Thursday, September 2, 2010

Who Is Holly Kittle? Part II

My earlier post on Holly Kittle apparently has struck a nerve with some people in the LMJC, with one of Kittle's supporters writing:
Mr. Slanderson,
You continue to be both judge and jury for those invovled (sic) in these cases. You talk about the Bible as if you may know it but you tend to judge others more than any other person I have had the displeasure of listening rant their nonsense. You have found your 15 minutes of fame and are now running with it acting as your (sic) are the swift justice to save North Georgia and all "innocent" child molesters (because your logic seems to believe their [sic] is no such thing as child molestation, maybe you are a child molester and thats (sic) why you have this strong view on the topic, yet I feel you have crossed a line with your latest blog. I hope God judges you as harshly as you judge others.
The point that Kittle's supporters are making if this: if someone is accused of being a child molester, then the person is automatically guilty and anyone who disagrees is doing so because that person also is a child molester. This is what passes for "law and justice" in Kittleworld.

(Important: I have concentrated on three child molestation cases in the LMJC, Tonya Craft, James Combs, and Brad Wade, even though there have been others. The reason is twofold: first, I cannot deal with every case, and, second, I believe that some of the other cases are legitimate. The ones I have emphasized have featured either contradictory or utterly implausible testimony, prosecution-suborned perjury, "expert" prosecution witnesses who should not be permitted inside a courtroom, and misconduct by prosecutors and judges. Unfortunately, Kittle's supporters have translated that into my being a child molester.)

The question is this: Why am I featuring Kittle and why am I speaking out so harshly against her? My sense is that Kittle and her friends believe I am treating her unjustly, but in this situation, justice seems to be in the eye of the beholder. I believe strongly that Kittle's behavior during her cross-examination in during the Tonya Craft trial reflected both ignorance of how her job should be carried out and arrogance that she seemed to believe that no one ever should question her.

Furthermore, by publicly approving the comments in Chris Arnt's Facebook forum when he attacked Tonya Craft and her defense, Kittle not only acted unprofessionally but also was guilty of misconduct for someone in her line of work. That she was nasty, arrogant, and haughty during her testimony only confirms to me that Kittle, like so many others in the LMJC, believes that the law only applies to those who are not part of the "injustice" system. In a real court of law, she would not be permitted to testify at all, at least as an "expert."

Why do I believe her to be incompetent? First, as I will point out in this post, her interview with Sandra Lamb's daughter on, quite appropriately, April Fool's Day, 2009, violated all standards of forensic interviewing and NEVER should have been entered into evidence as "proof" that Tonya Craft had molested anyone.

Second, Kittle admitted during her testimony that she did not keep current on literature, and then later told Arnt (on re-direct) that she had been reading up-to-date materials. However, when asked by Dr. Demosthenes Lorandos the titles of what she supposedly had been reading, Kittle had no recollection. This is not someone who actually is trying to find the truth; this is someone who believes her job is to try to fix a case for the prosecution, and people like that have no problem with fudging the truth or even outright lying (since they know they won't be charged with perjury).

For the sake of length, I will not include the transcript of Kittle's interview with Lamb's daughter, but it is available here, and the interview and the comments that I wrote afterward (with help from an experienced analyst not connected with the Craft case) put the whole thing into perspective.

What the child told Kittle was absolutely preposterous, yet Kittle was all ears. However, I did not point out in that article that Kittle violated an important protocol in the forensic interviewing of young children: she left the room during the interview, not once, but twice.

In the Chattanoogan's account of Kittle's testimony, we have this gem:
The young child, six years old at the time of the alleged incident, told the interviewer that Ms. Craft had inserted all of her fingers in her ‘privates’ and one finger in her rear. The defense would later question the physical possibilities of this happening. The witness told the defense counsel that she had never considered that possibility. (Emphasis mine)
So, here is an "expert" who never considers the possibility that a "hand rape" such as what was described was even physically possible, and if it actually happened, why there was not severe damage to the child's private parts. Instead, Kittle acted like a stenographer while claiming to be a well-trained "forensic interviewer."

