvious, and
numerous that a simple ruling by the judge would suffice.
To our surprise the judge ruled that all CID reports
were indeed exempt from _de novo_ judicial review, and
that the CID could conclude whatever it wished from
its report *as written*.
We appealed, and the appeals court upheld the district
judge's decision to exempt CID reports from the Privacy
Act. Again in its decision, the appeals court recited
as "facts" excerpts from the very CID document whose
falsehoods were the *issue* of the entire lawsuit.
Following the lawsuit I detailed and documented the
CID lawyer's extensive lies in briefs & oral argument
to the Army Inspector General, Judge Advocate General,
and finally the Army Chief of Staff.
None of my facts or documents was disputed or refuted,
but neither was any action taken to courtmartial those
responsible. This effectively exhausted my options.
The bottom line was that on one hand the politically-
driven "black bag job" to intimidate me out of the
Army had failed, and indeed could not withstand many
other decent and honorable offices and officials in
the same Army who, as they learned about the scheme,
refused to aid, abet, or tolerate it. [This included
every single superior officer in my own chain of
command throughout all the years of the initial
attack against us and the subsequent investigations.]
On the other hand we came to realize that it was
politically out of the question that a Christian
chaplain be courtmartialed for crimes committed
against a "Satanist" and his wife, or that trails
of illegal actions leading to powerful national
political figures would be followed. And we also
learned that the courts were also not about to
force exposure such a widespread and potentially
politically-explosive cover-up as this one.
On the expiration of my fulltime active duty contract
in 1990, I continued as a parttime active USAR
officer for the next four years, assigned to
Headquarters US Space Command with an above-Top
Secret clearance. I decided to retire in 1994,
and at that time received the Meritorious Service
Medal from the [new] Secretary of the Army, covering
1984-1994. I remain today in the Army as a Lt.Colonel,
USAR-Retired.
On the Internet an anonymous cyberstalker using the
screen name "Curio" (along with various others)
appeared a couple of years ago to aggressively
promote the "SRA" witch-hunts, and the Presidio
one targeting Lilith and myself in particular.
"Curio"'s smear tactics were to publicize the CID's
statements in its briefs and orals, and selected
excerpts from the court decisions. "Curio" has also
repeatedly falsified numerous facts about the
chaplain's original attack, as well as concerning
"copycat" allegations made by a few "SRA"-bandwagon
cranks and $-hopefuls (*all* finally discredited by
local law-enforcement jurisdictions as well as
[disappointed] CID investigators) once the
chaplain's attack on us had become a national media
circus.
I see nothing to be gained by endless corrections
and refutations of "Curio"'s lies on the Internet.
Most people will find it sufficient, I think, that
Lilith and I were never charged with anything after
two long investigations (SFPD/FBI, CID), that I
retained my TS+ clearance, and that I retired
honorably in 1994. My Officer Efficiency Reports
from the time of the attack on us to my 1994
retirement also continued to give me the highest
possible evaluations in all categories.
My military service and present Army-Retired status
are public record and can be independently verified
by anyone wishing to take the trouble. I do not post
personal papers on the Internet, though I have
produced them in previous lawsuits against libel
and of course shown them personally to credentialed
individuals whom I think should see them.
Nor is the 1990 lawsuit in any sense a "skeleton
in my closet". A review of my attorney's district &
appeals briefs & orals - *not* just distorted
extracts of the CID's which "Curio" wants people to
see - will glaringly expose what was actually
taking place: a court coverup of blatant Senatorial/
SecArmy/CID misconduct - and simultaneous brushing-
aside of numerous illegal actions against an Army
officer and his wife of a "politically incorrect"
religion.
While I may repost this statement periodically as
seems necessary, I will not dignify "Curio"'s hate-
campaign with responsive dialogue.
Michael A. Aquino, Ph.D.
Lt.Colonel, USAR-Ret
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2
iQA/AwUBOYXNE2RWyNykJwrDEQLEswCgjQqC59N0x2S8+IEiiuTOo/6xjdQAoImz
1Br/eZp2F7V0L5Ds42IIRYbl
=DrCs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Michael A. Aquino
http://www.xeper.org/maquino/index.html
Corn Spirulina Sea
Rock on Baby, Rock on...
It's A Corn Spirulina Sea !!!!!
> > > .................................
> > > SAVE DECATUR ILLINOIS!!!!!!!!!
> > > http://www.decatur-airport.org/html/location.html
> "MARY POPPINS" (1964)
> http://www.filminternational.com/marypoppins.html
> Mary Poppins, by P.L. Travers, published in 1934
> http://www.mary-poppins.co.uk/
BushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBush
GoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGore
BushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBush
GoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGore
BushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBush
GoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGore
BushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBush
GoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGore
BushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBush
GoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGore
BushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBush
GoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGore
BushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBush
GoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGore
BushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBush
GoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGore
BushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBush
GoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGore
BushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBush
GoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGoreBushGore
It's A Corn Spirulina Sea !!!!!
It's A Corn Spirulina Sea !!!!!
It's A Corn Spirulina Sea !!!!!