May 26, 2018

“It’s one of the most telling shots in Ofra Bikel’s painstaking investigation into the Little Rascals child-abuse scandal in small-town North Carolina: As a convicted perpetrator [Bob Kelly] is taken away in a police car, children frolic nearby and chant, ‘I hate you, I hate you’, as their parents applaud and one adult says, ‘Let’s go get something to eat.’ ”

– From “Justice Abuse? `Frontline’ Documentary Takes Hard Look At A Small-town Scandal” by Bart Mills in the Chicago Tribune (July 20, 1993)

Sept. 10, 2017

“With no conclusive DNA evidence, medical evidence of penetration or an eyewitness to the alleged assault, both prosecution and defense relied on expert witnesses to speak to the reliability of a young child’s testimony and whether it had been tainted by outside factors, such as how her mother had pressed her about whether she was touched… and how child advocacy center staff had interviewed her….

“ ‘Did [the 6-year-old girl] lie? I don’t know, and the problem is, neither does anyone else,’ [Marine Col. Daniel] Wilson’s civilian attorney Phil Stackhouse said in a closing argument…. Stackhouse pointed out that she had twice denied to her mother being touched by Wilson before she said he had.

“A government witness, Dr. Mark Everson, an expert on childhood trauma at the University of North Carolina, had testified that 6-year-olds are remarkably resilient to suggestion, or the planting of false memories….”

– From “Jury Deliberates Over Colonel Accused of Child Sex Assault” by Hope Hodge Seck at military.com (Sept. 9)

Yes, that’s the same Mark Everson who helped persuade a jury that Bob Kelly was guilty of 99 counts of child sexual abuse.

Everson, a UNC psychologist, disputed well-accepted research that children are suggestible and should not be repeatedly interrogated by therapists. Even 10 years later, he found it hard to believe that every Little Rascals child-witness had been badly interviewed and confused: “There’s so much smoke there, it’s hard to imagine there’s no fire.”

Update: A military court at Camp Lejeune found Col. Wilson guilty of child molestation.
 

June 5, 2013

“More than 50 parents of alleged child victims in the Edenton day care sex abuse case issued a statement Tuesday criticizing ‘Innocence Lost’ (after) reviewers in the national press hailed the show as a compelling portrait of a small town that may have become overcome with mass hysteria:….

“ ‘ “Innocence Lost” conveyed the false impression that parents of the children came to the conclusions of sexual abuse as a hysterical reaction to rumors of abuse.

“ ‘We, as parents, came to the devastating conclusion of the sexual abuse of our children after great reluctance and only after the most convincing evidence, evidence which could not be revealed in interviews for “Innocence Lost” and can only be revealed during the trials of the defendants.’

“Specifically, the parents faulted the show for:

• “Failing to make clear that parents could not discuss ‘the factual reasons for the determinations of sexual abuse’ because of pending trials.
• “Suggesting to viewers that three state-sponsored, local therapists were responsible for evaluating the children when ‘in fact, the children were evaluated by no less than eight independent therapists, none of whom live or practice in Edenton, N.C.’
• “Giving the impression that the families who used the day care center were a ‘prestigious group’ when they represent a ‘broad economic and social cross-section of the town of Edenton.’ ”

– From “Day care parents resent implications of hysteria” (News & Observer, May 15, 1991)

Most disingenuous is the Little Rascals parents’ claim that “the most convincing evidence… could not be revealed in interviews for ‘Innocence Lost’ and can only be revealed during the trials of the defendants.”

In fact, it was the parents themselves who had so excitedly “revealed” the supposed evidence and sent it coursing unchecked through the town’s consciousness, reproducing and mutating as it spread, and resulting in unimaginable tragedy.

April 5, 2013

“In the Little Rascals Day Care case testimony was given about children being attacked by sharks kept in a pool by the accused. No prosecutor believed this story, and had such tales been told by adults, their credibility would have been laughed at…. However, (two Edenton defendants) were convicted, because under a new precedent, obviously false stories by children were set aside in the minds of prosecutors and juries, because of the belief that testimony from children needed to be treated differently….

“In (the Salem Witch Trials of) 1692, as in the modern day-care cases, the heart of the episode was the claims of the accusers versus the denials of the accused. Jurors were forced to choose between two sets of competing claims with no independent verification for any of them. Although not all the accusers were children, many were, and the idea of protecting the children played a heavy role in the prosecutions.

“Accusers claimed that the specters of the accused hurt them…. This kind of uncorroborated evidence became known as ‘spectral evidence,’ and on the basis of that evidence convictions routinely occurred. Contrary to popular, modern representations, all this took place in an orderly manner in a special court set up to investigate the outbreak. Within the rules of the day, the accused people had fair trials, just as the (day-care defendants) had a fair trial.

“What brought the trials to an end was the growing belief by the elites in Massachusetts Bay Colony, especially the clergy, that spectral evidence could not be trusted…. The trials continued, but under a new court where spectral evidence was not admissible, (and) the convictions largely stopped….”

– From “No Finality in Fells Acres” by Bernard Rosenthal, author of “Salem Story: Reading the Witch Trials of 1692”

“In spectral evidence, the admission of victims’ conjectures is governed only by the limits of their fears and imaginations, whether or not objectively proven facts are forthcoming to justify them. (State v. Dustin, 122 N.H. 544, 551 (N.H. 1982)).”

– From “Spectral Evidence Law & Legal Definition”

“Governed only by the limits of their fears and imaginations” – doesn’t that nail it!