Likewise, I suppose that when Kittle interviewed the two boys who are claiming that Mr. Combs molested them in a classroom, it never occurred to her that since the room was full of children, perhaps others might have witnessed such a scene. Why didn't a bunch of children come forward? While I don't have access to the transcript of that interview, nonetheless I have no doubt that Kittle was both incompetent and dishonest, seeing her job as helping Buzz Franklin's office railroad Mr. Combs into prison.

After the trial, Kittle gave an interview to WDEF-TV that demonstrated her own arrogance:
Holly Kittle says, "I do not go into an interview searching for anything. In fact, I go into an interview hoping that this has not happened."

Holly Kittle is a forensic interviewer for the Children's Advocacy Center and interviewed one of Tonya Craft's accusers about a year after the allegations came out.

She says she's trained to the Children's Advocacy of Georgia standards. Kittle says she asks the kids open ended questions, not leading or suggestive ones like Craft's defense suggested.

Kittle says, "I felt like I was personally attacked, but my interview and my job was minimally attacked."

Kittle says she keeps and open mind and even looks into an alternative hypothesis.

Kittle says, "I know how to do my job, and I know that I was trained to do my job, and I do my job to the best of my ability."
So, even to QUESTION what clearly was a sub-standard "forensic interview" was to personally attack Kittle. Yet, in doing research for an article on the Craft case, Kittle's interview stood out (as did the rest of the CAC interviews, including those by Stacy Long and Suzi Thorne) as how NOT to interview children.

Believe it or not, I am not motivated by a personal animosity toward Holly Kittle, although I will say openly I have nothing but contempt for her and her CAC and LMJC colleagues. Instead, I am attacking the quality of her work and the fact that she is part of a machine that seeks to destroy people who clearly are innocent of the crimes of which they are accused.

Kittle, because of her job, has the power to help destroy innocent lives. However, I get the sense that she really enjoys the influence and "prestige" that being a "forensic interviewer" brings. Because the consequences of destroying innocent lives are so great, I believe that someone must speak out when people like Kittle are acting in an unprofessional and haughty manner and promoting false testimony instead of the truth. That is what I am doing, and I don't care if some people in North Georgia don't like it.


Cyril said...

I can say that I know Bill, and he's not a child molester. But that aside, the real issue is whether someone can be a nice friend of yours and still not be competent at her job. Is it possible for someone to not understand or accept that she is not functioning up to standards? I deal with many people who struggle with coming to grips with their inadequacies, it's called "denial" and it is the fruit of "indwelling sin." (Rom 7)

I don't begrudge anyone making mistakes and suffering from denial; we all do it. The problem is when those mistakes result in serious injustice or injury. This is why we expect perfection from our brain surgeon but not our hairdresser.

Ms. Kittle may be a wonderful friend to some of you out there. But I have to tell you, as a counselor who is NOT a forensic interviewer, I would NEVER have conducted an interview the way that I read that Ms. Kittle did. In my mind, she blew it. Thank goodness the jury saw it too.

MikeZPurdue said...

In their defense, the only thing they can do is use the sole weapon they have in their arsenal: suggest that you might be a child molester (because you're defending people accused of child molestation.) Such childish behavior, reminiscent of the childlike behaviors they exhibited on the witness stand, giggling and rolling their eyes.

You are fighting the good fight, and truth and justice is on your side. Thank you for exposing these people to the light of day. These people need to learn that they are there to seek the truth, NOT to support the prosecutor.

AND they also need to learn that it's not okay to commit perjury on the witness stand even if they're convinced the accused is guilty, the end does NOT justify the means. It's a criminal act to lie on the witness stand. It's not all about winning convictions -- it's about truth and justice.

KC Sprayberry said...

