Thursday, June 17, 2010

Holly Kittle and the Escalation of Charges

[Update, Friday, June 18, 2010, 5:45 PM]: While this update is off-topic, nonetheless it tells us that the LMJC is not the only place where the police commit outrages. This story from WRCB-TV should make your blood boil:

CHATTANOOGA (WRCB) – A patient believed to be having a stroke says a Chattanooga Police officer blocked her and her husband from entering the emergency room Wednesday night.

Aline Wright is a cancer survivor, amputee and a newlywed. Wednesday night she began to show signs that she was having a stroke.

That's when her husband of four days, and a nurse technician at Erlanger Medical Center, Jesse Wright, put her in the car and rushed her to the hospital.

On the way to the hospital, Aline says Jesse stopped at then proceeded through two red lights, as if they were stop signs. After Jesse ran the second stop light one block from Erlanger, a Chattanooga Police Officer turned on his blue lights and followed the couple into the Emergency Room parking lot.

According to Aline, the Officer caught up with the couple as they were attempting to enter the emergency room at Erlanger Medical Center. Aline says her husband was carrying her in his arms because she could not walk. According to Aline, the Officer blocked the entrance and demanded answers for running the red lights.

Aline says eventually the Officer allowed them to enter the hospital, but says he didn't stop there.

Aline tells Channel 3 Eyewitness News that once the couple was placed in a hospital room, the Officer attempted to enter their room to arrest Jesse for evading the police.

Erlanger medical personnel turned the Officer away at that point, informing him that since Aline could not speak Jesse was needed to answer questions for the doctors.

Thursday morning Erlanger security informed the couple that a warrant for Jesse's arrest had been issued, and suggested he turn himself in. Aline says Jesse went to the Hamilton County Jail to turn himself in that evening. According to Aline, Jail employees told Jesse that they had no record of a warrant for him and told him he was free to go.

So Jesse returned to his ailing wife's bedside at Erlanger Medical Center.

On Friday morning the police were back at the hospital. This time Jesse surrendered to Erlanger Security who arrested him on behalf of the Chattanooga Police Department.

Eyewitness News was the only crew there as Jesse was released on $7,500 bond, about right hours after being arrested. He is facing seven charges related to Wednesday night's events, including felony evading arrest. He's due in court on July 9th.

Eyewitness News contacted Chattanooga Police today for their side of the story.

lLt. Kim Noorbergen says the officer was just "doing his job".

Beyond that, the department will not comment until a formal complaint is filed with the internal affairs department.

Aline Wright says she plans to file the complaint. The couple has already hired an attorney to file a suit against the officer.

As for Erlanger, a spokesperson tells us by law their security guards are obligated to carry out an arrest warrant related to felony charges. An Erlanger spokesperson says once they learned the warrant for Wright's arrest was issued, and they learned he was in the building, they had to arrest him.

I guess all of us can be relieved that Chattanooga's "finest" are trying to keep people from receiving medical help so an officer can run around and try to pretend that he is king of the hill. How do jerks like this officer (who I am sure is being protected by the Usual Suspects at the CPD) ever wear a uniform, get a badge, and carry a gun?

A man's wife is having a stroke, and the cop is getting a stroke of his own because he is not considered the Most Important Person at the ER. Give me a break!
[End Update]

(This is the seventh in a series on the testimony of the child accusers)

Ten months after meeting with Suzi Thorne at the GreenHouse, Accuser #1 met with Holly Kittle of the Children’s Advocacy Center and gave much more graphic answers to questions than she had before. Perhaps it is appropriate that the interview took place on April 1, April Fool’s Day, for the answers she gave not only were contrived, but it is clear that she and someone else – perhaps her mother, Sandra Lamb – had been working on juicing up the account she would give.

As we follow this interview, remember that the interview process started in 2008 with “a girl has been mean to me,” and 10 months later escalates to outright sexual assault by “the evil one,” who (of course) is Tonya Craft. Remember that the bath idea did not come from Accuser #1, but rather from Stacey Long in the second interview on May 27, 2008. After stumbling a bit, Accuser #1 takes this story and builds on it.

There are other red flags as well. First, Accuser #1 never alleged “digital penetration” in her previous three interviews, so the fact that she suddenly remembers something that to a young child would have been a horrifying experience should make one suspicious. I am sure that the CAC crowd would claim that she had “suppressed” those terrible memories, but with the help of a “therapist,” she was liberated from that cage. All of this brings me to my second point.

She had spent nearly a year of “therapy” by none other than…Laurie Evans. Yes, this is the same Laurie Evans who was diagnosed with being mentally ill, the same Laurie Evans whom Judge Marie Williams had ordered to stay away from Tonya Craft’s children, and the same Laurie Evans who committed perjury in a deposition and on the stand during the trial of Ms. Craft.

Given Evans’ history, I only can imagine what “miracles” she managed to perpetrate on Accuser #1 and the other children during that time, and, apparently, continues to give “therapy” to at least two of the children that testified against Ms. Craft. However, given Evan’s vivid imagination and her utter lack of a moral compass, I am sure that she prepared Accuser #1 to go whole hog when the girl met with Kittle, and Accuser #1 delivered.

ACCUSER #1: We took tests...we took a test today and it was a test about perimeter and everything. And I went to P.E. I left because I didn't feel good.
HOLLY: Why didn't you feel good?
ACCUSER #1: Well, last night I told my mommy something that the evil one did that I call her.
ACCUSER #1: I told her one time I was taking a bath, well, she was giving me a bath and she stuck her finger up my butt.
ACCUSER #1: [re finger up butt] And she wouldn't say anything. She would always just not talk when she did it…
ACCUSER #1: [re finger up butt] and see, like, when her daughter Accuser #3 was in the bath she wouldn't do it because she would always wash me first and then Accuser #3 would get in the bath and she would do it... see like, if I was in the bath she would wash me until Accuser #3 would come in there and then she would give Accuser #3 a bath. Well, anytime me and Accuser #3 took a bath together, she wouldn't do it. So... I don't know if she did it to Accuser #3 because she would always wash me first. Anytime Accuser #3 would be in the bathroom she wouldn't do it. And so, and so, so I don't know if she did it to Accuser #3, but that's the thing she did to me.
HOLLY: Okay when was this [finger up butt]?
ACCUSER #1: I was like in kindergarten and first grade.
ACCUSER #1: Well, see I didn't...she just automatically started doing it. And so I don't know... and then that's... and she would sometimes also stick her finger up my private and that's all she would do to me in the bathtub, but that's all she used to do in the bathtub.

[Note: 5/27/08 interview AFTER Stacey Long leaves the room and then comes back in to ask out of the blue "did you ever take a bath over there?" .........
STACEY: Okay. All right. When she would wash you, did she wash, like, in between your legs too, on your private?
ACCUSER #1: Huh-uh. (Moves head from side to side)]

ACCUSER #1: She did this to my private and she stuck her finger up my butt with only this finger.
HOLLY: Okay. Was it that hand? Was it with that hand and that finger or was it…?
ACCUSER #1: I think it was this finger
HOLLY: And what do you call that finger? Do you have a name for it?
ACCUSER #1: Uh, index. [on pg 8 we see it was the left index finger]
HOLLY: Okay. Did that go inside your private or outside your private?
ACCUSER #1: Inside.
ACCUSER #1: I… I didn’t like it. Before she did it she said that you can’t say anything. And so…
HOLLY: What did you say when she said that?
ACCUSER #1: She covered my mouth. I couldn’t say anything. [states it was left hand a few lines down]
[Note: it is difficult to be both sexually assaulting someone and covering their mouth with the same hand at the same time.]

