CA - Dr. William Ayres for child molestation, San Mateo, 2007 #1

[believe09]

Yes, they are biologically his. I recall at the first trial he said he moved from Boston to California when his son Robert was "in utero." Gave me the creeps for some reason. He somehow left his wife out of it. He could have said "We moved from Boston to California when my wife was pregnant." Instead he uses the clinical term. He also said he was married in 1963. He was married in 1962.

I don't believe he or anyone else said at the trial "My daughter could not be here." He just said he had a daughter named Barbara and there was a strained pause after that.

Word is that the police found something that Barbara had written when they searched Ayres' home- and word is it was something incriminating about her father.

Wonder why she wasnt called as a witness then?

 

[Missizzy]

Don't assume, though, that "in utero" meant in Solveig's uterus. I would not be surprised, in the least, to learn that these children were not biologically Ayres. I surely could be wrong. I wonder if anyone has ever researched this?

My feathers are certainly not ruffled, ON, by the possibility/theory that Solveig was a coconspirator. All I have to do is look at Silverman's wife. She was found in contempt of court by allowing Silverman to have unsupervised access to their son while awaiting trial, she assisted him in leaving the country, she supported him financially while in Israel, and practices child and adult psychiatry to this very day with full impunity. I believe that she knew full well what Silverman was up to. And I can well imagine what he was doing during his nine years of "tutoring" in Israel. O/T but of great interest to me is that Silverman has been placed in the same prison as my son, who is a young offender and locked up due to a probation violation. My son is gay. My son saw Silverman once when he was quite young and saw Silverman's wife for probably six years. I wonder if they will strike up a friendship coming from the same neighborhood?

I believe that there are some like Ms. Bradley and Ms. Foulk who see the writing on the wall and run. I can't understand why they leave the children behind, however. That causes me to feel deep ill will towards them. You don't grab the children as you exit the burning building?

I also want to be clear that I am not trying to turn this into a gay/straight discussion. It matters not a whit to me which orientation(s) these men are. My whole point is whether these men had set a sort of "approved" smoke screen for their actions. Respected wife, two kids, lovely house, community volunteer work. I have a feeling (but have no evidence) that Ayres would probably shy away from any adult consensual relationship--whether with a male or female. He's attracted to young boys and is so specific in his paraphilia that it becomes a total objectification of the child. He relishes the element of control. I do not find it hard to believe that there was some sort of partnership with Solveig in procuring boys. Nothing would surprise me.

 

[OnbekendeBron]

Nothing would surprise me.

Isn't that the really sad thing in all of this, though.

Nothing surprises me either. Except when things turn out NOT to be twisted. :crazy:

 

[OnbekendeBron]

I don't believe he or anyone else said at the trial "My daughter could not be here." He just said he had a daughter named Barbara and there was a strained pause after that.

I am almost positive that ayres said something very close to "unfortunately she could not be here" at the beginning of his testimony. I have the phrase IN QUOTES in my handwritten notes. I normally only use quotes in my notes when I've deliberately ignored subsequent statements to attempt to accurately record a specific and interesting statement as close to verbatim as possible.

I have a distinct memory of it being somewhat like an aside, or that Weinberg may also have been saying something over the top of him at the time. In fact, I'll print the statements from the transcript below, and you'll see that Weinberg changes the subject immediately after ayres mentions his daughter, and I think that ayres was continuing to talk about her during Weinberg's question. Weinberg always interjects "Okay" when he means: "Shut Up."

I think that the "strained pause" you may remember is because as he introduced his wife and son, they each stood up in turn, looking happy to be with ayres, and there was a definite strained feeling in the air while everyone glanced around to see if Barbara was anywhere to be found.

There is also some other interesting info in his introduction to his family. I believe when ayres says "in utero" he may mean "stillborn," or no longer living, or something along that line, OR he IS referring to Robert, but he's called his son by the wrong name:

Weinberg: You came to San Mateo in 1963?
ayres: 1963.

Q: With your wife?
a: Yes.

Q: And her name is?
a: Solveig s-o-l-v-e-i-g, which is a Norwegian name. And my son, who was in utero, Dave, came along.

Q: Not by choice. And are you still married?
a: Yes.

Q: You have children?
a: Yes.

Q: How many?
a: I have two.

Q: And their names?
a: Robert is the eldest, and Barbara is the younger one.

Q: Okay. And you worked initially for San Mateo County. How long did that last?

 

[believe09]

I would love to see both Solveig and Ayres files at Judge Baker.

 

[OnbekendeBron]

Wonder why she wasnt called as a witness then?

The whole lot of findings (The naked boy books, and whatever this evidence from Barbara is) was not admissible due to interpretations about how the search warrant was meant to apply.

See here: http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=112028

An important clarification to this story: The naked boy books and a manila envelope (we think this is where whatever material there was concerning Barbara was) were in a file cabinet that was inside the police property room at the time that they "found" it. The cabinet was there because it contained the patient records that were seized by the police under warrant. The court decided that they should have had ANOTHER warrant to search the cabinet for other materials. I've heard this one successfully argued both ways, I'm obviously biased in thinking that the books were in police possession, AND they didn't look at the books until after they found victims from the patient files. (I would argue that this is similar to the case where the police go into a house on a drug warrant, and find dead murder victims. Someone IS successfully going to be charged for murder... the dead bodies are NOT poisoned fruit evidence.) But hey... I'm no lawyer.

