15
Nov
09

MY OWN GUANTANAMO

I have been a detainee for over ten years in the Florida Civil Commitment Center and although I have been allowed appeals in our legal system, I have been denied justice and fair play contrary to the promises of the Constitutional guarantees of the amendments: IV Probable Cause, V Double Jeopardy, VI Right to a Speedy Trial,  and XIV Due Process. The Jimmy Ryce Statute came into effect January 1, 1999 and was immediately applied retroactively to anyone leaving the prison system. I was fair game for the collective forces of the judiciary and investigative agencies at work in the State of Florida having taken a plea bargain to avoid more arrests of the Glendale staff. Guantanamo Bay detainees are suspected of terrorizing certain military or civil populations. I am suspected of being a threat to juveniles sometime in the future if I am released unless I successfully conclude a sex offender treatment program to prevent further “terrorist” activities on my part in society. There is no accommodation in the program here at FCCC for someone like myself who maintains his innocence. In actuality, there are not enough places available for those who do wish to take the program and they linger for months, even years, without receiving the help for which they are being detained.

 Excerpt from Barak Obama’s speech, Remarks on National Security May 21.2009:

“…In the long run, we also cannot keep this country safe unless we enlist the power of our most fundamental values. The documents that we hold in this very hail the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights… are the foundation of liberty and justice in this country, and a light that shines for all who seek freedom, fairness, equality and dignity in the world. Instead of using the flawed commissions of the last seven years, my administration is bringing our commissions in line with the rule of law. The rule will no longer permit us to use as evidence statements that have been obtained using cruel, inhuman, or degrading interrogation methods. We will no longer place the burden to prove that hearsay is unreliable on the opponent of the hearsay. And we will give detainees greater latitude in selecting their own counsel, and more protections if they refuse to testify.”

My name is James Toward, charged with sexual abuse of six pre-school boys of the Glendale Montessori School and I took a plea- agreement of guilty-while-maintaining-my-innocence (Alford Plea) and accepted a sentence of 27 years plus 10 years probation with the stipulation that I could leave the country permanently in lieu of probation. I have spent twenty years concerned about the mental health of the Glendale children, although I don’t take responsibility for the reaction of the parents — they were all intelligent successful adults and had the choice not to go so quickly into becoming part of the herd being rounded up to sue the school. A majority of the parents did not go that route and now twenty years later have young adult sons without the stigma of the “Witch Hunt” carried out at Glendale. Also there were a few of the parents who did not believe their children had been harmed but were attracted by the offer of free money — those parents made their own deal. I feel deeply for the suffering my office manager, Brenda, has gone through and is still going through. She was dedicated to and deeply loved the children of the school. The sudden attack on my family by the authorities became a full scale slaughter with mercy for none after a number of families got into the action. The accusations went from abuse to Satanic Ritual Abuse in record time. We lost our business, home, family unity, and community’s respect. My family endured extreme cruelty at the hands of the authorities, local and state, we continue to suffer extreme cruelty under the Civil Commitment Act. We will go to civil trial and we welcome the support of those parents and grown-up students who wish to help erase the ongoing fatal attraction to a collective nightmare which should never have happened.

18
May
09

Part 2 of Article from FMS Foundation Newsletter SPRING 2008 Vol. 17 No. 3

6. Bizarre beliefs of therapists who interviewed the children:

The former student who contacted the Foundation explained that she learned about the FMSF as she was doing research about the Glendale case. The doctor who interviewed the first Glendale child to make an accusation was psychiatrist Alan Tesson, M.D. (He was not the former student’s therapist.) In a Foundation newsletter the former student found an article about Tesson’s settling a lawsuit with Sue Tinker for $650,000.[11] Tinker claimed, among other things, that Tesson implanted false memories of satanic ritual abuse. During the course of the Tinker v Tesson trial, Tinker’s attorney Don Russo showed that Dr. Tesson frequently consulted with selfproclaimed experts in satanic ritual abuse (e.g., Cory Hammond and Catherine Gould) on the subject of SRA mind control. [12] Indeed Russo portrayed Tesson as having been obsessed with satanic ritual abuse ever since his work with the Glendale students. To those familiar with the history

of ritual abuse accusations, these names raise immediate skepticism about any case with which they — or people who have worked with them — are connected. Jeanne Ralicki, another of the therapists who interviewed the children also holds extreme views. She lists as her specialties treatment for Dissociative Disorders, Trauma and PTSD, and Past Life Regression. She notes that the first two have been specialties since 1974.[13] Believing that a therapist can actually “regress” a patient and find a past life must be considered bizarre in the face of the scientific evidence showing that the process of “regression” is really the process of imagination.