ACCUSER #1: And see, she told me if I told anyone she would hurt my mom. But when I started telling my mom, she said it was okay. I’m not the one who did it. And so it made me feel a lot better so I could tell everything I needed to tell. And that was the last thing I always kept inside because I was scared I would get in trouble.
HOLLY: Who were you scared you would get in trouble from?
ACCUSER #1: My mom.
HOLLY: Okay.
ACCUSER #1: My mom is the best mom ever, so I know…
HOLLY: Okay. When this happened in the bathtub, were you in her class then?
ACCUSER #1: Yes.
HOLLY: Okay. How old was Accuser #3 when this happened [finger up butt in bath]?
ACCUSER #1: I think she was four, five…
HOLLY: Okay.
ACCUSER #1: I was… yeah she was probably four or three.
ACCUSER #1: Because I was five then.
ACCUSER #1: The other day I sent Accuser #3 a picture of me and was... her friend "childs name" cut it out and then a picture of me and her mom. I cut her [Tonya] out and threw it in the garbage and put us together. And I put best friends forever and I sent it to her.
HOLLY: Okay. You said that… you said that when you were taking a bath… where was Accuser #3 when you were taking a bath?
ACCUSER #1: Accuser #3?
HOLLY: Uh-huh
ACCUSER #1: She was… I think she was playing or jumping on the trampoline.
HOLLY: Was she [Accuser #3] in the bathroom?
ACCUSER #1: No she was never in the bathroom when it happened.

[NOTE: This is an important part of this interview. She will dramatically change her story later, although the huge change does not seem to faze Kittle. Accuser 1 starts off making small changes and later goes for the gold by having ALL the children in the bath tub at once while Ms. Craft molests them in front of each other. Laurie Evans claims Accuser 1 told her that story.]

ACCUSER #1: [Tonya’s house was] down in Chickamauga down this road in a subdivision.
HOLLY: Did what you told me happen in the bathtub. Did this happen more than one time?
ACCUSER #1: Yes.
HOLLY: … was Accuser #3 ever in the bathtub with you?
ACCUSER #1: Once.
HOLLY: Once she was.
ACCUSER #1: Well, she was but when Tonya did the bad stuff to me she wasn’t. But sometimes Accuser #3 took a bath with me but she didn’t do it.
HOLLY: Okay. Do you know if Tonya did anything like this to Accuser #3?
HOLLY: She didn’t or you don’t know?
ACCUSER #1: I don’t know.
HOLLY: Did she ever touch you anywhere else besides your private and your butt?
ACCUSER #1: No. Well, sometimes she hit me.
[Note: This is the first time the claim of Ms. Craft hitting had been brought out.]
ACCUSER #1: Well, she always said that I've been bad at her house and anytime my mom called and said she was coming to pick me up, before I even left when my mom pulled in the driveway she would always hit me. I don't know why she would ever hit me.
ACCUSER #1: She hit me on my neck and my face and that’s all. And she also slapped me on my arm. And that’s where all she hit me.
ACCUSER #1:…like she pulled her hand and she slapped me really hard.
HOLLY: Where did she slap you?
ACCUSER #1: On my face. She hit me hard on my face
HOLLY: Okay. Which side?
ACCUSER #1: This one.
HOLLY: Okay. Which side is that?
ACCUSER #1: My right.
[Note: Tonya is RIGHT HANDED]

HOLLY: Did she say anything to you when she hit you?
ACCUSER #1: She said that’s what I get for being bad.
HOLLY: Did anybody see this [hitting] happen?
ACCUSER #1: Uh-uh.
HOLLY: Where was Accuser #3 [during hitting]?
ACCUSER #1: She was in her room.
HOLLY: Where was he [Tonya’s son during hitting]?
ACCUSER #1: I forgot where he was.
ACCUSER #1: Sometimes…sometimes she did this [finger in privates] out of the bathtub.
HOLLY: … where would you be when that happened?
ACCUSER #1: Some… mostly in the kitchen
HOLLY: Was it on top of your clothes or underneath your clothes?
ACCUSER #1: Underneath.
HOLLY: Did that go inside your private or outside your private?
ACCUSER #1: Inside.
HOLLY: What did that feel like?
ACCUSER #1: It hurt just like the bathtub.
HOLLY: Did it ever happen anywhere else?
ACCUSER #1: Just in the bathtub and in the kitchen.
HOLLY: Okay. Did she only touch your privates in the kitchen or did she touch something else?
ACCUSER #1: She only touched my private in the kitchen.
HOLLY: And what happened in first grade?
ACCUSER #1: She would keep on doing it and doing it.
HOLLY: When was the last time that anything happened?
ACCUSER #1: I was in first grade and then when I started to get in second grade, I started telling.
ACCUSER #1: [talking about the last time anything happened. She was spending the night] And then… then she did the same thing that she would always do. Like, she would stick her finger up my butt. And stick her fingers up my private. And when I was going to leave the next morning she would always hit me when my mom was in the driveway.
HOLLY: Did she always hit you when your mom was in the driveway?
ACCUSER #1: Yes. Or when she was pulling up the road.

[NOTE: Like the phantom injuries that occurred with the faux "hand rape," we see that no one ever complained that this little girl had been slapped around while at Tonya's house. Certainly, a mother as attentive as Sandra Lamb seems to be would have noticed marks or something that would logically follow if Ms. Craft were hitting her daughter, especially since Lamb was in the driveway. Amazingly, this seemed to pass right by Kittle, who by this time was all ears.]

[NOTE: This next section that goes to the end of the interview has some of the most fantastic -- and contradictory "disclosures" in the interview.]

[The child now has anatomical dolls]
ACCUSER #1: [demonstrating on doll] She did this. She tried to put all of her fingers together and what she would do would she would stick it up in me.
ACCUSER #1: [demonstrating on doll] And then she would…she would turn me around and stick this finger up my butt.
HOLLY: Okay. Did she ever ask you to touch Accuser #3?
ACCUSER #1: Uh-uh.
HOLLY: Okay. Did she ever ask Accuser #3 to touch you?
ACCUSER #1: Uh, once but I said Accuser #3 you don’t have to do it.
HOLLY: Okay.
ACCUSER #1: So she didn’t.

[NOTE: Here is the conversation she had with Stacey Long on May 27, 2008:
STACEY: Did Miss Tonya ever tell you and Accuser #3 to touch each other?
ACCUSER #1: No.]

ACCUSER #1: Well, see, we were in the bathtub and Tonya told Accuser #3 to touch me. And she said anywhere she wanted to and I said...I whispered to Accuser #3, like, I went Accuser #3 you don't have to do that. You don't have to listen to her.
HOLLY: Uh-huh.

[NOTE: At the risk of repeating ourselves, here is what she told Kittle earlier in the interview:
HOLLY: Okay. You said that… you said that when you were taking a bath… where was Accuser #3 when you were taking a bath?
ACCUSER #1: Accuser #3?
HOLLY: Uh-huh
ACCUSER #1: She was… I think she was playing or jumping on the trampoline.]

ACCUSER #1: And then she said, I know. I'm not going to do it. And so, and so she didn't do it. And so her mom just made a face at me and didn't say anything and so she just gave us a bath.

[Note: Tonya's daughter would have been three years old at this time. Accuser #1 makes the claim that this three-year-old had that kind of language and moral skills.]

HOLLY: Did Tonya ever ask you or Accuser #3 to touch each other outside the bathtub?
HOLLY: So the only time it happened was inside the bathtub.
ACCUSER #1: Uh-huh. But one time Accuser #3 touched me and her mom told her to. I heard her mom tell her to. And she forced her to do some... she said she would do something and Accuser #3 came in there and she said my mom said to touch you. And I said well, Accuser #3 please don't and she said well, she said she would do...l forgot what and then I said but Accuser #3, you don't have to do it and she said well, my mom said whatever she was mom said she would do that or. .. and so, and so Accuser #3 touched me on my private and she said I had to do it back or she would hurt my mom too, or she would hurt my mom.
HOLLY: Who said that you had to do it back or they would touch your mom, or hurt your mom?
ACCUSER #1: Accuser #3.
HOLLY: Accuser #3 said that?
ACCUSER #1: Because her mom… Tonya told her to say that to me and so…

[Note: The story has now morphed from Accuser #1 and #3 being caught playing "doctor" to Tonya forcibly making her child, accuser #3, sexually assault Accuser #1. From Tonya having never threatened anyone to her directing her child to make threats against Ms Lamb.]

[Note: Accuser #2 told a story to Det. Deal, where she claimed Tonya AND her daughter took turns molesting Accuser #1 and #2 and another child at the same time while in Accuser #3's bedroom after breakfast on one occasion.]