 

[Mercyneal]

Robert was born in late 1963 and I believe the Ayres left Massachusetts in April or June of 1963. So it had to have been Robert who was in utero. It's weird he called him "Dave." Is it possible the court reporter misheard him?

Missizzy- Robert looks very much like his mother.

 

[believe09]

The whole lot of findings (The naked boy books, and whatever this evidence from Barbara is) was not admissible due to interpretations about how the search warrant was meant to apply.

See here: http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=112028

An important clarification to this story: The naked boy books and a manila envelope (we think this is where whatever material there was concerning Barbara was) were in a file cabinet that was inside the police property room at the time that they "found" it. The cabinet was there because it contained the patient records that were seized by the police under warrant. The court decided that they should have had ANOTHER warrant to search the cabinet for other materials. I've heard this one successfully argued both ways, I'm obviously biased in thinking that the books were in police possession, AND they didn't look at the books until after they found victims from the patient files. (I would argue that this is similar to the case where the police go into a house on a drug warrant, and find dead murder victims. Someone IS successfully going to be charged for murder... the dead bodies are NOT poisoned fruit evidence.) But hey... I'm no lawyer.

Thanks ON-a snip from the article:
Responding to arguments offered Monday, Judge Beth Freeman ruled Thursday morning that jurors will not hear that police found the books — two identified are “The Sex Book” and “Coming of Age: Photographs by Will McBride” — among medical records seized in 2006.
snip

(You can find the book on Amazon-I linked it and an explicit photo which is on the cover came up on this site...)

Um, it is difficult not to read a whole lot into the book of photographs by Will McBride. I think it would not be a stretch to assume it might have been used as a tool during the sexual assaults of the patients.

Just when I think I have wrapped my brain around this case, I get nauseated.

This was not the fruit of a poisoned tree that I can see-I think the prosecutor might have appealed the ruling but probably believed that there was enough evidence that it wasnt worth fighting.

Barbara and Robert, if you are lurking at all, you have my sympathy. It must have been very very confusing to be raised in that household. At a minimum.

 

[believe09]

so I wonder who "Dave" was?

 

[Mercyneal]

If you happened to witness father Ayres and son Robert together, you would see that there is no emotional connection between them whatsoever. Together, they look like very, very distant strangers. I don't think Ayres sees his son as important enough for him to remember his name.

When Robert was at Brown University, he was involved in some sort of sit-in outside the corporate headquarters of some company. Among the other Brown students was Amy Carter. Robert is quoted in the Associated Press story as saying that he was "going to hassle corporate America for years to come."

Perhaps his anger and rebellion towards the establishment and status quo is the closest he could get to rebelling against his arrogant father, who was part of the establishment.

 

[Mercyneal]

Heartbreaking front page story in the New York Times today about the deaf molestation victims of pedophile Wisconsin priest Lawrence Murphy.

It reports that the victims had been alerting authorities since the mid-1950s.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/27/us...consin.html?hp

Excerpt from New York Times today

Young victims of sexual abuse are often so confused, ashamed or traumatized that they wait years to report the violations. Some never say a word. One of the remarkable aspects of the Father Murphy case is that young victims began alerting the authorities in the mid-1950s, when sexual abuse was hardly even a part of the public vocabulary.

Same thing happened in the Ayres case- victims had been coming forward since at least the mid-1960s and no one did anything.

 

[believe09]

Well that did not work out-I tried to link a review from Amazon, but the cover of McBrides book automatically linked as well....

Basically there are reviewers who want the book to be known for what it is, which is a disjointed photo essay of naked boys.

 

[Mercyneal]

The majority of people who wrote reviews of "The Coming of Age" are all pervs and pedophiles from the Man/Boy Love Association. When one or two of the viewers venture to say the photos are inappropriate and , they are attacked as being prudish.

Here's one review from "Gaza Guy" who attacks those who object to the book:


16 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars Brilliant tribute to the lost art of ritual and manhood, May 10, 2006

By Gaza Guy (Washington, DC United States) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Coming of Age (Aperture Monograph) (Hardcover)
One of the reviewers below - interestingly the one with the longest tirade and the most misspelled words - sadly reflects the puritanical revulsion and hypocritical rebuke of so many works of art that involve male nudity. The poor guy actually exposes more of his own internal sexual disorientation than he probably realizes. His psyche is disrobed when he protests that Will McBride's photographic journal is "sexual and the only real purpose would be to get people hot and bothered."

Reviewer C. Greene is obviously a true Son of the South. Shackled with so much sexual repression, he can't help but accuse Will McBride of leading him into temptation. It's really rather funny when you think of it.

C. Greene's accusation that a book's intent is to get people "hot and bothered" says everything about C. Greene's internal world and nothing at all about Will McBride.

