| Re: WINNERS! Usenet Kook Awards, November 2006 pedophile frank mccoy |
BigPond Internet Service .. |
| Wonderer (piriesa@bigpond.com) |
2007/01/05 17:01 |
"Baal" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
news:20070105231827.E7D236386C@remailer-debian.panta-rhei.eu.org...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 22:47:58 -0500, in Message-ID:
> <hv8mp29llh1q3mgpfkqmpkjnagofft95np@4ax.com>, 4s00th <4s00th@thetruth.com>
> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> I would very much like to see his [Rind's] documentation in this area.
>
> As would I, actually.
freely available on the net, type in "rind report" or the names of each
researcher
Wonderer
>
>> I have just spent quite a bit of time reviewing the ethics as they
>> apply to psychiatry on the APA website. Although ethics do allow for
>> release of information when legally compelled to do so, the only two
>> instances in which it is ethical to release any information without
>> consent is when: 1) child abuse or neglect is suspected; 2) under
>> Tarasoft, the patient appears to be a threat to himself or the
>> community as evidenced by stating intentions to harm someone, and even
>> then, unless the patient names specific potential victims, then the
>> doctor or agency may not have any responsibility to warn as there
>> isn't anyone to warn.
>>
>> I will also cite http://www.psych.org/pnews/98-09-04/analyst.html , in
>> which a supervisor for a psychatric program is being sued because in
>> the course of his work with a student of the program, he discovered
>> that the student had pedophilic fantasies. The supervisor took
>> apropriate steps, the student left the program but later did become a
>> child psychiatrist and was arrested for molesting two children in a
>> hospital/residential treatment setting. So far, the APA and all legal
>> advisors are supporting the supervisor's decision, specifically since
>> the laws of the state involved (Connecticut) do not require reporting
>> when there is no readily indentifiable class of victims (based on a
>> decision by Connecticut Supreme Court).
>
> Thank you for that link. I've already skimmed it; it looks quite
> interesting.
>
>> As to Baal's information, I believe that he clearly stated that it was
>> based on Canadian law, not US Law. Furthermore, in the case he
>> presented, the person did not go to a shrink and say, "I'm a
>> pedophile," he was accused of sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl.
>
> The Nagler case is not directly applicable; I fully realize that. The
> point I
> was trying to make with the Nagler case was just how ridiculously easy it
> is to
> get one's name on a watch-list, even without so much a shred of evidence.
>
> I just remembered a case that is, perhaps, even more apropos: the case of
> Wanda
> Young. In a nutshell, Ms. Young was a young, aspiring social worker who
> wanted
> to do nothing more than work with abused kids. As is not uncommon, she
> made an
> error in a paper she wrote--forgetting to footnote/cite a case study.
>
> Her Memorial U professor, reading this, decided without consulting Ms.
> Young,
> that this case study was autobiographical in nature, and contacted both
> the
> RCMP and social services. As a result, Ms. Young '... was red-flagged and
> her
> name was on a registry within the ministry as a suspected child abuser.'
>
> Ms. Young was repeatedly passed-over for promotion due to the fact that
> her name
> was red-flagged on this register; she discovered this only years after the
> fact.
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/vw62d
>
> W-FIVE Staff
>
> Updated: Sat. Feb. 11 2006 7:14 PM ET
>
> In 1992, Wanda Young was a student at Memorial University in St.
> John's, Newfoundland. Wanda had always wanted to be a social worker
> and help abused children. She had been going part time to Memorial
> and wanted to be accepted into full time studies in [the] Social Work
> Department.
>
> It was a big dream for a girl from Spaniard's Bay, a small out port
> about eighty-five kilometers from St. John's. Her father Gordon
> Young is a cabinetmaker and her mother Barbara once worked in the
> local fish plant. Wanda is the middle child in this large close-knit
> family and ever since she was small she had one thing in mind --
> to become a social worker. When she told her father she intended to
> pursue her dream, he wasn't surprised. "She was cut from that cloth,
> says Gordon, "that's what she wanted to be."
>
> For Wanda, being a social worker was more than just a career --
> it was her vocation. "I just felt in my heart and soul that I had
> something that I could do for these kids. I don't know, I just
> wanted to help them out in any way I could." recalls Wanda.