ACCUSER #1: And so Accuser #3 took my hand and stuck it down her pants to her private.
HOLLY: Did she [Accuser #3] touch you on top of your clothes or underneath?
ACCUSER #1: Underneath
HOLLY: Okay. Where were you when this happened?
ACCUSER #1: In her [Accuser #3’s] bedroom.
HOLLY: Okay. And then you said that she [Accuser #3] took your hand?
ACCUSER #1: Yes.
HOLLY: Okay. And what did she do with it?
ACCUSER #1: She stuck it down her pants.
HOLLY: When Accuser #3 touched your private, did she touch you inside...I mean inside your private or outside your private?
ACCUSER #1: Uh, she just touched and rubbed it.
HOLLY: The outside or the inside?
ACCUSER #1: Inside.
HOLLY: Inside?
ACCUSER #1: Well, no the outside is what I mean.
HOLLY: Okay. And then when she took your hand...
ACCUSER #1: Uh-huh.
HOLLY: Did you touch the inside or the outside of her private?
ACCUSER #1: The outside.

A few things should be clear to the reader. First, Kittle is utterly unqualified to be doing this interview, and it is clear that her job is simply to gain more incriminating “evidence” against Tonya Craft. Second, when a child is trying to make up things on the fly, even if he or she has been coached, there are going to be a lot of loose ends, and they are painfully obvious in this interview.

Was Tonya’s daughter taking a bath with this child or jumping on a trampoline or watching a movie, or whatever? Obviously, even in the LMJC, a little girl cannot be in two places at one time.

Why no mention of this alleged “digital penetration” in earlier interviews? The “suppressed memories” syndrome just won’t hunt here, as none of the children interviewed seemed particularly traumatized when they were interviewed in 2008. If you compare the three interviews you can see how the story changes from 2 girls caught playing "doctor" to not only Tonya committing sexual assault but her daughter as well at her mother’s direction.

This is not the product of children; it is the product of the adults, and the adults decided that the children were going to deliver one way or another – and they did. The parents and the principals of the LMJC had their agenda, and nothing – especially the truth – was going to stand in the way.


kbp said...

I did a screen save for all if Bill tries that trick on us again!


Lame said...

Just a quick question to start us off. Did Ms Craft's daughter ever testify or say anything about R Lamb being bathed by Ms Craft? Accuser 1 says that she would be in the bathtub being washed by Ms Craft when Accuser 3 would come into the bathroom. So, it would be impossible for Ms Craft's daughter to not know that Accuser 1 is in there too, because Accuser 1 says that some times Ms Craft would bathe both of them together. So, if Ms Craft's daughter was ever asked about seeing Ms Craft bathe Accuser 1 and answered in the negative, that shoots, in my opinion, everything that Accuser 1 says all so full of holes that even the Titanic has a better chance of floating.

Anonymous said...

Guys, here's something I just came across today. There's a situation on-going right now where there IS evidence that a woman molested several girls, and yet the police have done absolutely nothing to stop her, and they have known about it, and by their inaction allowed at least one more girl to be molested.

Someone needs to contact this woman and let them know what has been discussed on this forum regarding proper investigative practices and proper therepy for her daughter.

Lame said...

At risk of being accused of "attacking" R Lamb again, does anyone else notice a pattern here where a girl two years older than the other continually lies, not just in this interview, but multiple times over multiple interviews, with details become more and more fanciful, about the younger girl touching her, when by all other accounts it was R Lamb who initiated ALL sexual contact?

THIS, folks, is NARCICISM!

Kaye said...

There's not a good interview in the bunch! I don't know how in the world the CAC's director (sorry, the name escapes me, Ione something, I think) could possibly defend this! Truly if he thinks this is evidence of a job well done in forensic interviewing, then the CAC needs to close its doors, period.

The TFP has an interesting article about Tonya's civil lawsuit. There is also a PDF link to Joal's motion to dismiss if anybody is interested in seeing that.

eagle1 said...

It's interesting to me that they decided to do this final interview 10 months later.
Because at this time Tonya had already been charged. Her children were already taken away. "Mommy" has been talking to Joal. The story is now all public.
And, someone sees the need to get some BETTER graphic details.
I wonder who suggested and arranged this one? Sandra? Laurie? Arnt?
This more I read the less I see that this girls testimony is credible.
Many kids make up little stories for stuff that does not matter anyway. But here, a combination of her imagination, what her "Mommy" tell her, plus what the therapist tells her... just escalated to an innocent hodgepodge of fantasy.
She is just reading another script of ramblings.

Janet said...

Bill - editing note - there is one paragraph in the post where Accuser #3's name appears.

Anonymous said...

A word search indicates there are four times that two of the girls' names appears.

Anonymous said...

There are now no legal reasons that these girl's names cannot be published. Only the ethics and good taste of the author apply. I'm sure Bill will remove these as soon as he is able.

KC Sprayberry said...

My, my. Joal's motion to dismiss makes it appear as if he's going to throw his new wife under the bus. "Although the law allows for inferences to be drawn from legitimate
factual allegations, except for showering and shaving, the only purported
factual allegations are masquerading in conclusory recitation of the elements
of the various causes of action." Note the exception of 'showering and shaving'. This man is a real piece of work. Not only does he tell his ex-wife 'take a good look at your kids, this is the last time you'll see them' whenever he picks them up, not only is he in arrears for his child support (and is he about to find out how aggressively GA hunts down those low lifes!), he's willing to get out of a civil suit by letting his pregnant child bride swing in the wind. That man has a great lawyer, just like himself. I did love how this lawyer slammed the use of legalese as being vague rather than pointing out specific instances.
One more thing, can't it be said Joal Henke implied Tonya was a sexual pervert by 'just remembering on the way to the courthouse' her watching girl on girl porn? Does this man think everyone will forget that little stunt? This just bets better and better (note the sarcasm) every day. If Henke can't afford to go through the whole discovery process, be a man. Admit he was wrong and pay the ex off so he can crawl back into his hole and fade into obscurity.

JD said...

I read somewhere that other children testified, I don't know about Tonya'a daughter particularly, about baths and all claimed no one took baths.

Lame you wrote yesterday that accuser #1 masturbated at school in the third grade. I must have led a pretty sheltered life because I don't think in the 3rd grade I knew what that was let alone do it. Also, if this was the 3rd grade, wouldn't that mean this was at least a year or two after she saw Tonya for the last time? So this couldn't be related to being molested by Tonya, so it makes me wonder what is really going on with this child.

BTW, I thought I read that children tried to avoid places where molestation took place. If this took place in Tonya's home, why did she voluntarily go to the sleep overs? If you don't have a choice but to see someone, i.e. a relative, teacher at school or day care worker then a molester can easily get to the child and he/she doesn't have a choice, but accuser #1 and accuser #2 had choices.

All this just doesn't add up.

Doesn't the timing of the complaint, May 14th, three days after the acquittal and the DA's office is reeling, seem quite coincidental? I think Peters knows something and the DA's office is trying to get to him first.

Anonymous said...

I will love seeing the responses to these motions. While I understand the case law that all the motions cite, federal and state court require "notice" pleading. That means that you dont have to put every "fact" in the complaint, just enough so the individuals understand what the lawsuit is about. Can Henke really deny that s/he doesnt know what this is about? The lawsuit alleges they lied, conspired, committed perjury and hid evidence. If the issue weren't so serious it would be laughable. And its a little too late for Joal to worry about financial ruin.

Anonymous said...

Ugh, reading Henke's motion to dismiss makes me pissed off at how much the Supreme Court has messed up notice pleading with Twombly and Iqbal. Much harder for litigants to get to the discovery stage. It makes no sense.

JD said...

Who is Twombly & Iqbal?

Anonymous said...

Sorry, let me find an article that explains it well. Basically, Twombly and Iqbal are two Supreme Court cases make it much more difficult for a plaintiff to survive a motion to dismiss, especially when all the facts aren't immediately at hand... which is exactly what discovery was for.

Anonymous said...

If anyone thinks activist judging is limited to one side, then they're completely wrong. Twombly and Iqbal basically rewrote the rules of civil procedure..

Some of these may get a little technical:

Anonymous said...

