The Accusation and Conviction Machine, Part IV

In my final post on this series, I will lay out again how both the incentives provided in the sexual misconduct accusation machine and the attitudes of modern American prosecutors, along with a "Progressive" news media, have resulted in "witch hunts" and other examples of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct that have landed scores of innocent people into prison. Most "Progressives" love to think of themselves as intelligent and sophisticated, and not capable of repeatedly falling for the same nonsense, but the facts speak otherwise.

I suspect when Tonya Craft first started searching the Internet for information about being accused by child "welfare" agencies of child abuse and child molestation, she was stunned. So am I. There are thousands of websites out there including those run by lawyers and law firms, which means that there are a heck of a lot of people being charged with these crimes. For example, here is one with Dr. Demosthenes Lorandos explaining how to protect yourselves.

It is utterly tragic that Americans constantly have to be on the lookout to protect themselves against false child abuse/molestation charges, but thanks to the "Progressive" federal government, that is our lot in the 21st Century. What began with Walter Mondale's bid to "save the children" has turned into a legal hell that is comparable to the worst things that Stalin and Mao did to their people.

There are two things driving this holocaust of false allegations: (1) federal money, and (2) federal guidelines for states that want federal money. Of course, all of this was made possible by an ultra-expansionist view of the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which "Progressives" believe is necessary for all sorts of good things to happen here.

Tracking the money is difficult, given that states and localities don't advertise how much money they receive from the federal government for each case in which authorities "determine" that someone was molested or abused. Obviously, we are dealing with a huge moral hazard, as the incentive to determine that children are abused or molested is huge because there really is no downside.

Why? The various state laws (which come from federal guidelines) proscribe punishment for people who do not report abuse that they allegedly see, but there are no legal punishments for making false allegations of child abuse or sexual misconduct. Furthermore, once an allegation is made, no matter how transparently false it might be, nonetheless authorities MUST investigate the matter as though it were true.

(Tonya Craft is suing a number of individuals plus Catoosa County for the ordeal they put her through with lying and false allegations. However, people like Sandra Lamb, Sherri Wilson, Joal and Sarah Henke, and Suzi Thorne won't be facing any criminal charges, despite the fact that all of them openly committed perjury during their trial testimony. Likewise, the people of the Children's Advocacy Center don't have to worry about having to pay for their lies and criminal conduct by losing their freedom.)

By setting into motion a whole process that is based upon the assumption that all the allegations of abuse/molestation are true, the federal government guarantees that people will be falsely accused, and I can say with confidence that few people in the government really care. Since they know that THEY won't be accused, and that they can intervene to save their friends (even if those friends actually are guilty), they could care less about the innocent.

Making things worse, according to attorney Paul G. Stuckle, is the fact that most wrongly-accused people really believe that the police and child "protective" workers simply want the truth. He writes:

Rule No. 1: Nothing an accused can say or do will convince a childsaver (Child Protective Service, child advocacy prosecutor, police investigator) that the abuse did not occur. NOTHING!

Rule No. 2: Talking to Child Protective Services or the police investigator, or anyone without an attorney present is the single worst thing a wrongfully accused person can do.

Rule No. 3: In most cases an experienced attorney will not allow you to talk to Child Protective Services or the police or give a statement. The attorney knows whatever you say will be used against you.

The violation of the above three rules by those falsely accused is commonplace. An innocent person believes sanity will intervene at some point, and decides to cooperate fully with the police and Child Protective Services. The accused gives written statements and videotaped statements to CPS and the police. In addition, the accused talk on the phone to detectives and caseworkers. They talk in the investigators offices without knowing whether they are being recorded. They often talk themselves into a corner that is extremely difficult to ever get out of.

Unfortunately, Child Protective Services and the police are not interested in conducting a fair and thorough investigation. The accused who walks into the child advocacy center without an experienced attorney to “tell their side of things” or “clear this all up” is doing exactly what the authorities want. The child savers know what they are doing. At this meeting they will obtain real or implied admissions and circumstances presenting opportunity for abuse coming from the accused’s own mouth.

It gets worse. Continue reading to find exactly how these people work, and how they manipulate the conversation to where literally anyone can be falsely accused:

The Child Protective Service investigator will start off by asking questions that appear to be innocuous but are intentional set up questions. The investigator may ask an alleged perpetrator if they have ever given their child a bath or changed a diaper. The accused will answer “Yes” as that is a normal parental function. Then the investigator will move in for the kill. The next questions will focus on other instances in which the alleged perpetrator has touched the genital areas of the child.