Thank you, Bill, for your reminder of an interview that sounded more like who's on first. Once again, I had the sense of a child following a script but rather badly, and doing so to please an adult and/or many adults. I believe at some point during the trial, one of the prosecution's cheerleaders made the statement that of course, Tonya Craft was guilty since these little girls had no other way to learn about sex like they did. I'm wondering now if those children didn't learn about these actions from their own parents and those charged with protecting the public. The interview I just read again certainly suggests that. I realize children involved in these types of cases must be interviewed about how the events happened, but the way these interviews were conducted makes me wonder if any of these people actually realize they're the ones doing the abuse through their methods. None of them use a lick of common sense in their rush to judgment and trial. When caught with their pants down, they back into a corner and act like the trapped rats they are - snapping at any and all who have dared to criticize their methods. Keep going. The only child molesters I see in this whole process are those accusing others of the act to cover up their own inadequacies.

Doc Ellis said...

Dr Anderson,

I am looking forward to your next post about this Fishy Kittle.

I expect prostituters to to assault you by accusing you in court of the crimes of which they have accused Craft and Combs, and for which they falsely jailed Wade.

I hope they fail to jail Combs. I expect them to get away with trying to railroad him.

I expect the folks who vote for judges and district attorneys in LMJC to reinstate the incumbents regardless of incumbents' criminal conduct. I hope otherwise, though.


Anonymous said...

Some of the defendants will argue that the cause of action against them should be dropped because they have no power over what statements are allowed in court. Michael Crowe recent appeal clearly refutes that.

The court reasoned that harm only arises when a coerced statement is admitted in court, whether during a trial or pretrial proceeding. Thus, “it cannot be said that a police officer is the proximate cause of such a violation . . . [because] it is the prosecutor, not the police officer, who decides to introduce and actually introduces the statement into evidence. Moreover, . . . it is the trial judge who ultimately determines whether the statement will be admitted.” Id. at 1091. This conclusion is foreclosed by our decision in Stoot. See 2009 WL 2973229, at *13-*14.

The district court’s reasoning would effectively bar any § 1983 action for a violation of the Self-Incrimination Clause. A police officer will never “actually introduce[ ] the statement into evidence” and prosecutors and judges have absolute immunity for any act performed in their prosecutorial and judicial capacities. See Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978) (judicial immunity); Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976) (prosecutorial immunity). Such a rule is in direct conflict with “[t]he purpose of § 1983 [which] is to deter state actors from using the badge of their authority to deprive individuals of their federally guaranteed rights.” McDade v. West, 223 F.3d 1135, 1139 (9th Cir. 2000). If a plaintiff could never bring a § 1983 action for a violation of the Self-Incrimination Clause, the statute would be robbed of its purpose.

Further, in the context of § 1983 claims, we have explained that “[t]he requisite causal connection can be established not only by some kind of direct personal participation in the deprivation, but also by setting in motion a series of acts by others which the actor knows or reasonably should know would cause others to inflict the constitutional injury.” Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740, 743-44 (9th Cir. 1978). When a police officer questions a suspect, he knows that any statement the suspect gives may be used to prosecute that suspect.

A fortiori, he knows that an obtained confession will almost certainly be used to prosecute. Thus, while the officer may not actually introduce the statement into court, coercing the confession “set[s] in motion a series of acts by others which the [officer] knows or reasonably should know would cause” the statement to be introduced. See Stoot, 2009 WL 2973229, at *14 (“Like the other circuits to address this question, we conclude that, absent unusual circumstances, a police officer eliciting incriminating statements from a criminal suspect ‘could reasonably have foreseen that a coerced confession would be used against [the suspect] and would lead to [the suspect’s] detention.’ ” (quoting Higazy v. Templeton, 505 F.3d 161, 177 (2d Cir. 2007) (alterations in original))). The defendants were unquestionably a proximate cause of the violations of Michael and Aaron’s Fifth Amendment rights.


Kerwyn said...

I have a friend who recently began medical school. She called me to bemoan the grading standards. In all medical/nursing schools, the grading standards are tough. 98% is a B, 90% is failing.

