However, when cross-examined by defense attorney Demosthenes Lorandos, we see two things: first, Long has less-than-sterling credentials to be doing this kind of work, and, second, she is arrogant about it. Take one "tweet" from Callie Starnes of WRBC:
Witness beginning to get agitated as defense asks more ?'s about code of ethics she had to follow when she was a social worker.My sense is that the "expert" witnesses provided by the CAC never have been challenged in court before, at least not in North Georgia. The CAC has been a great one-stop-shopping opportunity for prosecutors, as the place provides everything -- including false or at least misleading testimony -- needed for a conviction. Don't forget that one of their "star" witnesses, Suzi "I Don't Remember" Thorne, does not even have a college degree, and yet is considered by Judge Brian House to be an "expert" witness who should be permitted to give "expert" testimony that could land an innocent person in prison for many years.
Objections continue over defense's questioning tactics. Witness rolling eyes
Witness continues to smirk and laugh.
I have no doubt that Long is shocked and angry that anyone ever would question her abilities and ethics. She, the CAC, and Arnt and Gregor have had the run of the courtroom for many years with their various "molestations" scams. I'm glad that Ms. Craft has an attorney who is able to point out their utter deceit and lack of truthfulness.
[Update]: One of the people commenting on this post just took a "Nosie Rosie" post from Twitter:
Witness (Stacy Long) says children are no more suggestible than adults.It gets even better. This is from Callie Starnes again:
Def asks witness to cite a study that shows children are no more suggestible than adults. She can't.There exists an extensive amount of literature in top-flight journals that says the exact opposite of Long's statement, and for her to utter that in what is supposed (emphasis on "supposed") to be a court of law is astounding. No "expert" in the interviewing of children would say such a thing, and for the prosecution -- and the court -- to declare her to be an "expert" witness is beyond the pale.
From what I have seen from the CAC, and from what real experts have told me, not one of their witnesses has been shown to be credible. They see their job as to give the prosecution what it wants, as opposed to telling the truth. However, given the lack of education, the lack of accreditation, the lack of credentials, and the lack of research by the CAC "witnesses," I safely can say that their testimony, as far as TRUTH is concerned, is worse than worthless. It is outright dishonest.
29 comments:
Thank you for the information you are providing about the Craft trial. I believe there are more sinister forces at work here than just dirty politicians and lawyers. Hoping and praying for truth.
Sad that she is now a school counselor!!
Nosie_Rosie
#TonyaCraft Lorandos: Wasn't that a suggestive question (you asked the girl?) Stacy Long: "So what?!" That's her testimony.
This has to take the cake. Not only does she not care that she was leading with her questions, but she doesn't care that it was pointed out for her in court. Of course I'm sure Judge House will just overrule the defense when they try to have her testimony thrown out just like he did yesterday with the other advocate who failed to document critical information.
Another fact to ponder here, developed during trial testimony. At least two of the state's "expert" witnesses, the ones that interviewed these children, now have different jobs. Even during a very poor economic climate, I would anticipate true experts to remain in or advance their positions.
Well there you go, "true experts"!!!
Yes, intresting how neither of the "witnesses" have remained in thier prior job positions.
If you understood how a CAC is operated you would understand them seeking more stable employment. They depend on grants and donations for funding. Plus after hearing so many stories of abuse it tends to wear on you after a while.
Recent tweet:
nosie_rosie: #TonyaCraft Witness says children are no more suggestible than adults.
This is BS, can/will the defense be able to put on their own experts to testify about suggestibility of children. What about experts on the day care witch hunts and how the children were manipulated?
Well that is a bald face lie, children are much more suggestible than an adult.
I wonder how many of the interviewers (or so called experts as they are called in this case) told these children to think real hard and picture in their mind, or imagine the scenario, prior to filming the interviews??? The reason for my question is that children of that age aprox 5 years old are rarely able to distinguish between what they imagine or what they see in their heads and reality!!! This fact has been studied and this practice is prohibited due to the fact that it creates false memories. It is similar to a child having nightmares about a monster in the closet. The parent can go into the closet 1,000 times to show them there is no monster in the closet, but the child has seen the monster and insists that this is repeated everynight. I think it's called the mouse trap theory.
Another thought regarding this is perhaps the parnets of thses girls talked to them at legnth about the abuse, resulting in the girls TRUELY BELIEVING it happened.
Sorry I rambled a little, but I would love to know/ have been a fly on the wall in the days prior to the interviews. One mother admitted on the stand that she questioned her child after being advised not to!!!
I was (male on male) sexually assaulted as a child, when I was just one year older than the children in this "case".
48 years have passed and I can remember every detail of my assault. Where, when, what I was doing, wearing... every one! I remember telling my parents, the police showing up at my school, and the line up where I identified the individual responsible.
I could talk about it then, I can talk about it now.
When sexual child abuse does occur, it is a horrid thing, utterly reprehensible. In the vast, vast majority of abuse cases, there are also hard facts, that do not need to be drawn out of victims.
I see nothing of that here.