7. The highly charged climate of the interviews, community and trial contaminated the evidence:

Richard Lubin, the attorney for James Toward filed a motion in 1989 requesting that Chief Circuit Judge Dwight Geiger be replaced because he appeared to be prejudiced against the defendant. Lubin charged that the judge allowed himself to be influenced by a letter-writing campaign that the prosecutor had orchestrated. The judge refused to excuse himself. Parents who believed their children had been abused formed a group and it is highly likely that accusations were shared. The first child to bring charges was a boy we call “ Tom” who had been a patient of Dr. Tesson. Tom’s mother was Dr. Tesson’s secretary. There is evidence of close friendships between families of accusers and some therapists. Some of the children’s therapy sessions overlapped. Therapist Jeanne Ralicki testified that on one occasion one child in her waiting room asked another “Do you remember going to Mr. T.’s house?” Ralicki said that she changed the subject, but what else may have been exchanged among the children? Although the trial was eventually moved to another community because of all the publicity, newspaper reports from the time indicate that it was highly likely that there was a a great deal of communication between the families claiming their children had been abused and even between the children themselves.

 8. Lack of physical evidence:

The questions not asked about the accusations are many. For example, if a 4-year-old had been raped, why did the parents not notice the effects and complain immediately? If children had crucifixes inserted in their anuses, why didn’t the parents notice the tearing that would have necessarily occurred? If children had been taken to Mexico, without permission, why didn’t the parents report that their children were missing to the police? There was a lack of any physical evidence for the children’s claims. The children said videos were made, but none were found. There was no attic in the house in which a child said that he had been kept. In the frenzy of the time, no one seemed to notice the complete lack of physical evidence.

23
Apr
09

From The False Memory Syndrome Foundation Newsletter, Spring ’08 Vol. 17 No. 3

Glendale Montessori School Case Resurfaces

State of Florida vs. James H. Toward. Case No.: 88-926 CF. Circuit Court of 19th Judicial Circuit in and for Martin County, Florida “Headmaster’s evil lives on in 20-year-old abuse case,” blazed the page 1 headline of the Palm Beach Post [1] on March 1, 2008. The article was about the satanic ritual abuse at the Glendale Montessori School in Stuart, Florida that began in 1987. The article did not call what happened a panic, however. No mention of the bizarre accusations, such as crucifixes inserted into children’s anuses, appeared in the article. Rather the reporter vilified James Toward, the former headmaster of the school who has been in prison for the past 19 years with no end in sight. The reporter also described both the suffering and accomplishments of the former students at the school who were ages 3 to 5 at the time of the alleged abuse. Indeed, the article was very similar to the many articles that helped flame public opinion at the time of the trial. If readers’ only source of news about this tragic case were the Palm Beach Post, they would have no idea that the Glendale case was just one of the approximately hundred day care cases that followed in the wake of McMartin and its vast publicity. Readers would have no idea that virtually every step in the process of “discovering” the alleged abuse of the Glendale children has been completely discredited in the past two decades.

Readers would have no reason to doubt the guilt of Mr. Toward, who is one of the last dozen or so people still incarcerated as a result of the day care hysteria that swept the country between 1984 and 1995 in which 185 adults were charged with ritual abuse. [2] In 1989, James Toward and his office Manager Brenda Williams were arrested for abusing children at the school. Williams received a 10-year sentence and after serving her time was released. Toward agreed to an Alford plea[3] and received a 27-year sentence. Toward was supposed to be released in 1999, but in 1998 Florida passed the Jimmy Ryce Involuntary Civil Commitment for Sexually Violent Predators’ Treatment and Care Act. Effective on January 1, 1999, the law allows the state to confine prisoners for as long as they are deemed a danger to society. The law was applied retroactively to James Toward. Contrary to the impression given in the article in the Palm Beach Post, there are a number of reasons for serious doubt about the guilt of Mr. Toward who is now 77-years-old.

