Australia - Performing arts school at centre of child abuse claims stands in disarray

[gpfloor]

Did any of those cases that you studied lead to charges by the police?

No. No complaint was laid to the police. The allegations were not in relation to the husband, but about alleged childhood memories. I think it served as a warning that if he persisted in trying to get his wife back, she might suddenly start remembering things he "did" to her or others.

You can read the details here. The allegations are beyond bizarre and bear a great deal of similarity to this current case.
Spirited away

It is the rush to judgment caused by the prejudicial reporting, arising from police leaking details - including descriptions of evidence that does not exist (the atrocities being filmed) - that should be among the main concerns in this case. These people were easy to demonize because of their alternative life-style.

When it comes to stories like this, some people lose all critical faculties. That is the only explanation for this, Pizzagate and similar Grimms Fairy Tales getting any traction.

 

[Jennifer17]

No. No complaint was laid to the police. The allegations were not in relation to the husband, but about alleged childhood memories. I think it served as a warning that if he persisted in trying to get his wife back, she might suddenly start remembering things he "did" to her or others.

You can read the details here. The allegations are beyond bizarre and bear a great deal of similarity to this current case.
Spirited away

It is the rush to judgment caused by the prejudicial reporting, arising from police leaking details - including descriptions of evidence that does not exist (the atrocities being filmed) - that should be among the main concerns in this case. These people were easy to demonize because of their alternative life-style.

When it comes to stories like this, some people lose all critical faculties. That is the only explanation for this, Pizzagate and similar Grimms Fairy Tales getting any traction.

I beg to differ. Our police are not stupid and the fact that they charged people in this case and not any of the others, bears that out. If there is no evidence then it won't get far.

 

[gpfloor]

I beg to differ. Our police are not stupid and the fact that they charged people in this case and not any of the others, bears that out. If there is no evidence then it won't get far.

I am not certain as to what I said to make you think that I think the police are stupid. They know exactly what they are doing - and do not run a trial by media where they have a strong case.

As for changes laid here and not in the the case referred to - as I said before - no complaint was laid in that case - so no basis for charges.

Am a bit confused by your comment "not being stupid" but then suggesting the possibility that they charged these people without any evidence. To say they are not stupid, negates the possibility that they would charge anyone without any evidence - leaving open only the possibility of corruption. If that is what you suggest - then we do agree.

They have proceeded here only the basis of allegations. That is no different to the historical accusations against Catholics and other mainstream religions. Those cases rely solely on the statements of the victims due to quite often being decades old. The difference between those cases and this one is that the accusations against clergymen do not include such impossibilities as the perpetrator lifting the victim with his penis, among other nonsense.

Lastly, I wish I could be as confident that this case won't get far. Unfortunately prisons are full of innocent people railroaded by corrupt officials. Cases listed by the Innocence Project are just a fraction of the total.

 

[Jennifer17]

I am not certain as to what I said to make you think that I think the police are stupid. They know exactly what they are doing - and do not run a trial by media where they have a strong case.

As for changes laid here and not in the the case referred to - as I said before - no complaint was laid in that case - so no basis for charges.

Am a bit confused by your comment "not being stupid" but then suggesting the possibility that they charged these people without any evidence. To say they are not stupid, negates the possibility that they would charge anyone without any evidence - leaving open only the possibility of corruption. If that is what you suggest - then we do agree.

They have proceeded here only the basis of allegations. That is no different to the historical accusations against Catholics and other mainstream religions. Those cases rely solely on the statements of the victims due to quite often being decades old. The difference between those cases and this one is that the accusations against clergymen do not include such impossibilities as the perpetrator lifting the victim with his penis, among other nonsense.

Lastly, I wish I could be as confident that this case won't get far. Unfortunately prisons are full of innocent people railroaded by corrupt officials. Cases listed by the Innocence Project are just a fraction of the total.

If you are going to quote me, use what I said. I did not say "not being stupid". I said they are not stupid. I also did not say that there was a possibility that they would charge people without evidence. That is your claim. The evidence will be tested in court. And I am sorry, but our prisons are not full of innocent people. That is a hyperbolic statement.