>
> In 1994, after four years of university courses, her marks were
> slightly below the admission rate of 65 per cent and the competition
> for placement was high -- she didn't get in. So she went to the
> head of admissions and asked her what she should do. Her advice
> floored Wanda. "It was at this point where she told me that they
> didn't think I had what it takes to be a social worker. And if I
> wanted to pursue a career in social work she would have to ask me to
> go elsewhere." But there was nowhere else in the province for Wanda
> to go. Hurt and confused she left the meeting in tears -- and left
> behind her dream of a career in social work for good.
>
> What Wanda didn't know was the university falsely suspected her of
> sexually abusing children.
>
> Wanda had written a twelve-page term paper about juvenile sex
> offenders. The last two pages contained an appendix entitled "Case
> Study", a graphic and lurid account written by an actual teenage sex
> offender who would molest the children she babysat. Wanda had taken
> it word- for- word from a textbook, but she had forgotten to add a
> footnote.
>
> She had written the paper for a long distance course taught by
> a social work professor, who was away on a research project in
> Labrador. The teacher was Professor Leslie Bella. When she read the
> appendix to Wanda Young's paper, alarm bells rang. She thought Wanda
> was writing about her own life. "There was attached to the paper was
> a first-person confession to being a child sexual abuser written
> by a young woman who was abusing her children in her care, says
> Professor Bella, "there was no reference, no citation indicating
> where it was taken from."
>
> Professor Bella felt the suspected confession could well be a cry
> for help from Wanda. So she consulted her director, Professor
> Bill Rowe. Professor Rowe is a leading expert on child abuse. He
> contacted Newfoundland's Child Protection Services to warn them
> about Wanda Young. He then wrote a letter suggesting the RCMP
> investigate. But he didn't send the entire 12 pages -- he only
> attached the alarming Case Study, which read like a confession.
>
> But nobody from the RCMP or Newfoundland's Child Protection Services
> called Wanda. And when Professor Bella contacted her, it was on
> an entirely different subject. Professor Bella called Wanda and
> suggested that she had self-plagiarized the paper. Wanda had
> actually written the paper for another course and naively had
> submitted it to Professor Bella's class. The professor gave her a
> zero and she failed the course.
>
> Wanda thought this was the end of the story. But it wasn't -- based
> on the false suspicions Social Services now had a file on Wanda as a
> potential child molester. And from 1994 to 1996, that file traveled
> around Conception Bay to a half dozen out port community welfare
> offices. From Carbonner to St. John's more than twenty different
> social workers were handed the file on Wanda. A file that Wanda
> never knew existed. Even when the RCMP in Bay Roberts got the file --
> just five minutes away from her family home. But while everyone else
> talked -- nobody called Wanda.
>
> It wasn't until about two years later that Wanda had any idea of
> what had happened. She and her partner Roy received a call from
> the Child Protection unit in St. John's. They asked Roy to come in
> to discuss a matter concerning Wanda and his two young children he
> had from his former marriage. Roy and Wanda raced into the social
> services office and were confronted with the Case Study. The social
> worker asked him if he had any reason to believe that Wanda was
> sexually abusing his children. The social worker placed the Case
> Study in front of him and quickly he and Wanda sorted out the
> confusion. Wanda went home, found the term paper and showed it to
> the social worker.
>
> Within twenty-four hours, Newfoundland's Child Protection Services
> sent her a letter clearing her of their suspicions.
>
> Wanda thought this disturbing episode in her life was finally
> over, but it was just beginning. She and Roy thought it was
> appropriate for Memorial University to issue an apology but they
> refused. Explains Professor Bella: "In a situation where there's
> a possibility of child sexual abuse, you have to be extremely
> careful not to put the children in danger by doing the investigation
> yourself while it's happening."
>
> So what should the professor have done? We asked Andrew Caddigan, a
> front line social worker with almost thirty years experience with
> young offenders. Says Caddigan:
>
> "You'd have to be a moron to make some of these decisions I mean
> before you make any statement to anyone concerning the idea that
> this person could be a threat to children, you investigate it. Then
> investigate it again and then investigate it again."
>
> But Memorial University stood firm and believed that professor Bella
> and Rowe did no wrong. Wanda Young met with the university on five
> occasions asking for an official apology but they refused to give
> her one.
>
> So Wanda went on to work in a series of low paying part time social
> work positions -- as a caseworker and as a guard at a juvenile
> detention centre. It was tough work and she received good feedback
> from her superiors like Andrew Caddigan but never was able to move
> up into more senior positions.