My comment back to her was as follows, "so if 90 should be an A, then you get to be wrong 10% of the time"? Needless to say, we as medical professionals, cannot be wrong 10% of the time because if we are wrong, someone dies.

How can Georgia have any lower standards for forensic interviewers than we have as medical professionals. If they are wrong, the end result is the same, someone loses their life (prison). But to make it more heinous, the child loses their life too. Those children face a LIFETIME of grief and horror because of the arrogance of a few.

I have found through researching this case, there are literally NO legal or professional standard requirements other than what the individual CAC's wish to impose in their hiring. No educational standards, no continuing education standards and no legal Standards of Practice laws such as the rest of us deal abide by.

This is a horror! That any group of quasi or self professed professionals can hold the life of another human being in their hands and can do it with a high school diploma and a 5 day class is beyond reason. Granted, Kittle has a degree in Anthropology which, as we all know, has everything to do with pediatric forensic interviewing right?

As a professional (card carrying, dues paying,nationally certified, state board tested, continuing education up the wazoo participant), Kittle and the CAC of Catoosa county, offend me at the deepest level.

Anonymous said...

I said at the beginning and till the end, These people will do any thing to get a name it and they will do it. Kittle is a JOKE and they know it, but they will still use her because she does what they say.One day when someone goes crazy and gets them all for something they did not do then they will see what we are talking about. WE have got to get them out of there.. Great Job Mr. Anderson, Keep it coming..

Jerri Lynn Ward said...

I hold the prosecutors more responsible for using someone like this as an expert witness. They ARE licensed and they are to do justice, not rack up victories. As long as prosecutors do not require competence of their experts, the Kittle's of the world will climb onto the gravy train created by CAPTA.

After all, given the fact that she is so proud of her incompetence and her propensity to act like a child whilst in professional circumstances, what employer would hire her other than those who suck off the teet of government largesse?

Anonymous said...

"After all, given the fact that she is so proud of her incompetence and her propensity to act like a child whilst in professional circumstances, what employer would hire her other than those who suck off the teet of government largess?"


Those who can, do; those who can't get gubmint "jobs"

kbp said...

Bill wrote:
“I have concentrated on three child molestation cases in the LMJC, Tonya Craft, James Combs, and Brad Wade, even though there have been others. The reason is twofold: first, I cannot deal with every case, and, second, I believe that some of the other cases are legitimate. “

The guilty have same rights as do the innocent, which is an important factor when seeking the truth.

The end result of using these “experts’ could easily be that REAL victims could be left without seeing justice in their cases should the corrupt practices of the LMJC end up permitting the guilty to go free

…while they also actually create victims where none existed.

The refresher on that interview reminded of how Saundra carried notes with her to testify. She still couldn’t keep the timeline in order even using those notes. That Kittle interview sure resembles mommy’s work!

Q.A. said...

Dear Kittle-Supporters,

This is what would make the Craft-Supporters shut-up:

Shut the Better-Destroy-1000-Innocent-Than-Not-Destroy-1-Guilty Party.

Anonymous said...

What really gets to me is the lack of willingness to learn by Kittle and the rest of the herd. It's as if she has the tablets from Moses. If you think you know everything already, then that's as good as an admission that you are unwilling to learn and incapable of growing. It might be different if her opinions were based on hard studies and valid research. But she couldn't even recognize that hand rape was not possible. In other words her skill set is not even in the first level of Bloom's taxonomy, basic knowledge. How can she be expected to engage in analysis as complicated as a child's testimony or as sensitive as taking one's freedom away, when her skill set is so obviously lacking. Like we say in Texas, Big Hat - No Cattle.

Anonymous said...

You know, I just have to compare this to a podiatrist deciding he/she wants to be a brain surgeon and takes a five day course and expects to be able to be a competent surgeon!! Not sure he/she would have very many willing patients!! It just doesn't happen. Sorry a five day course just doesn't cut it. These are people's lives and futures we are talking about! I think when you are doing any job, where lives are at stake you should have the most training and education you could have to do that job.