 

[gpfloor]

If you are going to quote me, use what I said. I did not say "not being stupid". I said they are not stupid. I also did not say that there was a possibility that they would charge people without evidence. That is your claim. The evidence will be tested in court. And I am sorry, but our prisons are not full of innocent people. That is a hyperbolic statement.

Of course it was hyperbolic. Just like the headlines in this case are. Do those headlines upset you as well?

Here's a good one, designed to get the nostrils flaring in righteous anger
https://scontent.fsyd6-1.fna.fbcdn....=dd4e925fa5e0454a34f4b4099db826ed&oe=5B807EF5

My hyperbole was merely highlighting that the numbers are higher than the figures shown by such orgs as the Innocence Project because they only deal with cases that have evidence which can be DNA tested.

"Not being stupid" and "not stupid" are different statements in what way?

Your "not stupid" contradicts "If there is no evidence then it won't get far." That was your statement, not mine. Would you really make a statement that you don't believe is possible because the police are "not stupid" - indicating they would only lay charges by having sufficient (real) evidence to do so?

 

[Jennifer17]

Of course it was hyperbolic. Just like the headlines in this case are. Do those headlines upset you as well?

Here's a good one, designed to get the nostrils flaring in righteous anger
https://scontent.fsyd6-1.fna.fbcdn....=dd4e925fa5e0454a34f4b4099db826ed&oe=5B807EF5

My hyperbole was merely highlighting that the numbers are higher than the figures shown by such orgs as the Innocence Project because they only deal with cases that have evidence which can be DNA tested.

"Not being stupid" and "not stupid" are different statements in what way?

Your "not stupid" contradicts "If there is no evidence then it won't get far." That was your statement, not mine. Would you really make a statement that you don't believe is possible because the police are "not stupid" - indicating they would only lay charges by having sufficient (real) evidence to do so?

The Sun is a British tabloid. I am not sure how many Australian readers it has. Anyone who reads it knows that it is another Murdoch hysteria sheet. And, of course there is a possibility that the charges won't stick, but that is not the same as saying that they were charged with no evidence. Neither you or I know what evidence they have.

 

[gpfloor]

The Sun is a British tabloid. I am not sure how many Australian readers it has. Anyone who reads it knows that it is another Murdoch hysteria sheet. And, of course there is a possibility that the charges won't stick, but that is not the same as saying that they were charged with no evidence. Neither you or I know what evidence they have.

Thank you. I know what evidence there is because I have, since first looking into it and writing about it, been contacted by family members not caught up in the allegations who have been at the hearings.

The police, for example, have admitted they have no proof of the alleged assaults being filmed. Yet they led the media to believe they had such evidence. What they are now claiming is that the files may have been deleted, or that they pretended to film. Deleted files are never really deleted. They can be recovered. The police have either tried and failed to recover them, or they simply know they never existed - thus their back-up excuse that the filming was "pretend".

Here is the Grandaddy of all of these types of false allegations - this from Texas.
"Accusations flew of sacrifice, drinking blood, sexual abuse and the invocation of demonic forces."
https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/06/23/satanic-panic/

21 years in jail on trumped up false allegations.

 

[Jennifer17]

I don't know why you are so worried. If there is no evidence, they will not be convicted and please, you have been contacted by family members? Family members are not objective. Leave it to the courts.

 

[gpfloor]

I don't know why you are so worried. If there is no evidence, they will not be convicted and please, you have been contacted by family members? Family members are not objective. Leave it to the courts.

Leave it to the courts... that's what they did in Texas. 21 years wasting in jail until proven innocent.

The family members contacted to confirm that I was right - there is a religious cult involved (on the accusers side), but not named in the media because of a suppression order the cult sought and was granted. Meanwhile the suppression order on the names of the accused was lifted - which is almost unprecedented where young children are involved. The reason being that where the accused knows the victims (which applies here), identifying the accused may lead to some being able to identify the kids. Not a good thing. The lifting of that suppression order on the identities of the accused is among numerous points that lead to concerns about the state of justice in this case.