1. Retracting Student:

In February 2008, a former student at the Glendale Montessori School contacted the Foundation. She explained that when she was 9-yearsold, she had been sent to a therapist who used hypnosis to try to uncover her “memories” of being abused at Glendale when she was two, three and four. The caller remembered a discussion of satanic ritual abuse between her therapist and his partner. She told us that because her family did not file charges and did not want her to testify, the psychologist felt they were negligent and tried to get her mother to sign release papers. Because her mother was suspicious, she refused to sign anything, and she took our caller to another therapist who was outside the Glendale community. This therapist said that the family should lead a normal life. If anything had happened, it would be revealed naturally. The former Glendale student said that after a lot of investigation, she is now certain that Toward had been wrongly convicted. She feels that the groups concerned with the wrongly accused have overlooked the Glendale case, and she wants to find a way to free James Toward.[4] Evidence of the beliefs that were circulating in the community (and thus the reason for using hypnosis on the former student), can be seen in the following quote that appeared in a 1992 article of the Palm Beach Post. “Therapists say many victims [of Glendale Montessori] have blocked any memory of what happened to them at Glendale, possibly because they were told terrible things would happen if they remembered.” [5]

2. Hearsay evidence was used:

At a pretrial hearing, Judge Dwight Geiger made the decision to allow hearsay evidence. That meant that the jury in the trial would hear parents and therapists tell what the children had said to them as opposed to the children themselves telling their stories. Richard Lubin, the attorney for James Toward, stated that the children told different stories when he interviewed them than what parents and therapists reported they said. Allowing hearsay evidence is not uncommon in cases involving children, but it always raises reliability issues. The person reporting could have a faulty memory and forget key material. There is the very serious danger that the meaning intended by the child was misinterpreted by the person reporting. There is the serious danger that the person reporting misjudged or misunderstood what he or she heard or saw. And there is always the serious danger that a person reporting will lie. In cases in which a community is inflamed by belief in abuse, as was the case in Stuart, Florida, the very serious danger is that adults who are reporting the children’s statements will inadvertently interpret what the child said to fit with their own preconceived beliefs in and fears about satanic ritual abuse.

3. Anatomically correct dolls were used in eliciting accusations:

Anatomically correct dolls were used to diagnose abuse. Therapist Jeanne Ralicki testified on March 8, 1988, that by the child’s use of lifelike dolls to show what happened, one 4-year-old boy told her that Mr. Toward had intercourse and oral sex with him. One of the many problems with the use of anatomical dolls is that their use has not been standardized in any form as valid evidence of past abuse. In 1989, there was no normative data with which to compare the use of the dolls with abused and non abused children. Research in subsequent years has shown that nonabused and abused children can play with the dolls in the same way. It is always possible that therapists used the dolls in suggestive ways. In the absence of a video of a child using the dolls with the therapist, any diagnosis made with their use is not valid. Respected researchers Stephen Ceci and Maggie Bruck,[6] noting the massive evidence for potential misuse of dolls, concluded:

“There is no available scientific evidence that supports the clinical or forensic diagnosis of abuse made primarily on the basis of a very young child’s interaction with anatomical dolls.” (184)

4. Intensive interviewing:

Jeanne Ralicki, a social worker, was a member of the state-funded Child Protection Team that interviewed the children. She later went into private practice and continued to treat children from Glendale Montessori, one even a decade later in 1999. On Tuesday March 8, 1988 Ralicki testified that one of the children, a 4-year-old boy, told her that the acting director of the school had intercourse and oral sex with him. She also said that he told her this after more than 20 therapy sessions.[7] What happened during the 20 sessions? Was the child repeatedly asked about abuse? A tremendous amount has been learned about suggestive interviewing since the Glendale trial. When Ralicki was challenged about the reliability of what the child had said, she testified that the child’s story was much too detailed to be fabricated. Ralicki is not correct. Research has shown that children may elaborate. The only way to know the truth or falsity is with external corroboration. Another child who reported in the spring of 1989 that Mr. Toward kept containers of blood at his home and that he splattered the blood over the children, had been in therapy with Dr. Allen Tesson since August 1987.[8] What happened in the therapy sessions between 1987 and 1989? Was the child repeatedly questioned? Dr. Alan Tesson testified that a 6-year-old boy told him that children had been forced to dance naked, were locked in an attic, threatened with snakes, spat upon by Toward and abused after swimming. Tesson showed 50 drawings that the child had made in therapy during 1987 and 1988.[7] What happened in all of those therapy sessions? Being asked the same questions over and over until the answer the adult wants is given is highly suggestive interviewing.

5. Child Sex Abuse Accommodation Syndrome:

Roland Summit [9] testified that he supported the conclusions of the therapists who examined one of the children who was filing suit. Roland Summit is the author of “The Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome” which asserts that there are five reactions children who have been sexually abused can exhibit: (1) secrecy, (2) helplessness, (3) entrapment and accommodation, (4) delayed, unconvincing disclosure, and (5) retraction. Science fails to support Summit’s claims. We now know that children with documented abuse do not exhibit denials, tentative disclosures or retractions. Summit’s support of the therapists’ diagnoses was unwarranted. [10]

To Be Continued… Part 1 of 4, Complete Article and more can be found on www.fmsfonline.org