 

[Missizzy]

I, too, wonder who Dave is. Is the man's name Robert David or David Robert? Can you discern from looking at the dates of the arrival in San Mateo and Robert's birthdate, if this is indeed the same child? On, you mention that Dave could have been stillborn. What makes you think that? Is Barbara younger or older? Very odd and something that I think must be looked at. And while I'm not in any way disagreeing that Robert looks like his mother, I need to tell you that of all our children, only one looks anything like my husband; our most newly placed foster daughter. We have three birth children and they look very much like me but nothing like their Dad....wait a minute. What if Solveig's children, Robert and Barbara are her biological children but not by Ayres? I can attest to the fact that my birth children are my husband's children. I wonder if Solveig could attest to the fact that Ayres is the biological father? Now, that is certainly something to consider.

The question was brought up as to where pedophilia fits into the evolutionary process. I think Gajdusek was probably wondering the same thing (while he went about his merry way molesting). I'm sure he must have had a theory. Through an evolutionary lens, it might even be correct. There are certainly well respected theories as to why 1 in 9 men are gay. There's a theory that is linked to hunting and gathering and tribal living.

I've always had a privately held thought that pedophiles are "fishing". They try out hundreds of victims and get their thrills. A handful of those victims will be attracted to the lifestyle and follow in the molester's footsteps. So many many people forget (or can't bear to accept) that when we are talking of a case where someone pleads guilty to molesting 2 or 4 children, the actual body count can be in the hundreds.

I posted a thread on Rev. Murphy and while the number 200 seems enormous, imagine what the real number is. Those are just the boys who attended the school for the deaf. What about relatives, classmates, neighbors, other children in the parish? Dr. Bradley is accused of abusing 103. By my accounts he could have had upwards of 10,000 office visits in his practicing years. The reported numbers do not in any way represent the human tally.

 

[Missizzy]

In doing some quick searching, I find the Robert Ayres related to William, listed as Robert E. Ayres. Barbara is listed as Barbara C. Does anyone know where Robert lives now? I see a Robert E. Ayres, aged 46, listed as living with a S. Ayres in Chicago. That age would coincide with the "in utero" statement. I've seen mention that Robert is involved in plays. In what capacity? Does he have children? Does Barbara?

It still doesn't explain who Dave is. Could a man forget his own son's name?

I see these two adults as victims of their father, also, and hope that someday, they'll be able to grasp why we have searched for the truth...as painful as that search is. Until I have proof of culpability, I have empathy for these two.

ETA: I see, in further checking on the Ayres blog, that Robert has directed a play in Chicago, "The Day Patient" and is described as divorced. No mention of children. Mercyneal, so you know if the Ayres have grandchildren? Also do you have the maiden name of Solveig?

 

[Mercyneal]

No, Ayres has no grandchildren. Robert Edmund Ayres was only married a few years. He's been divorced for some time. He lives in Chicago and directs plays when he can. I believe he does other work to pay the bills.

Barbara is not married and does not have children. She lives in California.

 

[Mercyneal]

The William Ayres blog has a video of a talk journalist Victoria Balfour gave in Belmont, California last year on her work on the Ayres case.

The moderator of the talk was former San Mateo Juvenile Judge Patricia Bresee. Bresee sent boys to Ayres and at this talk she apologizes for having done so. She had no idea what Ayres was doing.

http://williamayreswatch.blogspot.com/2010/03/video-blast-from-past-victoria-balfour.html

 

[Missizzy]

Did Solveig go to MIT? I found her on this site:

http://dramashop.mit.edu/archive/1962-63/match.php

This is from December 12-15, 1962 and she's listed under "property crew" for the play, "The Matchmaker". Do we have a birthdate for Robert? Ayres testified that he arrived in San Mateo in 1963. Do we know when? The reason I ask is that I find it almost unbelievable that a woman in late 1962 could have served in a property crew position while visibly pregnant. It just was not done. It would have been "unseemly" and seen as too dangerous. Even 7-8 years later would have been a whole new world.

 

[Mercyneal]

Solveig did not go to MIT. She graduated from the University of Wisconsin. But she was working in Boston at Judge Baker, and MIT is close by. Non MIT students were allowed to join the theater group.

Robert Ayres was not born until late 1963. November or December 1963. So she would not be pregnant in this photo in 1962.
Sorry, talking about her being pregnant gives me an icky feeling

I would prefer to talk about the enormous pain that his many victims are under.

A member of law enforcement told me recently that he thought Ayres' victims number in the four figures.

 

[believe09]

Solveig did not go to MIT. She graduated from the University of Wisconsin. But she was working in Boston at Judge Baker, and MIT is close by. Non MIT students were allowed to join the theater group.

Robert Ayres was not born until late 1963. November or December 1963. So she would not be pregnant in this photo in 1962.
Sorry, talking about her being pregnant gives me an icky feeling

I would prefer to talk about the enormous pain that his many victims are under.

A member of law enforcement told me recently that he thought Ayres' victims number in the four figures.

BBM. I think that is a fair guess. I am trying to figure out why Ayres did not find a way to record his abuse given how completely overtaken he was by this world. I wonder if he has a secret stash anywhere-disposable phones and the like. Did anyone ever check his office for recording equipment?