Anonymous said...

I have a great idea! Why does Holly Kittle not go on Tonya Craft's new talk show and they can have an adult discussion in a venue where Holly does not have the exclusive right to do all the talking.I have no doubts Tonya would welcome the opportunity to debate with someone who has not obtained the amount of education Tonya has. It is amazing that all of the players in the LMJC have faded into the woodwork while Tonya is willing to put herself out there. Holly ought to be ashamed of herself and I challenge her to contact WGOW to be on The Truth of the Matter with Tonya Craft. I will say with almost complete certiantity that Holly does not have the fortitude to stand up to Tonya face to face in a grown up conversation without her LMJC buddies to be a buffer. I urge everyone - if you have a child who makes allegations and you live in North Georgia PLEASE take your child to a QUALIFIED psychologist with the creditials to want to find out what really happened. Holly Kittle, Stacy Long, Suzie Thorne, Laurie Evans, Len Gregor, Chris Arnt, Tim Deal, and the others in the LMJC need to be feared by all!!!!!!!!!!! Children who are actually molested are falling through the cracks while this group continues their damage to anyone in their path. These individuals should be prosecuted for the abuse they inflict on so many.

William L. Anderson said...

Hey, 10:08,

You are good!!!! Now, I am sure that Kittle will claim that she stayed in a Holiday Inn Express while she got her training.

Anonymous said...

I was in the courtroom and saw Holly roll her eyes, act very nonchalant, and even laugh on occasion. Tonya's attorney even asked Holly if something was funny. Holly exuded disrespect to all but especially to the children involved in these false allegations. If she believed the allegations Holly would not be on the stand grinning, laughing, and shrugging her shoulders. If she did believe the allegations and acted so unprofessionally that concerns me even more. Holly knew it was bogus but she thought it was "in the bag". All of their arrogant attitudes are offensive and one day they will have to answer to someone far bigger than any of us!

Anonymous said...

What goes around comes around. Holly Kittle will be judged by God for every lie she told in that court, and she will answer as to why she did it. We will all know the motive. She and the whole bunch can go to church every time the doors are opened but it won't get them into heaven. God hates lying and isn't going to change His mind about it. The Bible says there is no place for liars in heaven, so you'd better watch out bringing God into this as a coverup. God knows every lie the whole bunch told and they will indeed answer to Him. It will all come out someday. They need to repent of it, and ask forgiveness first from God and then from Tonya. If they truly are Christians, the Holy Spirit lets them know their guilt. If they aren't Christians, it is only by God's mercy that they will see the need for repentance, and turn to Him. You just can't fool God, folks!!

Lame said...

Two points:

First, has anyone here seen the story today that a bunch of people in Portugal, including several former high-ranking government officials, have been convicted on what seems to be Tonya Craft-esque evidence? The trial took 6 years, and the judges deliberated and found them guilty in a matter of days, then the same day sentenced them all. I'll have to say, as totally screwy, devilishly-twisted as the State of Georgia's court system is, I'd rather be tried there than in Portugal.

Second, if Miss Kitty has a problem with what you're saying, as per my comment a few days past, let her challenge Dr. Anderson to a duel. All of you, if you're disturbed by what someone writes about you, don't go and write nasty words on some blog or call in annonymously to some radio talk show, send the person a note giving them two options: pistols or swords. There must be some place in the world where dueling is still legal. Save yourselves a whole lot of time and grief, and even possibly money, buy a (one way) ticket, and either skewer or be skewered/pump led or eat led. It really would save so much trouble if people knew that by saying or doing something like what those people did to Tonya Craft they face the distinct possibility of hearing the words, "Gentlemen, when you are ready."

Len Gregorisadouche said...

Unless I missed it, I can't believe that no one has done the LMJCm destructive... errrr... deductive reasoning bit... So Let's

Holly Kittle photgraphs naked babies.

