Tonya Craft: Looking at the Evidence: The Prosecution's "Conspiracy Theory"

One of the current themes with the prosecution is this: The defense is alleging a huge "conspiracy" involving families, the prosecutors, the CAC, and, of course, the children, all out to get poor Tonya Craft. According to Len Gregor and Chris Arnt, the defense has been engaging in bad faith by insinuating that the prosecution has been goading witnesses into not telling the truth.

Actually, the prosecution has been goading witnesses into not telling the truth, so I'm not sure where the claims of bad faith really lie. Nevertheless, let us look at this "conspiracy" angle, because while no one on the defense has alleged the ridiculous conspiracy theory as caricatured by the prosecutors, nonetheless, in the legal term, a conspiracy is exactly what we have.

Now, did all of the parties to this prosecution, from Sandra Lamb to Joal Henke to the children to the prosecutors gather together in a really big room, with Brian House calling the meeting together with a declaration: We are here to falsely accuse Tonya Craft of child molestation? Of course not. It is quite rare that any conspiracy like that ever exists.

However, what we have had has been a group of people whose agendas have dovetailed, and THAT is good enough for a conspiracy, at least legally-speaking. (Under federal law, the standards for "conspiracy" are so lax that Brian House's eye contact with Arnt and Gregor in the courtroom would be legal evidence of a conspiracy, and federal prosecutors have managed to get convictions for less.)

Sandra Lamb wanted to be, well, Sandra Lamb, and Sherry Wilson wanted revenge for Tonya's recommendation her daughter be held back in kindergarten. Joal and Sarah Bass Henke wanted to take custody of the children of Joal and Tonya, and both were willing to lie for it. The various Children's Advocacy Center "interviewers" wanted to be important and there was Mondale Act and Annie E. Casey Foundation money to be had. Arnt and Gregor wanted to get another feather in their caps, and Brian House wanted to look like a "tough on crime" judge.

In other words, there was something in it for everyone, and it might even have worked had not Tonya Craft herself stood up for her own innocence. To put it mildly, her failure to play the good victim has enraged the parties favoring the State of Georgia, but in the end, despite the demonizing she has received nightly from the clueless reporters at Channel 9 (and I hope all decent people will boycott that sorry news operation for eternity), she has won the hearts of the good people.

For example, after she gave her testimony on Monday, Dr. Nancy Aldridge told Tonya she supported her admonitions of innocence. Given that Dr. Aldridge is the Gold Standard in understanding sexually abused children and the adults that abuse them, this was not only a major personal victory for Tonya, but also a massive rebuke to the prosecution.

(Because of the gag order, Dr. Aldridge cannot make a public statement about the case, but you can bet she will when this trial is over. In fact, others will make public statements, and that is going to spell a lot of trouble for many of the characters who have been part of the prosecution's "team.")

As for the "conspiracy," all that was needed was for all parties to push on as though none of them could be wrong. That they spend a year badgering children, implanting false memories through abusive interrogation techniques, and, when all else failed, giving them a script to recite, tells us what we need to know about the prosecutors.

If there was a "conspiracy," it was the Lambs, the Wilson, the McDonalds, Joal and Sarah Bass Henke, the staff of the CAC, the prosecutors, Channel 9, and Judge House joining together to help abuse three young girls, to use them in a most disgusting and reprehensible manner in order to use them as a vehicle to destroy as many human lives as possible. No, they did not dream up the entire scenario at the beginning; they took it one step at a time, but when you look back, you can connect the dots very easily.

Contra Gregor and Arnt, no traditional "conspiracy" is needed. All that has been needed was for this cast of rogues, scoundrels and perjurers to be close enough together to where their own lack of judgment, their arrogance, and their own conniving personalities could intertwine.

So, while Gregor believes he really is clever when he pulls out his "conspiracy" theories, just as he thinks he is clever when he gives us the "believe the children" arguments, in the end he is nothing more than another sleazy prosecutor willing to pull any trick to win. Men like Gregor care nothing about right and wrong; they just want to win at all costs, and how many innocent lives are destroyed in the balance means nothing to them.

With Dr. Aldridge having flat out declared that their case is based upon falsehoods, Arnt and Gregor should have the decency to give it up and to drop charges. Instead, they want to continue to run toward the cliff, caring not about the consequences of their actions.

People like that should not be prosecutors; they should not hold a law degree or a law license. They should be cleaning the toilets of their innocent victims with their tongues.