If you read all of the posts in the original link I provided here, you will see I have been correcting those relatives when I feel they are letting the stress and emotion blur their judgment on what is happening. They may be lacking objectivity, but I am not. That said, I would be a complete mess if this was happening to members of my family.

 

[gpfloor]

I think this more than adequately spells out the concerns:


Accusations flew of sacrifice, drinking blood, sexual abuse and the invocation of demonic forces but it was wasn’t Salem, and the year wasn’t 1692. The conviction of Daniel and Frances Keller took place in Travis County, Texas, three centuries later amid what became, quite literally, a modern-day witch hunt.

It began when the Kellers were accused of sexually abusing a troubled 3-year-old girl, Christy Chaviers, who was a visitor at Fran’s Day Care, which the couple was running out of their Austin home. The couple was convicted in 1992 and spent 21 years in prison until they were freed in 2013 — but not until after an investigative journalist and attorney looked into their case and discovered it was riddled with outlandish accusations, inconsistent testimony and undisclosed exculpatory evidence.

The link again in case it was missed the first time https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/06/23/satanic-panic/

The similarities are there... outlandish accusations, and inconsistent statements from police concerning evidence.

 

[gpfloor]

Here is a case from the same era, only from Sydney, not Texas. Same stories of unbelievable abuse, but in this case, the accused were acquitted.
Tony Deren’s nightmare: 'There goes Mr Bubbles'

 

[gpfloor]

Here is a case from the same era, only from Sydney, not Texas. Same stories of unbelievable abuse, but in this case, the accused were acquitted.
Tony Deren’s nightmare: 'There goes Mr Bubbles'

A very telling quote from this story:

Police leaked the (false) information to the tabloids that pornographic videos and books about Satanic rites had been seized during the raid; the prosecution claimed (but produced no evidence) that they had “dressed in white robes and certain occult things happened”; and a rent-a-crowd of women unconnected with the case mobbed the Derens outside the court, screaming”dirty, disgusting scum”.

Yep. Innocent people have nothing to fear from police. They are as honest as the day is long and never ever run trial by media when they have a weak (read non-existent) case.

 

[flourish]

There is no possible way the incidents they are accused of ALL happened and didn't leave ANY physical evidence. Poking a child's eyeball with a needle is going to leave evidence. Lifting a child's entire body weight by only the penis is going to leave evidence and is likely impossible.

These are very outlandish accusations, and they've already stated they don't have any physical evidence to support the accusations. I'm of the general belief that of course we should listen to children, but these were very young boys stating very crazy things, (bloodletting and drinking?) of which there is no apparent evidence...the accusations stated at least one assault was videotaped with a cell phone. What do the phone forensics say? What about the phone companies, internet providers, etc.? What exactly was the timeline between the alleged incident(s) and the reports?

The only video I've heard of in this case (as in confirmed to exist) is video of the alleged perps with the alleged victims engaged in healthy outdoor play with like, kites or something.

And these particular accusations are very reminiscent of the "Satanic worship" freak-outs in the US during the 80s and early 90s. During that time, I even had a teacher accuse ME of worshiping Satan, and had to go to the counselor's office and "discuss it."

I know nothing of the police, prosecution, or their respective systems in Australia. My reaction would be the same regardless of the setting of this story.

I do really wonder what the initial "evidence" was that allowed them to arrest these folks in the first place. I don't know that I've read that anywhere...anyone?

 

[Hatfield]

JMO
This case concerns me. I have no idea if the charges are valid or not but what concerns me is if LE is only going to use statements from very young children as their evidence which I hope that is not all they are going to do.

And the reason I get concerned about that is from a TV special I saw. Sorry I cannot recall what I was even watching and have poor recollection but I remember the gist of it. It basically showed young kids that were in a play room and it was a study of whether they would lie or not. And it was eye opening to say the least.

