Nelsons daughter and son-in-law accused of sex abuse

[_cinepro]

Hardy has argued that this is not a case of SRA. That's why I am pushing for a definition. What must SRA include to define it as such and do any of the children's journal writings of the time suggest they were being asked to worship Satan or the like.

Honestly, that seems like kind of an odd defense. It's not the label of "Satanic Ritual Abuse" that makes this case problematic in a way that if you could narrowly define the term and then argue that this case doesn't meet that definition you've suddenly solved your problem with Snow's involvement.

We know now for sure that the witnesses are claiming that the older of the Carstensen daughters disclosed the alleged involvement of the Miles and Bill, outside of therapy, so one would have to make the argument that Snow was so good at brainwashing and rewarding the children that she was able to influence the children through ESP which is even more bizarre imho.

How does it work? How does Snow get to brainwash these children so thoroughly that they can come up with names when she is not around. I don't find Cinepro's arguments persuasive at all.

Who said anything about "brainwashing" (a nicely loaded term that is chosen to good effect)?

Ultimately, this boils down to believing the children were reliable witnesses. Based on what I have read, I don't believe that children who meet with Barbara Snow in 1986 and make claims about repeated neighborhood "touching parties" that involve several adults and teenagers in the neighborhood with a widening circle of accused as the therapy sessions continue. I just don't. Sorry.

I believe the children really believed what they were saying, and still do to this day. That's not unexpected or surprising; it happened all the time in these cases (which is another tragic aspect of the whole situation). But it doesn't mean what they are saying really happened.

I also believe that the evidence against Carstensen is much stronger; if the children in his second family made the accusations without ever having met with a therapist with a history of "encouraging" such allegations, that would be very strong evidence.

But until there is much stronger evidence, I consider the Miles and the other teenagers to be innocent, and the accusations to be a byproduct of the therapy sessions with Snow.

[_Mary]

Cinepro, I have been busy today. Just to say that the term brainwashing was used in one of the law links (either Bullock's or Hadfield's) in reference to Snow's techniques. I'll try find the reference.

[_Mary]

Okay, got it.

"The State contends that the manifold failures to object complained of by appellate counsel for defendant were the result of a conscious strategy, and we agree. It is reasonable to conclude that defense counsel, an experienced criminal lawyer, consciously chose not to seek the exclusion of the testimony about which defendant now complains. While the evidence complained of may have been inadmissible, trial counsel could reasonably conclude under these circumstances that there was little chance of keeping the testimony of the children out of evidence, especially after the trial court sua sponte made reliability findings. He might well have thought that the only way of effectively undermining the mutually consistent testimony of these young children about shocking incidents of sexual abuse was not to insist that the children testify at trial or object to their videotaped testimony, but rather was to put a less sympathetic adult witness, such as Dr. Snow, on the stand and to portray her as an unprofessional, misguided zealot who put these ideas in the children's minds through the use of techniques akin to brainwashing. In this way, counsel could explain to the jury why the children were relating untrue stories which they seemed to believe. Having made this decision, counsel could reasonably have concluded that it would be inconsistent to seek to exclude Dr. Tyler's testimony about behavior and the children's out-of-court statements and that since the experts, not the children, were thus "on trial," there was little reason to try to keep out their opinions on abuse.

State v. Bullock: 1989

https://law.justia.com/cases/utah/supre ... 70053.html

[_cinepro]

Bill is keen to tell Marion that physical violence was not his method of choice. It was emotional manipulation based on a perversion of what should be a relationship of ultimate and pure love a parent would normally have for a child.

At this point, I'm not sure you've actually read Marion's notes from the interview with Bill.

Here are some of the questions and answers. Ask yourself if this is a guy that is "keen" to say something and remembers these events and knows what happened? Or is he confused, and possibly convinced that he did something that he can't remember so he's going off the cues of the interviewer to try and imagine something happening when he has no idea what they are talking about?

MARION: Did you know that baby tenders were bringing teenage boys to your home and what they were doing?

BILL: In going back.. .and trying to think, at first.. I don’t see there being a knowledge, but it somewhat dawned on me what was...goin’ on. ..(long pause) but no we basically, we’d always be home at midnight or shortly thereafter so something like that...no, and I believe that the majority of those went on without my...without my awareness of it..that...(voice trails of)

Then about the Miles parties:

MARION: Do you know how frequent the parties at Miles’ were?

BILL: I would say...you’re going on probably talkin’one or two times a month.

MARION: How did the parties get organized?

BILL: (long, long pause) I would say the ...majority of them were probably through...actually between Janice and Dick...her letting him know who she was tending for and.. .

MARION: Do you recall taking your children to some of the parties?

BILL: The only place I can conceive taking them to is Miles’ house.

MARION: Do you recall talking to Dick Miles about these things?

BILL: No, I don’t...it was somewhat mobile. The parties could be in three or four houses in our neighborhood when I was there and that...conceivably when I wasn’t there and these other people were doing things that involved others. No, I have memories of things taking place at three different houses.

