Oct. 18, 2013

Because the Elizabeth City Daily Advance rejected my letter to the editor questioning its support of Nancy Lamb for district attorney, I’ve been posting comments in the online Advance, these two most recently:

Oct. 2: “It was no ‘technicality’ that led the North Carolina Court of Appeals to overturn the conviction of Bob Kelly (and of Dawn Wilson). The court focused on three glaring reversible errors in Kelly’s trial and implied it could have cited many more had that been needed. You can read the decision here.

“Little Rascals was only one of a wave of ‘ritual abuse’ day-care prosecutions during the ’80s and ’90s – virtually all of them based on hysteria rather than facts. You can read more here.

“Thank God, ‘Frontline’ put a national spotlight on the shameful abuse H.P. Williams, Bill Hart and Nancy Lamb – and their team of ill-trained therapists – were inflicting on the Edenton Seven, but the miscarriage of justice was clear even without it.”

Oct. 12: “Unfortunately, the most salient example of Nancy Lamb’s ‘ability to think for herself’ was her irrational, hysterical, unprofessional prosecution of the Little Rascals Day Care case. It would be easier to forgive her role in perpetuating the myth of ‘satanic ritual abuse’ in day cares were she finally able to admit her mistake and to apologize for crushing the lives of seven innocent defendants.”

After the death of District Attorney Frank Parrish, Gov. McCrory gave Lamb a 60-day appointment as interim DA. He is now deciding who should complete Parrish’s term. Next election for DA will be in November 2014.

June 28, 2013

“Children can lie, but research shows that they do not fabricate detailed descriptions of adult sexual acts unless they have experienced or witnessed them. Studies also show that children have good memories and that even preschoolers can remember key events like sexual abuse. One problem is that repeatedly molested children have great difficulty distinguishing one act of abuse from another and linking abuse to specific dates….

“In the McMartin case, we learned… to minimize the use of leading questions during interviews…. While the verdict comes as a disappointment to the children in the case, their courage and willingness to testify for weeks on end has been a catalyst for change that will protect countless other children.”

– From Believe the Children adviser Civia Tamarkin’s interview with John E. B. Myers, professor at McGeorge School of Law, University of the Pacific, in “The McMartin Nightmare” (People magazine, Feb. 5, 1990)

As his faculty bio notes, Professor Myers has long been “one of the country’s foremost authorities on child abuse,” especially in tracing its historical context, but he seems to have been excruciatingly slow to recognize the fraudulence of  “satanic ritual abuse” claims. Although he stopped short of declaring the McMartins guilty, Myers clearly stationed himself in the “child saver” camp, more sympathetic toward serial interviewer Kee MacFarlane than toward the defendants whose lives she devastated.

In a journal article five years later, Myers would acknowledge “growing skepticism regarding children’s credibility,” at the same time warning of a “real danger that the pendulum will swing too far in the direction of disbelief.”

More recently, Myers addressed McMartin in “Child Protection in America: Past, Present, and Future” (2006), crediting it with raising the standard for interviewing, but concluding that “In the final analysis, we will never know what happened at the McMartin Preschool. From the outset, the case divided people into ‘true believers’ and skeptics….”

In “The Backlash: Child Protection Under Fire” (1994) Myers had added a most curious footnote: “I have no opinion regarding the guilt or innocence of any of the McMartin defendants.” How could he – a law professor! – acknowledge the corruption of the child-witnesses’ testimony, yet doubt the defendants deserved a “not guilty” verdict?

Almost 20 years later, I wondered whether Myers might have formed an opinion.

His emailed response: “No idea about guilt or innocence.”

Dec. 21, 2013

As noted here and here, News & Observer columnist Dennis Rogers was among the too-few voices of skepticism about the Little Rascals case. Today Rogers is mostly retired, but he continues to lament the state’s failure to take responsibility for its willful prosecution of seven innocent defendants:

“North Carolina has a sad reputation for misguided justice. There is no better example than the plight of the Edenton Seven. The government destroyed lives and families in its fevered rush to find wrong where there was none.

“It takes political courage to right painful and embarrassing wrongs from 25 years ago. The case of the Edenton Seven offers those who would claim the mantle of leadership in our state an opportunity to demonstrate that they are the kind of people we need in Raleigh.

“Silence in the face of such obvious injustice is cowardice.”

Aug. 19, 2013

A brief visual aside, courtesy of the Google books Ngram Viewer:

However much frustration I feel in pursuing exoneration for the Edenton Seven – plenty! – I do take some reassurance in watching the ritual abuse moral panic slowly lose its hold on public discourse, as shown in the Ngram above or here.