There was a hidden camera on the room that the kids were not aware of and the study involved doing simple testing of the children like leaving a plate of cookies out and telling the kids not to eat any until later and things like that. Or having certain toys in the room that they were told not to play with. Real simple stuff.

Then after awhile the adults would come back into the room and question the children if they played with the forbidden toys or if they ate any bites of the cookies or something like that.

What amazed me was how some of the kids (not all by any means) would flat out lie to the adults and be very convincing in their lie.

They were believable as they lied and that was what was so scary.

Since I have seen that show I always get concerned if a very young child's testimony is going to be used in a real trial. I get concerned about if the child could have been coached by other adults or if the child really believes something in his own mind that may not have reallly happened.

It all is very scary to me if people's lives are on the lines and only a very young child's testimony is the only thing used in a trial. Lets hope that is not all LE uses as evidence.

 

[gpfloor]

Thank you, Flourish and Hatfield. You have both pretty much nailed it - at least as far as it can be for the moment. These kids had these idea planted in them by adults and the motive was revenge against this family for trying to get a loved one away from their "religion". Some of the claims as pointed out, are physically impossible, others have left none of the physical evidence they should have. The fact that adults coached the kids to make such untenable claims is a sign of "magical thinking" - often associated with schizophrenia and/or religious occult beliefs. No normal functioning adult would plant such ideas because normal functional adults would realize the impossibly of them.

The big question is why the police laid charges given all of the above. I really really want an answer to that one.

Magical thinking
Magical thinking - Wikipedia

 

[flourish]

JMO
This case concerns me. I have no idea if the charges are valid or not but what concerns me is if LE is only going to use statements from very young children as their evidence which I hope that is not all they are going to do.

And the reason I get concerned about that is from a TV special I saw. Sorry I cannot recall what I was even watching and have poor recollection but I remember the gist of it. It basically showed young kids that were in a play room and it was a study of whether they would lie or not. And it was eye opening to say the least.

There was a hidden camera on the room that the kids were not aware of and the study involved doing simple testing of the children like leaving a plate of cookies out and telling the kids not to eat any until later and things like that. Or having certain toys in the room that they were told not to play with. Real simple stuff.

Then after awhile the adults would come back into the room and question the children if they played with the forbidden toys or if they ate any bites of the cookies or something like that.

What amazed me was how some of the kids (not all by any means) would flat out lie to the adults and be very convincing in their lie.

They were believable as they lied and that was what was so scary.

Since I have seen that show I always get concerned if a very young child's testimony is going to be used in a real trial. I get concerned about if the child could have been coached by other adults or if the child really believes something in his own mind that may not have reallly happened.

It all is very scary to me if people's lives are on the lines and only a very young child's testimony is the only thing used in a trial. Lets hope that is not all LE uses as evidence.

Yes, I remember something like that, too! I think it was like 20/20 or Dateline or something like that I think in the late 90s...anyway, I remember they interviewed the parents and asked about bee stings, and if the children have ever been stung. Then they asked the children, and they said they'd never been stung by a bee. But then someone comes in and tells an elaborate story about being stung by a bee and next thing you know a bunch of the children are describing their own non-existent bee-sting stories. A quick google didn't find it for me, but I did find this journal article I sure wish I had access to read!

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime | Protocol

That's one thing I really miss about being in college--free access to online journal articles!


Another interesting article: Testing the Reliability of Child Witnesses

I found a bunch of interesting things by googling "child testimony reliability." There are some studies which seem to indicate children make better eyewitnesses than adults, even, so there's a lot of conflicting schools of thought out there, still, it seems.

 

[flourish]

Thank you, Flourish and Hatfield. You have both pretty much nailed it - at least as far as it can be for the moment. These kids had these idea planted in them by adults and the motive was revenge against this family for trying to get a loved one away from their "religion". Some of the claims as pointed out, are physically impossible, others have left none of the physical evidence they should have. The fact that adults coached the kids to make such untenable claims is a sign of "magical thinking" - often associated with schizophrenia and/or religious occult beliefs. No normal functioning adult would plant such ideas because normal functional adults would realize the impossibly of them.