Pictures of naked babies constitute child pornography, (which is a heinous crime)

People with possession of Child Pornography are pedophiles and child molesters.

Holly Kittle is a child molester.

and then

Ralph Van Pelt dates Holly Kittle.

Holly Kittle has just previously been proven using the accepted practices of the LMJC by this court of opinion to be a child molester and pedophile.

Ralph Van Pelt approves of those pictures, and surely looks at those pictures taken by Holly Kittle due to close proximity of their relationship status.

Viewing child pornography is a state and federal crime, and is done by child molesters and pedophiles.

therefore we conclude that Ralph Van Pelt is a Child Molester.

Hey Holly, Do you see how absurd your and LMJC felon check off lists are?

and Holy Holly just rolls her eyes, giggles and says "So What?"

Anonymous said...

I thought Van Pelt dated Laurie Evans?

William L. Anderson said...

Holly is married. Laurie Evans was Van Pelt's girlfriend. That is why he recused himself from the case, although from what I have heard, he was telling people before the trial that Tonya was a "sociopath," which was why, in his view, she passed the lie detector tests.

You see, in the LMJC, they go by "Heads I win, tails you lose" justice. It works, as long as you have the right connections or you are like Sandra Lamb and can commit crimes in broad daylight (and file false reports) and Van Pelt and his friends protect you.

Anonymous said...

Amen. Mr Anderson. Keep it coming.

Anonymous said...

Slanderson? Perhaps, the poster meant Libelson as the words were written rather than spoken.

If Professor Anderson is using court documents on which to base his writing, and if all of his writing is of his opinion, then, while I am not an attorney though I do work in the field, I daresay that libel may not be at issue here.

Reader from NYC

Kaye said...

If I recall correctly, Holly Kittle wasn't named in Tonya Craft's federal lawsuit. I wonder why not?

Anonymous said...

To the person who called Mr. Anderson Mr. Slanderson, you need to look up words before you use them. Slander means, a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report: a slander against his good name. You dummy, there's no slander here,just unbelievable facts that I and 100's of others never want to let die! Keep up the good work Mr Anderson. People are still watching.

kbp said...


Kittle is just a corrupt team player who is very unprofessional.

Tonya would have to try seeking damages for intentional ignorance on Kittle's part. Holly acted more like a biased stenographer for the prosecution than a forensic interviewer.

There is a fine line on what can be done with testimony, as it in itself cannot be the basis for liability. It’s more like evidence that supports the claim of liability created prior to giving the testimony.

Kittle just going along with the late interview, purposefully ignoring what an interviewer should have done, is a difficult situation. Her limited involvement so late in the case (long after charges had been filed) would make it difficult to prove she was a co-conspirator, even though I believe she showed disregard for what she should have done.

Abraham said...

This case is just still very electric, and try as they may it's not going away.
The LMJC is being duefully being exposed for what it's worth.
Kittle is just 1 bad apple hanging off the tree.
I think Arnt is the ring leader.
When is EE new court date?
I am anxious to see what kind of biased court actions they come up with to use against him.

maria said...

I think that if children are not hurt by any means and there is no proof of any damage to them, there shouldn't even be a trial. Kids are seeing and hearing what they can do to get out of trouble and are using this more and more, not realizing how much damage they will do to the person they are accusing. What would they think if it was their family being attacked by a child?

Kaye said...

Thank you for your response, kbp. Yes, that makes sense to me... Kittle did come into the Craft case much later. However, it will be interesting to see exactly how she conducts herself during James Combs trial, and what role she played in bringing about charges against him. With Stacy Long no longer working at CAC, then Kittle may be risking more liability for herself in the event Combs eventually pursues civil litigation as well. I would imagine one could only act as an incompetent, ignorant wannabe for only so long without suffering some sort of consequences. She needs to give some serious thought to that before she decides to blindly support the prosecutors in their continued railroad jobs.