22
Apr
09

from a former Glendale student

In response to the post “From a Glendale Montessori parent”

Thank you so much for writing this! I know my parents and I both agree wholeheartedly. We wish the best for James’ hearing! Kristin Erickson (Glendale student from 1980 – 1983)

17
Apr
09

Glendale Student Recants claims against James Toward

In February 2008, a former student at the Glendale Montessori School contacted the Foundation. She explained that when she was 9-yearsold, she had been sent to a therapist who used hypnosis to try to uncover her “memories” of being abused at Glendale when she was two, three and four. The caller remembered a discussion of satanic ritual abuse between her therapist and his partner. She told us that because her family did not file charges and did not want her to testify, the psychologist felt they were negligent and tried to get her mother to sign release papers. Because her mother was suspicious, she refused to sign anything, and she took our caller to another therapist who was outside the Glendale community. This therapist said that the family should lead a normal life. If anything had happened, it would be revealed naturally.

The former Glendale student said that after a lot of investigation, she is now certain that Toward had been wrongly convicted. She feels that the groups concerned with the wrongly accused have overlooked the Glendale case, and she wants to find a way to free James Toward.

13
Apr
09

From a Glendale Montessori parent

James … I wish you good luck in your hearing, apparently slated for later this month (April 2009). I think what you have written here should be read by all whose lives were impacted by the alleged events at Glendale, back in the Eighties. I remember only too well the panic of the times, and the way in which so many of us (parents) were caught up in the horror of it all.

It was impossible to know whether what we were hearing was real, or not – my personal experience consisted of a phone call from another parent, begging me to get my three children “evaluated by a therapist” as soon as possible because “it looks as though every child at Glendale has probably been involved, in some way, in what went on there”! And, this was a parent who was a supporter, in the beginning!

Despite conflicting thoughts, I felt – naively – that there was nothing to be lost by taking the children to the therapists, Jean Ralicki initially, then Dr. Tesson – though it became clear, thankfully all too soon, that my children were more intimidated by the therapy itself – one of them dissolving in tears, after a visit with Dr. Tesson declaring “Mommy, it’s so scary to think that you can’t remember something so bad you can’t remember it” I recall the feeling of shame, immediately, that I’d subjected them to this. I had sat in on most of the sessions with Dr. Tesson, and concur that there was simply nothing to uncover. I was reading the same books, knew all about what was going on across the country, and found myself in a state of suspended disbelief much of the time. I think Dr. Tesson was a victim of his own belief system, just as caught up in the furore as the rest.

I belonged to a “support” group of Glendale parents who were pretty much in the same boat as myself – torn between disbelief and dubious conviction – mostly convinced that the behaviors of their own children could be attributed only to the reported events at the school.

It was the worst of times. The rumour and innuendo that circulated was insane. Gossip and speculation presented as truth – I know this because I frequently took it upon myself to go to the root of “he said/she saids” to try to get at the truth for myself. Many of use behaved as if we were completely mad. We withdrew our childen from Camp High Rocks in the Carolinas because it wss represented that “the Cult” was reprogramming our children while they were there! I know of two parents who actually went out under cover of darkness to keep watch on one of Dr. Tesson’s patient’s home because she was so convinced that members of a Satanic Cult were visiting her on nights of the full moon! One of them actually “bugged” a local nursery school hoping to catch the teachers in the act of molesting children. One family was so persecuted that it became “common knowledge” that they held Satanic rituals at their home, and were probably at the root of “everything”! One parent dug up the grounds at the school, looking for tunnels and hidden graves. It was “reported” that a case of chloraform was found in the attic, and so on. But, for all of it, the nagging reality in the back of my mind was always there “but, we were DROP-IN PARENTS, always showing up at the school, unannounced, day in/day out”! It was part of the attraction of consigning your child to Montessori – you could always be “hands on”. I can’t ever remember being discouraged. So when, I would ask the support group, could the children have possibly been “kidnapped” and taken off campus for nefarious purposes?

It was a time of total insanity, and though there are few of us who maintain contact today, only too happy to lets those times fade into obscurity, I often wonder how many there are who, like me, feel that it was all some sort of mass hysteria that infected our community even as examples to the same happened all over the country. I often wonder when are the children themselves likely to come forward and recant? Probably never, I think. As you pointed out in your poignant essay, the majority were probably so damaged by the therapy itself that the time is to be a terror for them, one way or other, no matter what. Frankly, I can’t believe that there have been so few retractions. I’ve read every publication on the aftermath of those times I could get my hands on. And though there is plenty to hear from the accused, there is little from the accusers; the children OR their parents.