For example, the investigator may ask if you have ever touched your child’s bottom or genital area. If the accused says “No”, the next question will be whether you have ever wiped your child’s bottom after changing a diaper. This will be followed by whether you have ever applied medicine or a lotion for diaper rash. After the accused says “Yes”, the investigator will become more aggressive. “Are you now are admitting to touching your child’s genital area?”. The accused, knowing that any contact was done without sexual intent and solely for personal hygiene reasons is confused. The accused may say, “No, not in the manner that you are describing”. The investigator will follow up by saying, “ Are you now denying touching your child’s genital area?” The follow up questions will be to establish opportunity for abuse, such as: “Are you ever alone with your child? Have you given baths while alone with the child? “ Applied medication to your child without any one else around ? What about the date of the allegation, isn’t it true that you were alone with your child at that time?”

The falsely accused now will face an official investigative report which will read like this:

Alleged perpetrator at first denied any sexual contact with child, but then after questioning admitted such contact. When this inconsistency was pointed out by the investigator, the perpetrator attempted to limit admission of contact by stating that same was done “only while giving baths and applying medications”. Investigator finds alleged perpetrators answers to be inconsistent, evasive, and untruthful.

After observing prosecutor Chris "Alberto-Facebook" Arnt tell jurors that when Tonya Craft put medicine on the bottom of her daughter (when the child had a rash), that was a "bad touch," the previous section makes sense as to the attitudes of the police and prosecution. Now, I am sure that Arnt has done the same with his own children, but he is protected from such accusations, yet had authorities wanted to charge him with child molestation, they easily could have done it, using the same tactics that Arnt and Len "The Man" Gregor used. However, we can be assured that Arnt and Gregor never will have to face the same tactics they use on other people.

The problem is that authorities have the incentive to charge people with molestation even if they know or strongly suspect that the charges are false. Remember, there is no downside for those who bring false charges, and there is money and fame, as the press will declare anyone who goes after evil child molesters to be "heroic." Furthermore, as we saw with Channel 9, which sent reporters to Tonya's neighborhood in order to scream, "A CHILD MOLESTER LIVES HERE!!" people accused are considered guilty until proven...guilty. Stuckle writes:

What should you do once an allegation has been made?

"I'm innocent. This is crazy. If I talk to them and explain it will go away." This is the initial feeling of the wrongfully accused. They have done nothing wrong and therefore there should be no adverse consequences. Those in authority will quickly recognize their innocence, the mistake, the overreaction, and it will all go away.

For the self-proclaimed child savers though, no mistakes are ever made. "Of course the accused will deny it. Who among us would admit to being a child molester? Children do not lie. Adults lie. Molesters lie. You are lying." This is the mind-set of those who will prosecute you. Child protective services caseworkers and prosecutors believe the case is over once the child makes an outcry of abuse and that outcry is subsequently substantiated during the videotaped interview. No other evidence is necessary for them to submit the case to a grand jury. No physical evidence of abuse. No medical evidence of abuse. Nothing.

Now they may try to get such evidence. However, in their minds a failure to obtain it does not undermine their conviction that abuse has occurred. Hymen still intact? Well the hymen does not have to be broken in order for abuse to occur, or for digital penetration. Lack of semen? Well, of course, this offense occurred over the course of years and the child did not make an outcry immediately after the incident. Lack of substantiating witnesses? No matter, molesters work behind closed doors, in private, when no one else is around to witness. Lack of criminal record for the accused? The accused is a child molester, he is interested in secretly abusing children, not in committing adult crimes. Has the accused pass a polygraph test? Those are not admissible because a savvy adult can manipulate such tests.

What one has to understand is that the views of the "child protectors" come from the "experts" and, of course, federal agencies, and the federal government NEVER is wrong (at least when the "correct" people are in charge). Thus, it is rare indeed that a person charged with child molestation does not go to prison, and I am sure that Ms. Craft understood that point, as well as did Arnt and Gregor, who were laughing and smirking at Ms. Craft when she came into the courtroom to hear the verdict. (Of course, the Dishonest Duo was in full pity party mode in the infamous Channel 9 love fest, and the smirks were gone from our heroes who claimed to have been victims of a vicious defense led by Tonya Craft and her ruthless attorneys.)

Few Americans wish to admit or even to contemplate that this country no longer has a "justice" system. It is an accusation and conviction machine that once in a long while produces an outcome that is semi-compatible with justice. We no longer can count on police and prosecutors to be honest, as I suspect most cops, most "child protection" agents, and most prosecutors would just as soon convict an innocent person as a guilty one, just as long as there is a conviction.

No free society can withstand the kind of assault on truth that has accompanied the Mondale Act, the Violence Against Women Act, and the two Victims of Child Abuse acts. I suspect that we are left with three classes of people in this country: (1) those who have been accused of child molestation, (2) those who are going to be accused of child molestation, and (3) those who either make the accusations of child molestation against others or are protected from being charged because of their legal and political connections.