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.
0 Responses to “”