If you, Sandra Lamb are reading this, you are sorrier than we thought if you don't get your child real help. I have an 8 year old and if she did this, I would go bankrupt if I had to getting her the help she needed. It is obvious to everyone, that she is making up wild tales about sexual assault. That is serious.
Ya'll this is sick. I have a daughter who is almost 3. I cannot IMAGINE her trying to touch another little girl, even if I told her to, she would be like "huh?" To me this Lamb kid trying to implicate a 3 year old child is a huge red flag(amongst everything else of course). Kids lie. It is up to the adult to figure it out and teach them better. But this?! This goes way beyond lying. This child really needs help. Reading this, as a parent, I'm like how could these stupid interviewers NOT know she's lying? I see now Mr. Anderson why you dislike them so much. Were they able to read transcripts of previous interviews?
I can't say it enough, this kid needs REAL help,

William L. Anderson said...

A few things. First, my apologies for leaving in a name. I use a replacement word search when I put together the document, and then have someone flyspeck it for me. We made some changes to the original document, and I just failed to do another word search.

I have replaced the name, and appreciate your letting me know. Second, every competent trained therapist I know can recognize the manipulation and the outright fantasy that is in the transcript. By this time, Sandra Lamb was obsessed and she was determined to take down Tonya and anyone else who was in her way.

The people at the CAC really are something else. These women pretty much are a bunch of losers who have been able to Look Really Important by "uncovering child molestation." They really start to believe their own lies after a while, and I am sure that Arnt and Gregor and others in the LMJC are full of themselves for being able to railroad anyone they target into prison.

Anyway, I wanted to make sure that readers can understand just how it was that three little girls were testifying against Tonya. The media made it look as though they came up with the stories themselves when, in fact, the adults in the picture were the ones responsible.

JD said...

Hypothetically speaking, when (I want to think optimistically) Tonya gets custody of the children back, can she sue the CAC in behalf of her daughter for malpractice, which would be in state court. I'm not sure what the statute of limitations is for that, but for some reason 3 years comes to mind.

Anonymous said...

As I read these transcripts I cant help but wonder why Tonya's and her attorneys only asked for $25 million. They are obviously low balling.


Anonymous said...

Maybe I've missed it somewhere through all of this, but does this child have a dad? Is he still married to Sandra? What kind of MAN allows these lies to perpetuate with his child and how does he stomach his wife, or ex-wife, manipulating his child for her own selfish agenda. Where is he?

Anonymous said...

In Joal Henke's Motion to Dismiss, his lawyer states the discovery process would be "devastating financially".....GOOD!!! Tonya's parents used every dime they could get their hands on to defend their INNOCENT daughter! These crazy people need to get a taste of what Tonya has lived through the past two years. They brought this on themselves and NO ONE feels sorry for them!
Why is the motion only about Joal? Wasn't Showering Sarah included in this lawsuit with him?? Is he only trying to save his a-- and let her go down in flames?? What a great husband....NOT!!!! He is a real piece of work:))

Kerwyn said...

One of the things that becomes very interesting is to compare Sandra Lambs various interviews with her daughters (the same with Kellie McDonald). They reflect each other like a mirror. Kelli and Sandra went so far as to have Kelli's daughter, accuser #2 claim that Tonya not only molested her but 3 other children all at the same time and then had her daughter molest them as well.. all that molesting going on in Accuser #3's bedroom directly after breakfast (the one accuser 1 says she never got). Funny how Accuser 1 and 3 don't remember this incident.

Sandra, who claimed to know about the "hand rape" on May 24th amazingly said nothing about it in her initial interviews until her live testimony (nether does Sherri Wilson) and both are interviewed several times as well. She says nothing about a "bath" until well AFTER the Thorne interview with her daughter.

It continues like this with more and more accusations coming forth. What still puzzles me is how many people testified that Lamb was rarely over at Tonya's, yet Sandra claims in a 09 interview that one time, Tonya intentionally sent her children to their father and had Lamb child spend the night alone with her. Yet that is never supported by anyone's testimony or interviews, including her own daughter.

If you read the whole of the material, there is no way a reasonable and thinking person would say, oh this is the truth, this is awful. Instead you would immediately get the flavor of, wow what a crock of crap.

You do not need to be trained or be a medical professional to see how outrageous the stories become on the part of Lamb, Wilson and Mcdonald. The adult interviews are just as telling as the children.

Interestingly, one of the other children named by this Accuser out and out calls her a liar as does her mother. The mother states in her interview that neither her daughter NOR lamb ever took a bath at Craft's and goes on about how Sandra Lamb and Sherri Wilson had this all laid out before THEY called Mcdonald to tell her the story.

How did she know this? Sherri and Sandra called her to get her to toe the line. When she refused, Sandra told her she would tell her place of work (she is a nurse) that she uses drugs and has proof of that. This woman refused to cave but leave it to sweet Sandra to get her dig in while on the stand. She directly accuses this woman of "cocaine use" in a sweet off hand manner.

So Sandra is going to use whatever she can to get others to fall into line with the "story". And.. she did all this BEFORE this interview took place.

Oh ya, I believe her uh huh....

Anonymous said...

June 18, 2010 9:55 AM

If your named individually you cannot have the same attorney represent you. It is a conflict. She would need to have her own lawyer and file a separate answer to case.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the clarification:)) How long do they have to file a motion to dismiss. I thought I heard it was this week???

kbp said...

Joal's motion to dismiss has many parts of it that actually duplicate Sarah's motion to dismiss. The same attorney represents both of them.

Anonymous said...

The thing I noticed most about this interview is the length of RL answers. If you look at her previous interviews, they are short...mostly uh huh...shaking head. Now it's as if she is "reading script." Some answers are paragraphs!!!!

KDaw said...

Good Lord! This episode of " Law and Order : LMJC" is quite telling.
It's like the REAL HOUSEWIVES AND TODDLERS IN TIARAS all rolled up into one. Truth is stranger than fiction.

I think Sandra had her daughter convinced she was just making another movie. It seems as if she is constantly waiting for her next "cue". I am so disturbed by the lack of basic parental instinct to protect your child. Instead a selfish agenda has done so much damage. I just hope the kid gets some COMPETENT counseling.

William L. Anderson said...

KD, I agree. The problem is trying to get three kids to stick to the script, plus adults. As you can see, there were some gaping holes.

I'm convinced that this was not a good faith prosecution. These guys had to have known what they were doing, and did not care. As Len Gregor wrote, he gets to be "The Man," and that means that his word is law. He was not counting on others knowing that he was such a jerk. Now he knows.

I'm not at liberty to let you know what else I know right now, but there is much more that will come out over time. Sit back and watch the show.

KDaw said...

I lost my Granny in January. You have given me a reason to get up every morning. I can't wait for the next post. Here I have made friends and even met distant cousins I didn't know. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for the change you have affected in my life.

dmk said...

Mr. Anderson's last point about it not being a good faith prosecution is so true. After having read now some of what really was said and went on, how could ANYONE interested in the truth say otherwise.

Almost all of what was said just doesn't make sense on the most basic level, and anyone with a modicum of common sense themselves can see that right off the bat. This latest post I think contains my personal favorite so far - according to #1, Tonya regularly smacks her around just as her mother is pulling up, and not only are no marks left for Sandra to notice, but that a kindergarten age child takes those beatings stoically and shows no tears, no running to the safety of her mother's arms, etc that any other small child would do if that had just happened to them seconds ago. NO ONE, and I repeat NO ONE, can hear or read this stuff and think for a second it was believable.

No matter how crocked though, it gave prosecution what they needed. Get a base allegation, no matter how shaky, and then start layering in the lies, fabricated "supporting evidence", and get your buddy Brian the Louse House to suppress any evidence that doesn't support the story, and yee-haw, another successful LMJC conviction for the headlines and the resume plus some more Federal money as a reward.

No chance it will happen, but these people deserve to be in prison for the rest of their miserable lives. Karma has a way of catching up to you though, and although it's much less than they deserve, sooner or later they are going to find the tables turned on them.

Anonymous said...


"Interestingly, one of the other children named by this Accuser out and out calls her a liar as does her mother. The mother states in her interview that neither her daughter NOR lamb ever took a bath at Craft's and goes on about how Sandra Lamb and Sherri Wilson had this all laid out before THEY called Mcdonald to tell her the story.

How did she know this? Sherri and Sandra called her to get her to toe the line. When she refused, Sandra told her she would tell her place of work (she is a nurse) that she uses drugs and has proof of that. This woman refused to cave but leave it to sweet Sandra to get her dig in while on the stand. She directly accuses this woman of "cocaine use" in a sweet off hand manner."