To my own children, it’s become a sort of “urban legend”, though I’ve expressed my feelings about what happened (or what I believe never happened) and encouraged them to contact their old friends and classmates via the auspices of MY SPACE and FACE BOOK to see if there is anyone, a “survivor”, who might come forward to shed some light at this time.

I don’t know what purpose this letter will serve, other than to let you know that there’s at least one person who supports the probablity that you are, indeed, completely innocent. I suppose I want you to know how sad I feel for Rosario and Margaret, and for you and the years you have lost. And, indeed for all the rest of us, who got caught up in it, despite ourselves, and whom – however unwittingly – contributed to what happened to you.

Good luck, James.

03
Apr
09

3A Dukes Case DA’s Apology Not Accepted

USA Today 4-13-07 – 3A Dukes Case DA’s Apology Not Accepted.

Prosecutor Nifong in the Duke Case, called a “rogue” prosecutor, by North Carolina’s Attorney General, who pursued the Duke case with “tragic rush to accuse.”  “When you have a prosecutor who takes advantage of his enormous power and over-reaches like this, then yes, it’s offensive.” Other prosecutors “were offended by a prosecutor who didn’t take the time to make sure he had all the facts straight before leveling charges.”

 

Prosecutor Nifong seems to be the personification of the prosecutor in charge of my case who took inaccurate and unclear evidence and built it up into a case of major proportions.

27
Mar
09

Reported Recovered Memories of Child Sexual Abuse

“Psychiatrists are advised to avoid engaging in any ‘memory recovery techniques’ which are based upon the expectation of past sexual abuse of which the patient has no memory. Such ‘memory recovery techniques’ may include drug-mediated interviews, hypnosis, regression therapies, guided imagery, ‘body memories’, literal dream interpretation and journaling. There is no evidence that the use of consciousness-altering techniques, such as drug-mediated interviews or hypnosis, can reveal or accurately elaborate factual information about any past experiences including childhood sexual abuse. Techniques on regression therapy including ‘age regression’ and hypnotic regression are of unproven effectiveness.”

 

 

Royal College of Psychiatrists, Reported Recovered Memories of Child Sexual Abuse, 1997. (UK)

25
Mar
09

Questions and Answers about Memories of Childhood Abuse

“There are no single set of symptoms which automatically indicates that a person was a victim of childhood abuse. There have been media reports of therapists who state that people (particularly women) with a particular set of problems or symptoms must have been victims of childhood sexual abuse. There is no scientific evidence that supports this conclusion. “

American Psychological Association. Questions and Answers about Memories of Childhood Abuse. 1995.

24
Mar
09

Research concerning the effects of suggestive interviewing on children’s reports-Robert Rosenthal, J.D.

Cases involving charges of child abuse are often decided solely on accusations made by children. Absent physical evidence, an adult witness, or a confession, the only evidence of abuse may be the claims of the child complainant. In these cases, it is important to understand how the accusations of abuse became known. Sometimes a child spontaneously reports abuse. Other times, accusations of abuse do not arise until a child is questioned, for one reason or another, by an adult. When accusations are not freely or spontaneously disclosed by a child, it is crucial to know the methods by which they were produced. This is because, as the scientific research shows, certain methods of questioning have the power to compromise the accuracy of children’s reports and even cause children to report having experienced events that never occurred. For more than a decade, social scientists have generated an ever-growing body of scientific research literature documenting that certain types of suggestive questioning methods may cause children to make inaccurate reports. The research has also revealed that inaccurate reports resulting from those suggestive methods are often indistinguishable from accurate reports. That is, there is no way to determine a true report from one created by interviewer suggestion. Thus, absent indicia that the post-suggestion statements are reli- able, there is no way to support a claim that they are what they purport to be: a reflection of the child’s experience rather than the interviewer’s influence.

An excerpt from “Suggestability, Reliability, and the Legal Process”, by Robert Rosenthal, J.D.

See Rosenthal Article under the pages heading for the full discussion




Categories

Why Believe That for Which There Is No Good Evidence?

Many people believe in the existence of widespread "repressed" child sexual abuse and organized satanic cults. Such beliefs occur despite lack of evidence supporting them, influenced instead by reliance on authorities and social consensus. In addition, people fail to understand the fallibility of retrospective memory, erroneously assume that high confidence in a memory means that it is accurate, and mistakenly believe that more information necessarily implies a better grasp of reality. Compounding this problem is the diminution in the scientific training of licensed therapists. When therapists themselves have not been inoculated with scientific skepticism, they will not inoculate their clients and will instead contribute to the epidemic of irrational beliefs. -Robyn M. Dawes http://www.fmsfonline.org/dawes.html