On another note, I must say that I am so hopeful when I continue to see so many trolls visiting this site and commenting. I have noticed that when Bill starts talking about specific people who were involved in the Craft fiasco, like for instance Tim Deal, then suddenly, lo and behold, there appears a troll who starts spouting off his superior knowledge about all things LE only to be proven a fool by another poster who actually discredits most of what the troll says. Haha! I have no doubts whatsoever that the LMJC criminals still read this blog and they, themselves, or their buddies post here trying desperately to defend their actions.

There are events and trials that are looming in the very distant future that will keep the spotlight on these people. Tonya Craft's radio program, (including her blog and podcast), the upcoming trials of Eric Echols and James Combs, insure that the focus will remain on them. There are a lot of people dedicated to watching their demise with utter enjoyment. They're scared... no doubt about it, otherwise you wouldn't have seen such a pathetic attempt as distancing themselves as was evidenced by the mass recusal of ALL of the LMJC judges for Eric Echols trial.

There is change coming...

Justine Valinotti said...

Whoever wrote the "Mr. Slanderson" letter should thank his/her lucky stars he/she is not in a room full of actual survivors of child sexual abuse. Ditto for Holly Kittle and the prosecution in Tonya Craft's, James Combs' and Brad Wade's cases.

The only thing that inspires as much animus in us as the people who molested us are those who try to impute our suffering to others (worst of all, children) and use it in an attempt to aggrandize themselves or indict those against whom they have grudges of whatever kind. And worst of all are those like Kittle, the otherwise inconsequential people who go along with them.

To understand people of her ilk, one should read Alberto Moravia's "The Conformist" and see Bernardo Bertolucci's film based on it.

Anonymous said...

What I find interesting of the "trolls" is their lack of knowledge in the fields in which they profess to know. Fortunately, there are a great deal of honest lawyers, LEO's, forensic interviewers & judges who read & comment on Bill's blog. Yes they do it anon, but, they do it. A lot of the good, some great people in these fields are disgusted & quite alarmed at what has been happening in the LMJC. They are amused at the ramblings of the people who are "friends" of questionable people who are framing innocent people in this district.

Not once, has one of the "friends" said something worth a grain of salt. I understand protecting friends, but I also believe in truth & justice over friendships & family any day of the week. I have a nearly life-long friend who happens to be the topic of some of Bill's blogs. I will not defend him & in fact, I have told him time & time again, that what he has done is wrong. He has tried to justify it as "his job", but I don't take that for an excuse or an answer. That is what a friend does, they don't sit by & assume that because of a friendship or because they are family that this person is gold or only speaks the truth. If the friendship ends, so be it. it wasn't worth what you thought in the first place.

In turn, that is what makes a good person in our judicial system. Someone who overlooks friendships, family, ties to the community or church & searches for truth & justice. Sadly, the LMJC has never done that, & even worse, it has become a mainstay for the innocent to go to jail. I recently had a friend who "slipped the envelope" & everything went away in a dui case. In Tonya's case, it was very different. There were no envelopes to slip, it was "take the plea or you are going to prison". Thank God in Heaven that she fought for her life. I will support Mr. Combs, just as I did Tonya.

I know at least one of the people who is protecting Kittle. Regarding this person, I would be scared to death because of my profession. But honestly, this person is connected & will never have to worry about being the next Tonya Craft or James Combs.

Bill, keep up the AWESOME work & I do enjoy your blogs. What I enjoy most, are the facts from which you speak & if you are speaking an opinion, you say so. Thank you for keeping our district on its toes. For so many years, so many have wondered, "what can I do?". Well, you gave an outlet & you are giving people a voice. You know as well as I do, there are people on here who have knowledge & conviction & will stand for what you speak. We have your back. You have not committed slander or libel, so you have nothing to worry about. So to the person who obviously knows nothing about the law, dig deeper & find out the true meanings of terms before you throw them out there. Tonya's legal team does & she will reign victorious again.

Truth Seeker

Anonymous said...