The big question is why the police laid charges given all of the above. I really really want an answer to that one.

Magical thinking
Magical thinking - Wikipedia

It's interesting you bring that phrase up...my older sister is a counselor and tells me I engage in magical thinking frequently. I've learned to recognize it, at least, but I still struggle somewhat. I was thinking about it, though, and I was raised in a somewhat insular, very religious household. The religion, although accepted now as "mainstream" certainly fits the criterion for a cult, and encourages magical thinking and cognitive dissonance, because otherwise nobody would buy into the incredibly nonsensical beliefs. So I've come to realize that my habit of engaging in that behavior stems primarily from my religious upbringing combined with my natural creativity and vivid imagination.

I'm not saying it's impossible for abuse to have occurred in this case. However, with the facts which have been released, I'm very skeptical and certainly don't believe the needles in the eyes and lifting by the penis stuff. My son had surgery once on his eye, where the specialized pediatric ophthalmologist injected an enzyme into his eye, and then used a laser to do...something to the injection site to close it somehow....my point is, my son literally did have a needle put into his eyeball, by a competent, trained eye surgeon, and guess what---there was still physical evidence visible on his eyeball afterward!! Imagine that...yet in this case we're supposed to believe that these random non-medical people stuck needles into children's eyeballs and nobody knew a thing about it for quite some time?!?!?!? Yeah, no. The children didn't come home with blood upon them or bruising or a freaking hemorrhaging eye?!?!?! Really??? And this other kid was supposedly literally lifted by only his penis? I'm not testing that one out, but I just don't buy it...it sounds totally impossible. And, like, no reports of nightmares or observable behavioral disturbances with theses children after these incidents? When and how was this all disclosed, and to whom? There's just not enough information available, but what is out there just doesn't support a criminal prosecution, IMO. At all.

 

[gpfloor]

TBH I think most of us engage in it to some extent occasionally - every time we praise or curse our "luck"!

Here is one of the original cases. This current case is no different to any of those "ritual abuse " cases from the 1980s and 1990s which this one seems to have inspired.
McMartin preschool trial - Wikipedia

 

[gpfloor]

Day-care sex-abuse hysteria - Wikipedia

 

[BIGDOG8888]

TBH I think most of us engage in it to some extent occasionally - every time we praise or curse our "luck"!

Here is one of the original cases. This current case is no different to any of those "ritual abuse " cases from the 1980s and 1990s which this one seems to have inspired.
McMartin preschool trial - Wikipedia

The reason for some cases of sexual abuse/ occult satanic rituals etc, being exposed and then dismissed as untrue ( for whatever reason ) is
to get the public doubting such things could really be happening, this case about the circus family seems very strange as there’s very little information in the media, but the needle in the eye and lifting up by the penis details I read about here might not of happened exactly as it’s been told, but that doesn’t mean abuse didn’t take place.
Yes children will lie to avoid getting in trouble
( eating those cookies) and to take part in a conversation that’s interesting to them
(bee sting) But if they’ve been abused, hurt, or they’re scared of someone, their behaviour will be
noticeably different to a parent, and if a child’s own parent is planting abuse stories in their heads for their own agenda ( God knows what parent could do such a thing ) they’re sick individuals.
But just because you hear a bizarre story, so outlandish you think it couldn’t possibly be true, think again, blood rituals, sacrificing, sexual abuse etc, is VERY real, cults and secret societies abuse and sacrifice their own children, they’re raised to be abused and to become abusers themselves, there’s plenty of very smart articulate people that have told their story after breaking free from these communities, leaving behind family members, unable to ever go back because they will simply be disposed of. The most
powerful cults involved in such behaviour have very little chance of exposure, they hold positions of authority in society, and have a long reach.
Check out a web page listing all the UK politicians that have been found guilty of sexual abuse of children, it’s gobsmacking, and sacrificing a child only takes a plane ride and a few dollars to pick up a child from a 3rd world country, they’re sold all the time by desperate mothers. This is a sick world, and I’m not of it.