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

[_Mary]

The therapy came after the conviction.. I'm confused by your response to this.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

https://www.New Jersey.com/opinion/index.ssf/20 ... ss_to.html

The man in that article confessed to a murder he didn't commit.

The two men spent the bulk of their adult lives in prison for murdering a store clerk in Paterson in 1993, slashing and bludgeoning him for a few bucks, the sort of senseless crime that can leave police, prosecutors and even jurors in a state of fury.

They went to prison mainly because they both confessed. It seemed a straightforward case.

But they didn't do it.

DNA evidence dug up by the Innocence Project proved that it was all a terrible mistake. So in November, they were freed from prison after nearly 25 years.

There are all sorts of people who have confessed to all sorts of things they didn't do, or see, or witness for all sorts of reasons. Are you seriously just now hearing this for the first time?

You're going to be shocked when you find out no one actually saw the gold plates, but some of them swear that they did.

- Doc

[_Res Ipsa]

In addition, there's also a wide separation between therapists and court processionals. I've been thinking about Res' perception that a therapist isn't supposed to be an advocate because the attorney is the one who is supposed to be partial to a party. It's a perception that is so far away from the field of professional therapy that I was struck by the major divide between the professions. In the court system, an attorney is supposed to represent a party. Other court professionals, such as mediators, are supposed to remain impartial to both parties. Judges are supposed to order a resolution when deciding partiality after listening to the representations from both sides.

That isn't my perception at all. I only mentioned this at all because you kept asserting that being a therapist isn't like being an attorney at the same time you were saying that a therapist was supposed to act as an advocate for the child. I was simply pointing out the inconsistency by pointing out that attorneys actually are advocates for their clients. I never asserted that therapists were supposed to act like attorneys or that therapists were somehow usurping someone else's role in the legal system.

When it comes to criminally prosecuting child abuse, therapists have two roles in the legal process: fact witness and expert witness. When it comes to whether the child has been abused and, if so, who did the abusing, the system relies on the therapist to be a neutral source of facts. There is no conflict there between being an "advocate for the child" and a "neutral source" for those facts. Are you going to argue that persuading a child that abuse occurred when none actually did is being an advocate for the child's mental and emotional health? Or that putting an innocent parent in jail is being an advocate for the mental and emotional health of the child? All you are doing here is using "advocate" for the child is creating a get out of jail free card for whatever Snow did without actually evaluating her conduct.

I've got a pretty good idea of what therapists do. I've been a client for about 15 years. And if I'd had the bad luck to stumble into the offices of one of the relative few "recovered "memory" advocates, they would have done their best to convince me that my depression was due to childhood sex abuse by my parents. They would have helped me "recover" memories of abuse that never happened. And if the therapist had been someone convinced that Satanic Ritual Abuse was rampant among Mormons, they would have "helped' me recover memories of a ring of child abusers operating within the ward I grew up in. And it would have torn my family apart and perhaps the lives of some of the kids I grew up with. And I've seen exactly how this works.

Snow was doing the same, only with kids, not adults. She was so predisposed to find SRA, that she saw it everywhere she looked. That's not being an "advocate" for kids. That's being an "advocate" for a conspiracy theory that she actively promoted in her writings.

[_Dr Exiled]

Religious thinking with its desire to believe a certain conclusion, despite contrary evidence, remains strong in some areas and with some people.

[_Lemmie]

The therapy came after the conviction.. I'm confused by your response to this.

The last sentence implies otherwise, but the bigger question is why you picked that one questionable detail, out of all of Snow's words, to be "confused" by.

Are you saying that Mormon Sex Rings are not possible? I am concerned that underneath the panic, there were children being abused. I can't comment on the cases you note or the conclusions you draw (no evidence for any of it) because I don't have the evidence to make that judgement. And again, children were taken to Snow because of parents concerns about the behaviour of their children. Snow may or may not have muddied the waters, but underneath the panic you still have concerned parent,/s.

In this thread, we now have Snow's words, judge's decisions about Snow's execrable techniques, actual testimony supporting it, and numerous court statements documenting Snow's inappropriate behavior. Your "no evidence for any of ...the conclusions you draw" statement is surprising, at best.

Yes, there is plenty of evidence to make the judgment that Snow not only "muddied the waters," but that she also actively created the "panic" and also created, at the very least, the vast majority of many of the issues that parents were "concerned" about.

No one has ever stated that there was not a single incidence of abuse among any of the children, and that has never been anyone's point in this thread, in spite of rosebud's repeated allegations to the contrary.

No, I do not believe that any abuse occurred the way Snow described it in her article, in her alleged "sex rings." Please see my quote from her article about what she described was going on. That has been thoroughly debunked.

Did you read what res ipsa wrote? I agree completely:

What you are doing here is using "advocate" for the child [to create] a get out of jail free card for whatever Snow did without actually evaluating her conduct.

... if I'd had the bad luck to stumble into the offices of one of the relative few "recovered "memory" advocates, they would have done their best to convince me that my depression was due to childhood sex abuse by my parents. They would have helped me "recover" memories of abuse that never happened. And if the therapist had been someone convinced that Satanic Ritual Abuse was rampant among Mormons, they would have "helped' me recover memories of a ring of child abusers operating within the ward I grew up in. And it would have torn my family apart and perhaps the lives of some of the kids I grew up with. And I've seen exactly how this works.

Snow was doing the same, only with kids, not adults. She was so predisposed to find SRA, that she saw it everywhere she looked. That's not being an "advocate" for kids. That's being an "advocate" for a conspiracy theory that she actively promoted in her writings.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Religious thinking with its desire to believe a certain conclusion, despite contrary evidence, remains strong in some areas and with some people.

The central figure in the Salem witch trials was Mary Walcot. The trials, which I think were around a year(?) resulted in the executions of twenty people, most of them women.

Ain't no goddamn witches in Salem no how.

- Doc

[_Mary]

Lemmie, do you have access to the Snow article? Could you copy paste so I can read for myself.

[_Lemmie]

Lemmie, do you have access to the Snow article? Could you copy paste so I can read for myself.

I'm sorry no. I accessed it through my university faculty account, which is why I only posted excerpts.

[_Mary]

Lemmie, do you have access to the Snow article? Could you copy paste so I can read for myself.

I'm sorry no. I accessed it through my university faculty account, which is why I only posted excerpts.

That article would be very helpful.

[_Mary]

I'm re-reading the Miles motion to dismiss.

Some of the points I am finding to be disingenuous. They fail to note that the children disclosed to the mother first in the case of the Miles and the Perpetrator. They fail to note the alleged confession of the perpetrator. They fail to note which of the 5 sex rings excluded tales of cannibalism. They fail to note the medical evidence.

They just want to blame it all on Snow, Snow, Snow. She planted their memories. It's her fault. She has caused them endless damage. I wish it were that simple.