OMFG this truly is shocking. And they had the gall to accuse and arrest Echols for tampering? Do these people think they themselves are above the law? Oops redundant question.

volfan69 said...

Mr. Anderson, or anyone,
Is it the "norm" to have a child interviewed so many times? Were all children interviewed numerous times? Is it the "norm" to wait ten months? This is so outlandish to outsider in matters such as these.

What this child is telling is not normal for little children. I taught for 32 years and I've heard plenty from children about what goes on at home and at the friends houses. Never in 32 years have I heard (read) accusations like this! I've been in court concerning child abuse cases...beatings with a belt, with a coat hanger, with an electrical cord, etc., but none of this has ever been witnessed by me. This is most certainly from parents.

kbp said...

Had there been the least bit of truth to any of the allegations that came about after all the coaching and questioning by all involved, the case should have fall apart simply as a result of the procedures used.

That's not to say there was any crimes in Tonya's case, but to point out that even in cases in which there are actual crimes that these procedures are very likely to end up fabricating false evidence that could lead to the guilty going free.

A system like that isn't good for anyone involved.

kbp said...


There was a bit of conflicting testimony from the defense experts on that topic, judging from the tweets and articles.

They seemed to agree that less time and a minimum number of interviews was desired, but the exact number and time span was coming across as maybe being subject to a combination of the abilities of the one conducting the interview and just how open the alleged victims are, along with a few remarks on the age or maturity of them.

Those experts all agreed that the interviews conducted by those in this case created many problems.

Anonymous said...

On a happy note, two of the convictions of the Mineola case, which has similarities to the Tonya Craft case has been reversed.


volfan69 said...

kbp, THANK YOU! Bobb

Anonymous said...

That whole part where Accurser 1 saidthe touching was "inside" and Dumbass Interviewer states "inside?" Then, what does Accuser 1 do? Change it to "outside." Figures Accurser 1 is the most animated about it all with her mother being Sandra "Satan" Lamb. Her husband needs to divorce her and sue her for custody.

kbp said...

Imagine that, the Mineola kiddie sex ring was fabricated.

There wasn't any "child-sex shows at a swinger’s club"?

I guess the "shooting of a dog, the hanging of chickens, flying around the swingers club on a broomstick, and the use of magic spells" wasn't fact, even though the jurors didn't get to hear those parts of the interviews!

I bet Gregor & Arnt would have LOVED to assassinate the characters on those "swingers"!

In comparison to those told in the Mineola case, the tales in Tonya's case were BORING!

Anonymous said...

I am the 9:06 poster,
I realize that Sandra and others influenced some of what R. Lamb said. BUT, it is blatantly obvious to me that R. Lamb was coming up with some of this stuff on her own. R.Lamb knew her mother hated Tonya and felt it was the 'Right' answer everytime she came up with a wild tale. But I'm telling you I know my 8 yr old wouldn't even know how to embellish a story that wild. She obviously has inherited her mother's genes. And it is obvious also that she made up craziness trying to get herself out of trouble for touching other kids. Most kids know something from school, but nothing as perverted as this. Sandra Lamb opened a can of worms. Now I get why they testified she was a "worldly child". Surely to Goodness, Sandra wouldn't suggest to her daughter that a 3 year old child had touched her b/c Tonya made her do it. If so, she should have her tubes tied & a hysterectomy to make sure she NEVER has more children. Not to mention the father having custody w/ no visitation rights.

Anonymous said...

Most kids know something from school, but nothing as perverted as this.
That's the problem with these false sexual abuse investigations. First, the investigators educate the children about sexual behaviors. Then the investigators convince themselves that these all allegations must be true; after all, no "normal" kid would know all these things about sex. Another thing I get ticked off about these types of investigations. They are the first to state "believe the children" yet somehow when children state nothing happen they are disbelieved.


William L. Anderson said...


I concur wholeheartedly with your statement. Miriam Boyd was claiming that Tonya was guilty because these kids knew stuff that they should not have known, sexually speaking.

Of course, the fact that interviewers, parents, and CAC staffers (and Laurie Evans) had been filling them with these things never seems to occur to Boyd.

JD said...

While I made the comment about accuser #1 possibly hearing or seeing something from her older brother, has anyone given the thought of what this child might have seen or heard on a movie set given the type of movie she was in? Just a thought.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 3:08 PM

do you know the Lambs? If so maybe you can answer a question. There was testimony re RL masturbated in her classroom to the point it was obvious and distracting. Unusual behavior for a young girl. It could be a sign of abuse but not necessarily it also can be a sign of stress. Has there been anything in the Lamb family that could cause a lot of stress for RL? (I should add that masturbation in children isn't all that unusual or to be concerned about)

Lame said...

Did anyone else catch the bit in the TFP article where Laurie Evans is using the argument that she should have her case dismissed on a technicality, because Georgia State Law said such and such? Just goes to show how smart that woman is, considering that this case is being conducted in FEDERAL not state court. DERP!

Kaye said...

Recent tweets from Callie Starnes (reporter) and Derrall Stalvey (news director)

calliestarnes @WRCB's attorneys are fighting Catoosa Co.'s decision not to release records I asked for yesterday. The public has a right to know.
8 minutes ago via web

Derrall Attorneys for @WRCB taking on attorneys for Catoosa County for access to public records. It won't be easy. But worth it.
30 minutes ago via TweetDeck

Lame said...

There's a great line from the decision in the Mineola case reversal that was just published. Just remove "himself" and put in "herself" and you have judge house's court.

". . . the trial court adopted ad hoc evidentiary rules that operated to assist the State in proving its case, while impeding appellant’s ability to defend himself.”

Anonymous said...

That poor Lamb kid needs to be committed. It is so sad that she remains with that crazy mother she has. I just don't understand why she is still living with that woman. Is there no one out there who has the power to take that child away from Sandra? I see no hope for the child if it doesn't happen soon. she thinks it is normal and good to tell stories like this if you don't like someone. So so SAD.

Anonymous said...

anon 4:06 do you wan't your young child to see something like that in the class room?

Narcissist 07 said...

Mr Anderson made the remark during the trial that Tonya was probably going to be convicted, and while a travesty, that would likely be necessary to bring out the absurdity of the charges in appeals hearings. If only he could have looked into his crystal ball and seen then what we now know to be facts of this case, in that the acquittal and subsequent federal law suit would bring so much to light.
I have to laugh out loud every time I hear someone say "The Rats are scurrying to the highest part of the sinking ship, and knocking their buddies in the water on the way up."
Mr. Anderson, you are bringing so much more to light than any sunshine law into any appeal could have ever brought forth, and so much faster than we would have had to wait. I for one am very glad you were wrong about TC having to be convicted in order to expose the level of corruption within the LMJC.

Anonymous said...

No wonder the Lamb child is masturbating in class right in front of other kids. Her mother and so many other people have constantly talked about fingers in her vagina and up her butt and no telling what else and if that's not enough her mother puts her in a movie acting like a victim of molestation and no telling what happened during that time. This kid IS sexually abused but it is by her own mother. It is a VERY SAD thing. This child needs to be kept out of all school systems until she is counseled by someone who isn't nuts. Needs to be taken away from Sandra immediately!

Anonymous said...

Miriam wears rose colored glasses.She is incapable of seeing the truth.She thinks people with money are the best friends.She really has no clue.

Anonymous said...

anon 5:09 amen,I have been saying this for weeks.Everytime I did I was called a troll.I am so thankful everyone now understands.

Mary Jane said...

Just a clarification:

RL did not act as a "sexually" abused child. She acted as a physically abused child in "One Missed Call".

Anonymous said...

Well Mary Jane just to clarify RL did act as a physically abused child in "One Missed Call". However it was RL's osnscreen sister who physically abused her as well as sexually abuse her. Your right it was never shown onscreen of these two children doing anything of that sort of nature, however it was portrayed that RL onscreen sister did sexually abuse her. So Mary Jane just to set the record straight RL played the role of both a sexually abusive child and a physically abusive child.

KDaw said...

It is possible that the child wasn't masturbating. Even young girls can get a yeast infection from antibiotic treatment. Also urinary tract infections can cause discomfort that would make a child squirm in such a manner. However, it would be disrupting in the classroom.