To All:

Reading over this blog the last week or so I have viewed some comments that are worth consideration,some comments that are clearly false, and some comments that are alarmingly nasty.

Out of respect to the Kittle Family, I am writing to inform ALL those who are uninformed. Kittle's job is to interview (period). Her job revolves around the protection of children. Children are brought to her office because of claims of molestation, rape, neglect, etc. Kittle (nor anyone else at the Advocacy Center) attempt to seek out "potential" child molesters to prosecute. All of her cases are referrals...which means that if there is belief that a child has been molested, an interview should take's the law.

Kittle's interviews with the children are non-threatening and non-judgemental. If a child states that he/she had a sexual encounter, it is not Kittle's job (nor should it be) to call the child a liar or demean the child. Her job is to interview and gain the child's trust...and with this trust, hopefully find the truth.

For those of you who know how the system works, it is not Kittle's job or determination on who/when to prosecute. Kittle simply interviews children...and occasionally has to testify (about the interview) in court.

As for Kittle's testimony...there is no room for lies because Kittle's requirement on the witness stand is to answer questions related to the interview of the children. I would hate to think that anyone should believe that Kittle could sway a jury (out of spite) by her comments regarding a child's direct recollection of alleged abuse.

And finally, to reference those who "claim to know" that someone is or isn't a child molester; anyone who has been molested can tell you that no one really EVER knows what happens behind closed doors, and NO ONE can honestly say with 100% certainty that someone is not a "child molester"...the only ones that know are the molester and unfortunate victims!

The only job Kittle has is listen to the child and document what she finds...not to provide ANY bias, which she has never done!

Please think about your comments before you post them...and some may need to think about them again!

Anonymous said...

Holly Kittle - Incompetent Tramp in bed with half of the LMJC. Here is one for the news media to do some research on.

Anonymous said...

OK, Anonymous 3:11, what does that (UNTRUE) statement have to do with anything? And for all of you out there "standing up" for Bill and how you all "know him," well, I know Holly Kittle and she IS NOT "in bed" with anyone other than her HUSBAND. Just as you have proven time and time again, this blog is a joke. How can anyone take it seriously with comments like these?

Anonymous said...

I think the term "in bed" should have meant in cahoots. BTW...I love this quote...
One expert who made an appearance, Holly Nave Kittle of the Children’s Advocacy Center, was openly hostile to questions about her lack of credentials and was unfamiliar with any relevant child abuse literature. Neither did she help her credibility as a witness after she “liked” a public Facebook post by Arnt, in which he wondered “if Tonya Craft’s Defense [sic] lawyers are really insane of [sic] just trying to jack up her defense bill?” (Both Arnt and Kittle’s conduct likely violate Georgia’s ethical rules.)

BTW, do you not have some work to do at the CAC framing some people?

Anonymous said...

"I think the term 'in bed' should have meant in cahoots." I guess it threw me off when the word "Tramp" was used before "in bed." Thanks so much for clarifying. So nice of you.

Anonymous said...

You would think she would at leas try to appear objective, instead she is facebook buddies with Arnt and Gregor...awesome. Apparently she is not the brightest bulb. Is that who we really want interviewing children?

In fact two characteristics of child molestors are that they are married, and they take photos of victims. Another is that they may work with programs involving children. Does that automatically make Holly Nave Kittle a child molester? Arnt and Gregor might disagree.

Anonymous said...

In many ways, she is probably considered a "tramp for the prosecution". Doing their dirty work, whether it involved being honest or not with her facebook buddies Gregor and Arnt.

Anonymous said...

She was oh so innocent...remember this...

Anonymous said...

What slays me, is as soon as someone uses the same terminology about Kittle, they get blasted.

I do believe the good old LMJC opened up that can of worms when they referred to the very well-educated, respected & respectful, true EXPERTS as "whores of the court". So if someone uses the words "tramp in bed with", they are automatically saying Kittle is sleeping with someone????? NOT! Open your eyes & read the context of it before you get all testy about your friend.