Dan, thank you for your comments and God Bless you for sharing. That is what so many of us have been saying, there are no hard facts, there is no history.
Isn't it amazing that so many actual child abuse victims or family members of victims are on here speaking out for Tonya. If anyone would want to see a child molestor convicted, it would be them.
I am just wondering but does anyone else not think it is odd that girls this age have come up with a boyfriend/girlfriend game. The next thing that stricks me odd is that the game was about touching. One of these children have seen way too much of something somewhere to even come up with this game
If anyone would want to see a child molestor convicted, it would be them.
Sure they would but Tonya Craft is not a child molestor.
One of these children have seen way too much of something somewhere to even come up with this game
Ever watch television?
That was my point, she has a lot of support from those who have been molested or have a family member who has been molested. Of all people, if they can see this as the sham that it is, everyone should!! I completely believe her to be innocent!
By the way, another big liar and I have personal experience here, is on the witness stand. He doesn't mind stretching the truth to suit his purpose either.
That's why he/she said that. There are so many people out here who have been molested, inappropriately touched and/or raped, that truly believe in her innocence. Me included.
Dan, you are right on about remembering. Thank you for sharing as it does help people see that just because someone is accused, it doesn't make it real. Anyone, no matter how young, can remember.
I'm not sure if anyone has brought this up, but in the local schools, the children (for the past 6 years), have been offered the "good touch, bad touch" program. So these girls, if their parents opted for them to take it, would know what molestation is, what to look for and what to do if it happened. It just adds another doubt in my mind that it did. Hopefully the defense team will look into this further.
Skipping past the "education, ...accreditation, ...credentials, ...research" problems, I think of how it would have been if I was questioned by any I trusted, a warm person, when I was a kid.
I imagine my grandmother asking a few times 'is there anything you want to tell me", and after not being able to tell on myself, the next 10 would be something like 'did you call your brother a name'.
I'd just say yes, knowing grandma prolly wouldn't spank me nor take me to a spa after a few of her interrogations, and then I'd just move along to playing again - interrogation over.
Grandma's objective included me admitting mistakes, whether or not they were mine to claim, as there was a household crime to solve.
If any person had kept interrogating me then I'd have just given in to get it over with. The interrogator would reach their objective and I my own - to get it over with.
In Alabama, they let the CAC "expert" testify that children usually do not lie and recantations really mean they are just scared. This is the only time the DA can bolster the credibility of a witness. One "expert" said he had interviewed almost 2000 kids and not one ever gave a false statement about abuse happening.
In another case, the CAC brought the child in 4 separate times, until she finally said she had been abused.
**
Please pass this link along to all in the media you can, especially metro and national media sources:
The Tonya Craft Case
**
I have passed on to CNN and to the Atlanta Journal so far. I will pass on to others after dinner.
Of all the testimony today this was the most shocking to me.
Reported by WRCBtv
Update 1:50pm
Lorandos: Wasn't that a suggestive question (you asked the girl?) Stacy Long: "So what?!"
Defense attorney asks interviewer if she was asking girls "repeating" questions. Stacy Long says she was "clarifying".
Update 1:40pm
Dr Lorandos reviewing transcript of videotaped interviews with Stacy Long.
It is simply inconceivable to me that a child abuse "expert" would say that. Under any circumstances.
This combined with her earlier and later testimony I don't think any reasonable person could conclude that she was concerned about getting at the truth.
Today was another genius. Here is my favorite exchange...
Well, you told the jury that you were familiar with the Sam Stone Study, didn’t you? How does bias happen in this study? Where was it published?” he demanded. “I don’t remember,” was her reply.
“If I gave you a copy of the Sam Stone Study would it help refresh your recollection?” “I don’t know, I can’t recall.”
“Well, why then were you so willing to tell the prosecutor you were familiar with the study when you can’t even recall what the study was about?” There was no response from the witness.
She was done...
All I can say is "WOW"! That is just crazy that this is the best the prosecution has for experts. My kids are better at BSing than that. Maybe the experts need to go to acting school.
Will the defense put their own experts on the stand explain to the jury the conclusions that were reached by the Sam Stone study along with numerous others? I just googled the Sam Stone study and it was very enlightening.
I look for the prosecution to try to disqualify all of the defense's expert witnesses, and for House to uphold the objections.
House wants to engineer a conviction. He already knows that the guilty verdict would be overturned on appeal, but that the appeal would take several years, so Arnt and Gregor would reach their goal of getting Ms. Craft into prison.
In other words, there is method to the madness, but it is immoral madness.
I am surprised the completely inappropriate conduct that is allow by these "witnesses" who present themselves as professionals of our community. Also, it's very saddening to see individuals like this in a community you work so hard for.
i agree it is very sad to see this mayberry mentality in a community i live and work in, pay my taxes in and finally that i vote in! this has been extremely enlightning for me!!! however, I am still very ashamed to be connected to this unprofessionalism. The CAC is definately not a place I would hold any type of stock in or ever go to!
Post a Comment