MARION: What three?

BILL: Miles, Carstensens and my mother’s house.

MARION: Parties were mostly in the evening or the day?

BILL: Most of those...were rarely in the evening and mostly in the day. Saturdays is when the times I would have the children. Eileen would be gone shopping or something like that I would be with the kids.

MARION: Do you know what was in the shots the children say they were given?

BILL: No, I don’t ...think I was aware of...

MARION: Do you know who the teenagers were?

BILL: As far as any of the time that I can... I can only have memories of two or three times and seems there was only, you know, adults and children, there was never...

[Note: The suit claims that Bill had sex with the babysitter at one of the parties.]

MARION: Do you know who the adults were?

BILL: The only ones that I can...specifically picture is being there, I know there were others there, myself and Miles, there is my friend Dan and...my mother on that side but
that’s all...

MARION: How did it all get started?

BILL:I can't. I haven’t been able to come up with those things and I expend an inordinate time trying to put things together...and have come with hypothesis from the beginning...(stops)

MARION: But not memories?

BILL: Correct.

(emphasis added)

Does that sound like a guy confessing to things he remembers doing, or someone who believes what he is being told and thinks he might have done it even though he can't remember it, and is trying to figure out what might have happened (which is how many of these false confessions came about)?

Now, regarding being "keen" to talk about how he controlled the kids:

MARION: What did you do to keep your kids quiet?

BILL: (heavy sigh) Basically, there was never any.. .never any physical threat any.. .it was through ultimate manipulative love and devotion. And, ugh, ya, the...kids love me and I love them and told them Eileen was so self-conscious that she really didn’t feel she could participate and kept telling them if you told Mom about it she'll be so sad...she didn’t have fun...wouldn’t have, at the next party, they couldn’t have refreshments or...and, ugh,...

MARION: What did you tell your nieces to keep them quiet?

BILL: Uh, the only thing I can recall on, knowing them, how I knew they would, probably something like, you know, that we would tell... their Mommy and Daddy would be really mad at them and think they were bad but... never,. .any.., violence towards them, just they would get in trouble.

Honestly, to me that sounds like a guy that doesn't know what was going on, but is convinced that something was happening and he's trying to figure out how it could have happened. Add in the possible use of sodium amytol, and all bets are off.

Hopefully the entire audio of the interview will be made available in the course of the trial, because I suspect there's much more to it.

[_Meadowchik]

It doesn't require making the argument that Snow had some supernatural power to explain her involvement.

I would think that the power of suggestion has potential that can extend beyond the moment that the suggester is present. Ideas can be planted and then acted upon later.

[Guest]

Bill is keen to tell Marion that physical violence was not his method of choice. It was emotional manipulation based on a perversion of what should be a relationship of ultimate and pure love a parent would normally have for a child.

At this point, I'm not sure you've actually read Marion's notes from the interview with Bill.

Additionally, the interviewer, and then-head of the clinic Snow worked for, is the GRANDMOTHER of the children of the interviewee, right? What on earth possessed this professional woman to think it was appropriate for her to be personally involved in such an interview?

[_Res Ipsa]

Keep in mind that Marion told the children’s mother about the babysitter’s involvement with the other ring, which included the Miles, before the children were ever interviewed. So, from the beginning, Snow, Marion and the parents had every reason to believe that the Miles were abusing their children. There’s a very real possibility that, once the children implicated the babysitter, all of these adults were asking them questions or making suggestions about the Miles. To me, that makes the question of whether the children first implicated the Miles in a therapy session largely irrelevant.

And it doesn’t take mind control to implant false memories — just suggestion.

[_Lemmie]

It doesn't require making the argument that Snow had some supernatural power to explain her involvement.

I would think that the power of suggestion has potential that can extend beyond the moment that the suggester is present. Ideas can be planted and then acted upon later.

Agreed.

[_cinepro]

Keep in mind that Marion told the children’s mother about the babysitter’s involvement with the other ring, which included the Miles, before the children were ever interviewed. So, from the beginning, Snow, Marion and the parents had every reason to believe that the Miles were abusing their children. There’s a very real possibility that, once the children implicated the babysitter, all of these adults were asking them questions or making suggestions about the Miles. To me, that makes the question of whether the children first implicated the Miles in a therapy session largely irrelevant.

And it doesn’t take mind control to implant false memories — just suggestion.

No, the "other ring" was the Bullock ring, which was discovered after Marion Smith gave her Relief Society presentation and some parents took their kids to ISAT. That ring hadn't named the Miles.

Janice the babysitter was apparently accused in that ring, at which point the Carstensens took their children to Snow to see if Janice had abused them as well. They first accused Janice, then other teenage boys, then the Miles, then Bill Carstensen and his mother.

[_Res Ipsa]

Thanks, Cinepro. I remembered that wrong.