JD, I have asked the same. One movie was a R-rated film. Someone on here said that she was at the theater on opening night signing autographs. And her mother let her watch it because she had acted in it. I do know that there were sex scenes in the movie. I don't doubt that she received quite the education on set.
I also know that in both movies she played a victim of child abuse. I'm going to Blockbuster(which I hate to do) to see if I can find both movies. After I watch them I will let you all know what I can find out.

I love that you guys Keep me inspired.

Anonymous said...

KDaw,her third grade teacher Joni Kythas said on the stand she was doing that during class.I think it was much more than a itch.

Trish White said...

This is the most unbelievable interview of all. My goodness this is filled with so many lies it is rediculous!! Really, Tonya slapped her hard on the face, more than once and "stage mother" Lamb never noticed marks on her precious little actresses face?? Give me a break!!!! For every single one of these interviewers, you should be so ashamed!!!

William L. Anderson said...

Narcissist 07,

I really did not have confidence in the jury, although in hindsight, I can see just why the jury acquitted her. One of my friends noted that jurors really don't like to see bullying in a courtroom, and when it was obvious that "judge" House was in on the fix, that really got to them.

Furthermore, the "evidence" really was a crock. My sense is that some of the jurors are reading this blog and realizing even more so just how they made the right choice.

And, I doubt any of them were happy with Buzz's imbecilic and pathetic statement, along with the Arnt/Gregor Pity Party on Channel 9. BTW, I never did watch the Pity Party, as I just could not stand to look at those jerks.

John said...


I think its just the "norm" for CPD. I don't believe it was that long ago that, a man was waving around a rifle, and family said he was having mental trouble. He was going to kill himself, instead of woundind him and taking the gun, which I believe they are trained to do,they filled him with 45 rounds of ammo. There is video to back the story, it show 4 to 5 cops emptying their guns and reloading. I don't think I have this story wrong, It was the CPD. I also believe there was a shoving incident at walmart with an old man. This story you posted read it earlier, and thought " what the Hell are these guys thinking its Damn well not LOGICAL.

What Has happen to common sense in this country???

KDaw said...

You may be right. Just offering another explanation to behavior. Which is still inappropriate in the class. And being so young at the time, she should have been sent out of the class and had that explained to her by a school nurse. I'm sure such a great school as CES would have a school nurse on staff.

Lame said...

Wow, that case with the police officer reminds me of something that happened a couple of years ago in Texas where an African American family was harassed by a white police officer when they were trying to get to the hospital to see their relative who was about to die.

I have a lot of respect for most police officers, but there is clear evidence that there are some amongst them who do the job because it makes them feel empowered.

Anonymous said...

KDaw CES has always catered to RL.I do not understand why,but that is how it is.They would never allow another student to act in such ways.That is why so many parents have been upset the past few months.

John said...

Still off topic on this CPD story,

I guess my folks were from to far back in the woods in their thinking when they raised me. I was taught to use common sense when looking at things, and how you make choices. I know I make mistakes in my judgment sometimes but I can not believe what is going on in our justice system. This story takes the cake for me.

As reported even if this cop was “just doing his job” what the heck could he have been thinking once he seen the situation. It was obvious that this was a medical emergency once he seen Jesse carrying this woman in the ER. The cop should have seen she was taking care of, talk with the man and wrote his report, then went on his way. But instead he wanted to be the (as Bill stated) “King of the hill” it was his way or nothing. I’m surprised he didn’t draw his weapon and demand him to stop taking care of his wife.
I don’t know folks, but it seems to me that were just going to have to have a go to Sunday meeting with are justice system and clean house. I’m sorry Bill but I’m beside myself on this one! Some in the CPD are just (for lack of a better word) butt wipes!

KC Sprayberry said...

A couple of points about acc #1. The unusual behavior in school happened in 3rd grade, right before the trial began. Therefore, maybe SL heard from one of her buddies they were worried all their contrived reports weren't enough to 'prove' the charges. However, what if they had an incident, witnessed by a disinterested third party, someone SL was sure would support her accusations? After all, all we had was a teacher reporting on a child's unusual behavior, behavior associated with sexual activity. Do we really know, other than what acc #1 told her teacher about being unable to control herself and stop acting in this manner, if that really is true? Wouldn't a trained actress be able to pull of something like this, especially if it were described to her in detail and she practiced?

Second point. All this happening to acc #1 in kindergarten at school and TC's house. Now, I may be just dumb on certain subjects but I grew up in the Los Angeles area and know the length of time it takes to make movies from having seen them in production (the shooting portion). Kindergarten would have been the grade acc #1 was in when she made these movies. And there was some information early on in these blogs and the trial about how TC wasn't happy with the principal giving acc #1 an excused absence for the amount of time she was gone to make the movies. A stage mom would see that as sabotaging her little darling's career and have gone after the person - no matter how they had to do it.
As for the bathtub scenarios of acc #1 and acc #3 involved in touching and witnessing TC supposedly doing things to the other one, well, there was the 22nd charge, the one we never really heard much evidence about, regarding acc #3. How better to prove that charge than to show acc #3 at age 3 or 4 than as practiced in things she shouldn't even understand at that age? Just a thought, but one worth thinking about. This interview might be explained better for the questions and answers if those things are taken into consideration.

Anonymous said...


I will say I USED to have respect for police officers until the last 10 years or so. Their cavalier use of tasers and treatment of citizens is deplorable. (for an example look for video and accounts of arrests and 'free speech zones' at the RNC etc)

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 4:56 PM would I want my child to view that behavior, in a word no.

There is another aspect to this case I am wondering if Tonya Craft has considered? There is research that shows that children who's latency period is interrupted by early sexual knowledge (such as these children were exposed to)can cause the child to falter academically. It's been many years ago since I've read several books on this topic by Melvin Anchell M.D. If so would not TC have even more of a case re her child?

JD said...


Anonymous said...

So many of you have called me uneducated because i was saying the same thing you all have the past two days.For someone so stupid i am holding a seven page report from the Catoosa County Sheriff's office about magistrate Anthony Peters & the CC S.O. Incident Report .I am sure Mr.Anderson also has.But i am to stupid to tell anyone anything.After all you all see me as uneducated.

Kathy R said...

WOW if these belly aching parents are so concerned for their children looks like they would put their efforts to good use such as actually complaining to someone who can do something about it. Ms. Day has not received one complaint according to my reliable source. Are you worried about your child or just jealous of these children, the money they have and attention they receive. Not saying it's right that they receive special attention if that is the case. Jealousy is an ugly thing, it's best to be happy with what you have. Some people in Chickamauga are very resentful of rich kids coming to their school and it seems this mess was all it took to bring it out. I would be more sympathetic if I thought your intentions were sincere.

Anonymous said...

KathyR you are just plain crazy.I know for a fact Mrs.Day has received complaints.Your source is wrong.I really am starting to believe that you do not even live in Chickamauga.

Lame said...

Anon 9:11, I don't know who you are to be saying we all called you uneducated. Perhaps if you used an actual handle rather than anon, which tends to lump you in with all the drive-by commenters. Please, don't take this the wrong way. I'm just saying that you come on here and say, "Well, you all called me uneducated," and don't give any way for us to tell who you are--use of handle, explanation of what it was you said that caused people to call you uneducated, or what other people specifically said. You mention "the same thing you all have the past two days," without stating what that thing is. We've been talking about R Lamb, about Laurie Evans, Suzi Thorne, Joal Henke, Larry King, some police people who behave like idiots, the magistrate issue.

If you're trying to make us appreciate something you previously said, you need to give us a clue as to what it was you said. My gut feeling is that it involves saying that we need the kids of the accusing families to be run out of the school system. If that indeed is what you were saying, then you are still wrong. We are not saying that at all. We are saying ONLY that there is ONE girl who has behaved in a dangerous manner and that she needs counseling before she should be allowed back. That's not to say she shouldn't return at all. Just that she needs help before returning.

Anonymous said...

KathyR if you live in Chickamauga give just a rough guess as to how many miles apart the Elem. is to the HS.

JD said...

Anony 7:57. You have hit on something I have felt for a while. I've always gotten the impression that this was a David vs Goliath scenario in the eyes of the community. I read TV station, newspaper, blogs and anything I could find to learn more about this situation. I got the feeling that these families had gotten away with things, and people looked the other way or didn't get involved;. However, when they went after a teacher w/a spotless record, liked and respected people said enough is enough.