>
> And one day while working at the Confederation government building
> in St. John's Andrew Caddigan overhead a group of people discussing
> who would be good for a promotion and heard Wanda's name come up. "I
> heard one of the workers say -- but Wanda has been red-flagged."
>
> Six years after meeting with the social worker whom she thought had
> cleared her name, Wanda found out through Andrew Caddigan that she
> was red-flagged and her name was on a registry within the ministry
> as a suspected child abuser.
>
> A teary-eyed Wanda recalls: "Basically my resume got passed over
> because I was red flagged as an alleged sex offender. I was very
> angry.
>
> And she understood now why her career was being held back. And
> a simple mistake made eight years earlier was causing a major
> disruption in her life.
>
> In 2002, Wanda Young sued Memorial University. In October 2003 her
> case went to court in St. John's. After a three-week trial that
> made headlines in Newfoundland, the six-person jury found Memorial
> University, Professor Bella and William Rowe negligent and granted
> Wanda a damage award of over $800,000.
>
> Wanda had her day in court and finally felt vindicated. But her
> nightmare was far from over. Memorial University appealed the
> case and won. Wanda had received about $300,000 of the $800,000
> award, but had to pay it back. It was a devastating. "I still can't
> understand how somebody can take that away," says Wanda, "I can't
> believe somebody's letting them off for what they did. I makes no
> sense that they can do this to an individual and get off with it."
>
> Wanda had one last chance to reverse the appeal court's decision.
> She took her case to the highest court in the land, the Supreme
> Court of Canada. At best, it was a long shot. The Supreme Court of
> Canada receives hundreds of applications and accepts about thirteen
> percent of the cases.
>
> But in October 2005 they heard Wanda's case and in January 2006
> made a decision. It was unanimous - all seven Supreme Court judges
> sided with Wanda Young. They dismissed all of Memorial University's
> arguments and upheld the original jury's verdict.
>
> It was a big moment for Wanda, her family and her lawyer Gillian
> Butler. W-FIVE caught up with Wanda and her family at her lawyer
> Gillian Butler's office in St. John's. They were ecstatic about the
> ruling but Gillian Butler thinks there are larger issues for the
> rest of the country.
>
> "The most profound one is you cannot make a report without a
> foundation. You cannot make an unjustifiable report because the
> consequences to an individual who was totally innocent are too
> significant," says Butler.
>
> But not everyone agrees. Peter Dudding of the Child Welfare League
> of Canada thinks this case will have a negative effect on child
> welfare reporting practices across the country.
>
> I'm worried about the family doctor, the school teacher, perhaps the
> police officer, those people who are dealing a lot with children,
> who may not be quite as well informed around their responsibities
> are and maybe worried about what their liabilities might look like,"
> Dudding told W-FIVE's Victor Malarek in an interview.
>
> Gillian Butler disagrees. "The Supreme Court of Canada says the
> university had no information. This ruling doesn't affect a case
> [w]hen people truly have information that a child is in need of
> protection. One, there was no child. Two, there was no information.
> End of story."
>
> W-FIVE asked Memorial University for an interview but they didn't
> return our telephone calls. They did issue a press release saying
> they accept the Supreme Court decision and have promised to write
> Wanda a letter of apology.
>
> And after all, that's all Wanda really wanted in the first place.
>
>> 4s00th
>
> Baal
> Retired Lecturer, Encryption and Data Security, Pedo U, Usenet Campus
>
> "Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?" -- "Who will watch the Watchmen?"
> -- Juvenal, Satires, VI, 347. circa 128 AD
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iQEVAwUBRZ38gwjjY4weksDoAQq5VggAj2U49Ikk4dLpQONkbYycv7NU/j4/dZ1n
> VGZoBFEWNnJWq9vn3kDaFb09S8hBkTUnbeSZ/OtDV8B4UlBvTSzp4tsmWnkhN1kd
> AehugJXFTy3KYL3AaqF+dNVmS9O45f1gc1y06sQ6Tn8wkNdmE2zxYjK6H7+PVEAC
> IyKm92BgMgUe67aeq8zkt7Qq9Ii/MaZBBTjXziOaniz2ZbQwZl6PM9TL74jVJThU
> Af5qT7xR75xrQ+DerC6LsU/QRy/cUQIvVUNlR6eubW8oS8qqk2jrwnzDwIs+czSi
> tdgcIRCdD8eHjR9LOwpwR8esHU4e6gsMdFGcC8DlKGdcCuNXm8724w==
> =Kmxl
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
|
|