A few things made me realize this woman was being railroad. First of all, you wouldn't get 70-90% of the community behind you. I can't remember the exact figure I heard on WRCB. In addition, you couldn't stage the reaction of the people afterwards. I don't think I've heard "Thank You Jesus" as much on Sunday mornings as I did on that video. I also checked out the experts. Who would I believe on what the best way to interview children and how to get false accusations. In addition, to give an assessment. People w/doctorates, one normally a prosecution witness, or people who don't have any education except one who has PTSD and been told to stay away from the Craft children. The trashing of Dr. Hazzard's office and the disallowing of the fact she found NO evidence of abuse spoke volumes.

Anyway, I do think the parents probably are fed up with the double standard. They also might think that it contributed to the whole situation.

Anonymous said...

Lame all I have ever tried to say was that I was scared for my children.I felt RL being around was not a good thing especially Sandra was a bad mix.I feel the Wilson & Boyd kids are good kids.The Wilson kids may be a bit bratty,but no big deal.I hope RL gets real help.But until then I do not want her at CES,if that makes me a monster then so be it.

Anonymous said...

I do think the policeman did not use good judgement regarding the emergency situation. With a stroke victim, time is a very important element in the treatment and reducing the type/amount of consequences resulting from a CVA. Therefore, I have decided to reframe from driving a family member to the emergency room for symptoms of a stroke, heart attack or uncontrollable bleeding. I will call an ambulance. That decision may go against my first instinct but it may save a life and cause a policeman to not be concerned with a traffic violation, or other possible illegal activity. I urge others to call an ambulance, also. First responders, EMT's, know what to do in emergency situations. And they are heroes, in my opinion.

KDaw said...

I don't believe I've said anything derogatory toward any of the regular posters here. Even those Anon posters have valid points and may have a professional need for privacy. I certainly have never called anyone uneducated. I would be in no position to do so as all I have is a high school diploma. Sorry Anon that your feelings are hurt. I can assure you it was not intentional.

Lame: As usual your explanation is way more eloquent than mine.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 9:43, it does not make you a monster, just someone who is abnormally fearful.

Anonymous said...

For some reason R.L. does not stike me as a weak child who would stand there and let someone slap her without showing SOME kind of emotion when she gets in the car with her mother , just moments later. And Sandra wants us to believe she is so out of touch with her child that she couldn't detect any terror from her child, as she kept right on taking her to Tonya's house?? I know someone who's son was being abused by a relative...Wanna know how she discovered it? The child began to show severe anxiety when she would start to take him to the abuser's home. This story came out because of a showering step-mom, sidewalk chaulk, and a boyfriend-girlfriend game...NOT because Sandra had ANY hint that there was a problem in Tonya's home, lest she would NOT continue to have taken her starlet over there....This stuff is CRAZY!!! (Miriam, you have identified yourself with loons.)

Ooltewah mom

Kathy R said...

The elementary school is on the same property on the back side of the High School. I walk the square often. I love the new ice cream shop across from the Bank of Chickamauga. Did you see the tree that fell on the car in the Parking lot of Crystal Springs Smokehouse, Across from the Shop Rite? I did on my way home. Power was out in Chickamauga until about 6 am the next morning. The Library is across from The High School right next to Ms. Day's office, you know where that is don't you. Take your concerns to her is all I'm saying.

Kathy R said...

Thanks for the crazy comment, like a fox baby....

RobertJ said...

Kathy R
Ms Day has not received one complaint according to my reliable source.
I do not know who your "reliable" is, but this statement is incorrect.
I can assure she got one strong complaint asking her to restore Tonya's teaching certificate.
Maybe she needs some more mail...

Lame said...

Anon, I'm not trying to brow beat you, I'm saying that 1) If you're going to make an "I told you so" comment, and there is more than one topic being discussed, you need to clarify which topic you're I told you so'ing about, and 2) R Lamb is not a monster. Whatever she is came about as a result of a narcistic and unstable mother and a father who seems very distant. A rotweiler doesn't become a killer because its owner was loving and trained it well. No, it becomes dangerous when it has an abusive or neglegant master.

One issue I have to bring up is, I wonder how often R Lamb is brought to church. The "angel for all the other little girls" remark, if she even said it at all, is not something that fits in with any biblical doctrine I've ever heard. We don't become angels and come down and help people after we die. Perhaps, if she were in church for either Sunday school or Sabbath school (I know there are several Seventh-day Adventists in the Chattanooga area, and I don't know where the Lambs go), then maybe she's get a better Christian influence that would teach her not to make up lies. Of course, just going to church doesn't make someone a better person. But, it doesn't hurt one's character, whereas missing school to run off and shoot movies doesn't help.

Anonymous said...

KathyR you are crazy like a fox baby.You will always stand on the bad parents side.For some reason you really wan't to be friends with Sandra.Heaven help your kids.You are just as bad as they are.You will sell your kids out to.Just to look good.To bad Sandra didn't call you to join.

Anonymous said...

Lamb,I always care about your input. You seem like such a great guy.I could never be on your level.No I am not an idiot but you are very educated.Back in the day I was too.I graduated from a great private school in Chattanoogna.I only feel that RL should not be in any school,until she gets the help she needs.May God bless you Lame you have things to offer.

Anonymous said...

KathyR wow others see through you.Not just me.

Anonymous said...

Funny how people run their mouths while their poor friends are sweating (Wonder if they will still want to hang out with them when they're really "poor")

Anonymous said...

KathyR you are a poor excuse for a human.I think you lied about your name.I know many teachers in all three schools & no one knows of a KathyR even others who attened different church's has no idea who KathyR is.Your gig is up no one cares what you have to say.

grits said...

Anon, it seems you are truly passionate about having RL removed from the school. If you feel that strongly, you have a responsibility to act. If Ms. Day is the starting point for RL’s removal, then make an appointment and sit down and find out what would have to happen to have RL removed from the school. How does that work in your school system? Then, take measured steps to demand accountability that the process is followed, without prejudice, to remove RL. You have stated your opinion, but unless you act, it is nothing more than complaining. P.S. the closest I’ve been to any of the places mentioned here is once when we went through from Atlanta on I-75.

Anonymous said...

grits I & many have already gone to Mrs.Day & to many board members.That is the good thing living in a small area that we all know the board members.We will keep it up.

grits said...

So, what did they say? Public schools are obligated to educate... even to the point of educating children of illegal immigrants who don't pay taxes but don't get me started. I understand RL is in that particular school by special permission. Is there a clause to refuse her return? By the way, if it were my child, there would not be a removal. I would be gone. To many pointing fingers, watching and speculation. I agree with everyone else SL has it coming but RL is a victim and I would like to see what is best for her.

Anonymous said...

oh boy KathyR can't take the heat.Boooohoooooo.What a baby.You know you are nothing but a bi#$5 so go away.

grits said...

Anon who responded to grits. Are you the same anon who is bashing on KathyR? If you are, why do you expect us to take you seriously? If you are not, I will tell you I thought you are the same person. That's a reason to pick a name, any name, and post under that name.

Anonymous said...

grits go back & read it is not one & KathyR both need to get a life.

Anonymous said...

KathyR tell us who you really are.Let me guess you are to affraid to say.Come Aug. it will be clear.You will be kissing butt.Everyone will then see you.

Lame said...

To the recent Anon posters, other than the one I previoulsy addressed regarding the 'told you so' issue--and in some ways, I take my hat off to you, because, yes, now that I know more about this girl I think she should be kept out of the school (not indefinitely, but only until she gets proper help, and I'm sure you'd agree with me that once she gets proper help she'd be just fine)--anyway, to the other anons who are hating on KathyR, I must say that you're comming off a bit trollish. KathyR is not always posting things blindly in support of the accusing parents. Your attacking her is eerilly similar to a troll attack upon yours truly, and it needs to stop. If you have a legitimate argument against her, put it forward or put a sock in it. It is personal attacks based upon unsound evidence or no real evidence at all that are what pushed many of us onto Tonya Craft's side in the first place. I would say that every time someone comes on here and attacks someone who says something to defend a third party it only serves to undermine support for Tonya Craft. However, what it really does is show that there is someone out there who may be falsly presenting themself as a supporter of Tonya Craft, but who in reality is trying to undermine Tonya Craft. It is like the leaked memo from a liberal group who said they were going to try cause the Tea Party to lose support by posing as Tea Party folks and shouting racist statements or how in the 60s the government planted agents into student organizations who tried to get other students to engage in illegal acts in order to make those organizations appear to be communist fronts. I really would not put it past some people within LMJC to come on here and say outrageous things in order to use them in support of their arguments that we are all a bunch of lunatics. Like Paul says, beware of wolves in sheep's clothing, or considering how inept these LMJC guys are and that we may be on to their little game, beware of sheep in wolves' clothing.

Dr. Lorandos said...

Thank you for your continued interest in the Tonya Craft case. Mrs. Craft is asking the Federal Court to step in and put a stop to these terrible cases with their incompetent interviewing and phony "investigations". YOU & ALL YOUR READERS CAN HELP - -

eagle1 said...

I am very proud to see that Dr Lorandos took time to visit this Blog. I think this is only a SAMPLING of the widespread public opinion about the case.
I want to say THANK YOU for your efforts in an unfair fight with a truckload of inept goons.
I wish you continued success, and hope you can help with the movie to ensure the details are presented correctly.
Hopefully some GREAT things will result from this tragedy.

Kathy R said...

Lame in your post you said I am not always blindly supporting the accusing parents, I don't think I have ever said anything in support of the parents, only the children.

Kathy R said...

I have a son who attended CES and a nephew. I do not have money but worked hard to save so my child could have a better education than the county school could provide. I am sure your not aware of this but there are parents who resent ANY child from the county coming to the city school because they believe they are rich and privileged because the parents have to pay for them to attend. These kids are sometimes treated like outsiders by other kids and the parents feed into that. I sense a Ryan White mentality with R.L. Some parents were scared for him to be in school with their kids because he had AIDS. I can understand some fear but to the point a child feels unwanted is simply not right. I have never and will never support the Parents, only the children. This anon poster has not in my opinion, ever went to Ms. Day. She resents anyone who has more than she or her child. That is not right and they create a difficult learning environment. Thanks grits for the support. I also believe the same person is posting all the garbage but under different names, just my opinion. And to "Robert J" I was talking about complaints from parent's not Tonya....

Anonymous said...

The anon. 10:05 comment and the anon. 10:09 response baffles me.... It is like K.R. is claiming to be Miriam...But that seems odd. She definately took ownership of the adjective "crazy" for some reason... and it wasn't even directed towards a person, just the situation..??? (Lame, there is just alot of confusion going on and some people enjoy.."like a fox" stirring it...)

Ooltewah mom

JD said...

So is RLamb not going to the school in her district, but paying tuition to go to CES? If so, that could explain how she gets by with things. The district wants the money. However, if the teachers are concerned about her behavior and maybe fearful she could accuse them she could be not allowed to attend or asked to leave at a future time since she is not in her own district. The district would have return at least a portion of the tuition money.

Remember the kids know who she is and might shun her or give her a hard time because of this, especially the little girl (and her friends) who said she lied about being at the sleepover and Ms. Craft touching her. Let's add on the children of Craft supporters who will hear things at home and make it harder for this child. She really needs a complete break and attend a truly private school. It can't be that much more of a hardship if the Lambs are already paying tuition anyway. However, if they can afford tuition then they can afford a better counselor than Laurie Evans.

gossip girl said...

is it my understanding that those who comment here often believe kathy r to be miriam boyd?? seriously?

Kathy R said...

I am Kathy R not Miriam Boyd and I am not stirring any pot just giving my opinion about how I feel about the kids seems as if my opinion doesn't matter because it is not shared by everyone. Go back and read my previous post it is clear I have never been on the side of the accusing parents. You have heard the last thing you will from me. I will no longer read or post on this blog.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Lorandos


How can the readers and posters here help?

Trish said...

Dr. Lorandos, Thanks for what you are doing. There are many others who have been victims of the LMJC. I wish I had known about you five years ago!!! By the way, awesome job during the trial, even though they did their best to silence you in any way they could!!!

Anonymous said...

Kathy R, my comment that you don't blindly support the parents was in response to those who were saying that you do support the parents. I did support Jerry McDonald until I read the transcript of his conversation with Eric Echols. So, at one point I did support one of the accusing parents.

As for R Lamb's comparrison to Ryan White, I'm afraid that is an apple-oranges comparrison. Ryan White could not be cured of AIDS. R Lamb could be, not cured, but treated and brought out of her present condition, and be made entirely safe to be around. Not that kids with AIDS are dangerous. The point is that Ryan White was perceived as being dangerous because he had a communicable disease, which we now know he more than likely couln't have given them, but was never-the-less PERCEIVED as dangerous. R Lamb, on the other hand, has as a matter of public record, engaged in sexual behavior with younger girls, the nature of which was unwanted, and had she been 17 and the other girl 15 would have resulted in sexual assault charges. That is not a perceived danger, that is clear and present danger. However, I and most other people who support the children (remember, I'm not out to get her, and if you read my prevous comments about bullying, you'll know I was bullied, and think that parents who encourage or tolerate bullying are scum) do not want her to never be allowed at that or any school. Rather, we only want what is best for her, and what is best for other students. The best thing to do at this time is to get her into proper therepy. Then, she would no-longer pose a danger. I don't want her bullied. I don't want people to think badly about her. I want people to HELP her.

Lame said...

The above 11:17 comment was made by me. I hit the post button before I could type my name into the line.

Kaye said...

Good to see Dr. Lorandos comment on Bill's blog.

volfan69 said...

Thanks, Dr. Lorandos! Bobb

Catoosagirl said...

First time comment. Been reading from the beginning. I just wanted to say the schools in Chickamauga city are what they call semi private. The city is very small therefore most, over half, live outside the city/county and pay tuition. The school board/schools decide who can attend if there is an opening in the school. The Lambs live in another county and pay for attendance to CES. They usually give first choice to children of alumni and if the family has other children attending the city schools.
Also interestingly enough, the Lambs have neighbors who are African American so I wonder how they feel living near a racist such as S Lamb.
I am not involved in this case or even know these people. I only know "of" them and live in the area.
Keep up the good comments! This is so informative.

suetiggers said...

Few know/care that these laws are not protecting children one whit more. But they have hurt many men who aren't dangerous.The hysteria feeds false accusations. My son Ken's story is one.But I've learned there are too many more.I've worked years in Child Protective Services on child sexual abuse cases&theres another side to these stories. Because of a few heinous sex abuse cases by strangers, the laws now have MOSTLY men who are on the registries who aren't dangerous, &especially not to children. Few people believe a child would lie about sex. But, I saw cases of belligerent teens who lied to get back at a father or stepfather. And,an eight-year old girl lied about my mentally ill son. When she lied, this was suggested to her&encouraged by two adult women who did not like my son's looks or personality. Because of his illness, he was too friendly, too trusting w/people, he did not take care of his teeth& he had very bad acne. When this child lied, everyone listened. Now she has grown up,recanted, but few listen. She ended up giving a very strong deposition. This had much in it about how her grandmother & a nosy neighborhood watchperson gave her the idea because they didn't like my son's looks (he had very bad acne and teeth .Ken was/is phobic about dentists&had severe acne Marian grew up in a family/neighborhood filled w/prostitution and drugs. She had 3 criminal uncles living with her. Her older sister, who my naive son was in love with, was a prostitute and drug addict. This girls' mother was a prostitute/ drug addict.(now both dead of o'd's) Lying was a way of life in this girls' family/neighborhood.People bragged about putting people away by lying.In her deposition, Marian talked about trying to think about ways to get my son away from her sister; she was so jealous that he took this sister, who she was very close to, away from her.She said, her grandmother &the other woman gave her the idea.She said if anyone ever asked her to take a lie detector test, she would;vetold the truth.She was scared of going to court. Ken’s lawyer,knew my son's looks would hurt him made him believe that an Alford plea was his only option. The states' attorney said my son looked "wierd"too &he was so aggressive in going after my son that Ken’s first atty.said that she thought he “hates your son”. So, an attractive but lying child looked innocent &an unattractive but innocent man took a plea because it seemed there was no choice. Everyone listened when the girl lied.Few care now that she is finally telling the truth. My son has always been a gentle, good person who was taken advantage of by others because of his naiveté’ about people. help us change the laws: