|
Post by sacerdotal on Jul 23, 2012 11:43:08 GMT -5
One of the friends was passing through our area this past week. She stopped for the night at our house- we were delighted to have her company. She asked us if we had "heard about Leslie". I said that we had. She then asked, "Psychiatrists and psychologists sure can cause a lot of problems, can't they?" I told her that it has been reported that 8 other women had also came forward (thanks, Rational).
Being familiar with the tactics of the friends and workers in handling scandals, it seems obvious that the new scapegoat is the "psychiatrists and psychologists" that are leading the poor sister worker astray. Heaven forbid that an overseer actually be seen as having done something "wrong." The thought pattern is usually "let all men be liars but the overseers never". I didn't ask our friend if she knew that it was professing psychiatrists/psychologists that have helped the sister worker through this experience. But, since they aren't workers, they can be thrown under the bus.
I hope that whomever is responsible for these whisper campaigns realizes the damage that this causes to the integrity of the fellowship.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 23, 2012 12:01:22 GMT -5
She then asked, "Psychiatrists and psychologists sure can cause a lot of problems, can't they?" I told her that it has been reported that 8 other women had also came forward (thanks, Rational). This may not be as far fetched as you seem to be implying. I do not think the SW is lying but in cases where there have been eye witnesses and a considerable amount of time has passed, the actual events become indistinguishable to the events that may have been created from whole cloth. And there was some statements that spoke to the idea that there were things that had not been remembered but were suddenly coming into focus. Recovered memories have always been a problem. The 'recovered" memories are so concrete to the victim that they cannot believe they do not reflect reality. There was a well known case of a woman who was raped while a TV program was on and somehow the person on the TV was, in her mind, the criminal. He was eventually convicted of her rape even though he had been on TV at the time of the rape. There was enough difference in the estimated times that it could be made to fit. DNA proved him to be not guilty and the woman finally realized that she actually had no idea what the criminal looked like. All I am saying is that the reports from either side may be as much of the truth as can be provided. The details and circumstances will be called into question. There is sometimes a fine line between rape and consensual sex which one party later regrets. "Recovered" memories of children in a couple of day-care trials resulted in innocent people being locked in prison for decades. This is a case that should never go to trial. Someone should be working on a fair and just way to address the wrong and be certain that it does not happen in the future. A trial will do nothing good for anyone.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jul 23, 2012 12:07:36 GMT -5
She then asked, "Psychiatrists and psychologists sure can cause a lot of problems, can't they?" I told her that it has been reported that 8 other women had also came forward (thanks, Rational). This may not be as far fetched as you seem to be implying. I do not think the SW is lying but in cases where there have been eye witnesses and a considerable amount of time has passed, the actual events become indistinguishable to the events that may have been created from whole cloth. And there was some statements that spoke to the idea that there were things that had not been remembered but were suddenly coming into focus. Recovered memories have always been a problem. The 'recovered" memories are so concrete to the victim that they cannot believe they do not reflect reality. There was a well known case of a woman who was raped while a TV program was on and somehow the person on the TV was, in her mind, the criminal. He was eventually convicted of her rape even though he had been on TV at the time of the rape. There was enough difference in the estimated times that it could be made to fit. DNA proved him to be not guilty and the woman finally realized that she actually had no idea what the criminal looked like. All I am saying is that the reports from either side may be as much of the truth as can be provided. The details and circumstances will be called into question. There is sometimes a fine line between rape and consensual sex which one party later regrets. "Recovered" memories of children in a couple of day-care trials resulted in innocent people being locked in prison for decades. This is a case that should never go to trial. Someone should be working on a fair and just way to address the wrong and be certain that it does not happen in the future. A trial will do nothing good for anyone. Thanks, Rational. I took a psychology course in college (Psychology 101) and it was a great course and I remember much of what you wrote here being mentioned during the course. I wasn't implying that psychiatrists/psychologists couldn't "lead" people into "remembering" something. I do know that that happens. But, I do have an issue with that being the theory that is being floated for this case as this is implying that the sister worker is lying. May I surmise that you have heard the same "theory" being floated about this case?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 23, 2012 12:35:40 GMT -5
How did you come to that conclusion?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 23, 2012 12:39:57 GMT -5
This may not be as far fetched as you seem to be implying. I do not think the SW is lying but in cases where there have been eye witnesses and a considerable amount of time has passed, the actual events become indistinguishable to the events that may have been created from whole cloth. And there was some statements that spoke to the idea that there were things that had not been remembered but were suddenly coming into focus. Recovered memories have always been a problem. The 'recovered" memories are so concrete to the victim that they cannot believe they do not reflect reality. There was a well known case of a woman who was raped while a TV program was on and somehow the person on the TV was, in her mind, the criminal. He was eventually convicted of her rape even though he had been on TV at the time of the rape. There was enough difference in the estimated times that it could be made to fit. DNA proved him to be not guilty and the woman finally realized that she actually had no idea what the criminal looked like. All I am saying is that the reports from either side may be as much of the truth as can be provided. The details and circumstances will be called into question. There is sometimes a fine line between rape and consensual sex which one party later regrets. "Recovered" memories of children in a couple of day-care trials resulted in innocent people being locked in prison for decades. This is a case that should never go to trial. Someone should be working on a fair and just way to address the wrong and be certain that it does not happen in the future. A trial will do nothing good for anyone. Thanks, Rational. I took a psychology course in college (Psychology 101) and it was a great course and I remember much of what you wrote here being mentioned during the course. I wasn't implying that psychiatrists/psychologists couldn't "lead" people into "remembering" something. I do know that that happens. But, I do have an issue with that being the theory that is being floated for this case as this is implying that the sister worker is lying. May I surmise that you have heard the same "theory" being floated about this case? The entire discussion of false memory and so on, is incidental to the point you are making. The fact is that this person has already decided that LW is clear and SW is in the wrong based on little or no actual information. The problem with that as a prevailing attitude is the resistance created for people to come forward when they are wronged for fear that they won't be believed.
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Jul 23, 2012 13:14:42 GMT -5
I wonder where all of those that were reported to be coming forward are? The case must be weak if it can't stand on it's own.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jul 23, 2012 13:44:41 GMT -5
One of the friends was passing through our area this past week. She stopped for the night at our house- we were delighted to have her company. She asked us if we had "heard about Leslie". I said that we had. She then asked, "Psychiatrists and psychologists sure can cause a lot of problems, can't they?" I told her that it has been reported that 8 other women had also came forward (thanks, Rational). Being familiar with the tactics of the friends and workers in handling scandals, it seems obvious that the new scapegoat is the "psychiatrists and psychologists" that are leading the poor sister worker astray. Heaven forbid that an overseer actually be seen as having done something "wrong." The thought pattern is usually "let all men be liars but the overseers never". I didn't ask our friend if she knew that it was professing psychiatrists/psychologists that have helped the sister worker through this experience. But, since they aren't workers, they can be thrown under the bus. I hope that whomever is responsible for these whisper campaigns realizes the damage that this causes to the integrity of the fellowship. What was her reaction to the report of 8 others? I haven't been inquiring, but I tend to believe that a lot of people would think the SW is being truthful. Too much "controversy" around LW in recent years.
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Jul 23, 2012 15:08:45 GMT -5
Whisper campaign The truth is hard to find in a whisper campaign. In most cases if it was broadcast the real TRUTH would come out and be hard to refute. Just the way things work ken
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Jul 23, 2012 15:14:09 GMT -5
So it seems like Rational is supporting the denials and blaming others for women speaking out about their abuse. No wonder it has taken so long for victims to speak out. Seems like they are saying, poor LW he is the victim of a smear campaign.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 23, 2012 16:38:47 GMT -5
Thanks, Rational. I took a psychology course in college (Psychology 101) and it was a great course and I remember much of what you wrote here being mentioned during the course. I wasn't implying that psychiatrists/psychologists couldn't "lead" people into "remembering" something. I do know that that happens. But, I do have an issue with that being the theory that is being floated for this case as this is implying that the sister worker is lying. That is as valid a theory as accepting the fact that what she has related was the truth. Or that what LW said was true. Or false. I try not to listen to it and assume that there is truth somewhere and that in the end truth will out. My point was that the SW may not have been lying but her story may well not be an accurate record of the actual event(s). The same is true for LW.
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Jul 23, 2012 16:46:22 GMT -5
Do u know how hard it is for victims to speak out, Rational, only to be re abused again. No wonder there is so much abuse in the world. It is the victim who is held under suspicion as much as the offender.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 23, 2012 17:02:18 GMT -5
So it seems like Rational is supporting the denials and blaming others for women speaking out about their abuse. No wonder it has taken so long for victims to speak out. Seems like they are saying, poor LW he is the victim of a smear campaign. It would be difficult for you to create a phrase that would express an idea that would be further from the truth. As I said, LW's denial may or may not be accurate. SW's accusation may or may not be accurate. There is no judgement on either. Now you, from what you have said, have already prejudged. I find I feel better when I avoid prejudice whenever possible.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 23, 2012 17:18:28 GMT -5
Do u know how hard it is for victims to speak out, Rational, only to be re abused again. I have a fair idea? Do you? Do you know how difficult it is to be prejudged? The accusation of the victim and the response of the accused should both be looked at with suspicion. Do you think one is more reliable than the other? Perhaps you have information that is not publicly available.
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Jul 23, 2012 17:29:14 GMT -5
I have a very good idea of how hard it is for victims to speak out and how rarely an offender ever owns up but instead offers denials and rationalisations.
I work with victims every day and have with many offenders over the years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2012 17:30:40 GMT -5
Rat, as someone who was abused as a child and took years to come forward I resent any implication that memory of abuse is not clear. I can remember the rooms my abuse took place in as clear as if it was yesterday. I NEVER forgot the abuse that happened to me. What makes you think SW does not remember it like it was yesterday. Do you have no memories that you will never forget. Where were you when JFK died?
|
|
|
Post by JO on Jul 23, 2012 18:06:34 GMT -5
There was a well known case of a woman who was raped while a TV program was on and somehow the person on the TV was, in her mind, the criminal. He was eventually convicted of her rape even though he had been on TV at the time of the rape. There was enough difference in the estimated times that it could be made to fit. DNA proved him to be not guilty and the woman finally realized that she actually had no idea what the criminal looked like. If this is well known would you please give us a link?
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 23, 2012 18:36:46 GMT -5
She then asked, "Psychiatrists and psychologists sure can cause a lot of problems, can't they?" I told her that it has been reported that 8 other women had also came forward (thanks, Rational). This may not be as far fetched as you seem to be implying. I do not think the SW is lying but in cases where there have been eye witnesses and a considerable amount of time has passed, the actual events become indistinguishable to the events that may have been created from whole cloth. And there was some statements that spoke to the idea that there were things that had not been remembered but were suddenly coming into focus. Recovered memories have always been a problem. The 'recovered" memories are so concrete to the victim that they cannot believe they do not reflect reality. There was a well known case of a woman who was raped while a TV program was on and somehow the person on the TV was, in her mind, the criminal. He was eventually convicted of her rape even though he had been on TV at the time of the rape. There was enough difference in the estimated times that it could be made to fit. DNA proved him to be not guilty and the woman finally realized that she actually had no idea what the criminal looked like. All I am saying is that the reports from either side may be as much of the truth as can be provided. The details and circumstances will be called into question. There is sometimes a fine line between rape and consensual sex which one party later regrets. "Recovered" memories of children in a couple of day-care trials resulted in innocent people being locked in prison for decades. This is a case that should never go to trial. Someone should be working on a fair and just way to address the wrong and be certain that it does not happen in the future. A trial will do nothing good for anyone. I have sometimes wondered in these cases as well, when events become known after a period of time and it is only done so under a psychiatric treatment....that is it perhaps something more like a rough feel-you-up that gets defined into something that really wasn't....but at the same time, I know how rape is, but for me I couldn't forget it for a day...there was that constant watching for another attack simply because I had not reported the rape to the authorities....plus even in my private life, I had to keep my senses to me because I knew to let such a thing slip that my boyfriend would have gone and literally killed the man since he knew him......so I have to also think that if the rapist is somewhat your boss, then there may be reasons for certain personality types to forget or push it back because they're confronted by the perp in many ways.....fear is a great determint when the real truth is needed. And this SW does admit to freezing up and I'm sure that that was fear that did thatr to her. Plus as I've mentioned before many of the 2x2 young girls are not taught how to protect themselves, to scream and holler for all it's worth....sure he may beat the hell out of you, but at least you did object loudly....and with the beating you do have some evidence of being treated against your will.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 23, 2012 18:39:20 GMT -5
This may not be as far fetched as you seem to be implying. I do not think the SW is lying but in cases where there have been eye witnesses and a considerable amount of time has passed, the actual events become indistinguishable to the events that may have been created from whole cloth. And there was some statements that spoke to the idea that there were things that had not been remembered but were suddenly coming into focus. Recovered memories have always been a problem. The 'recovered" memories are so concrete to the victim that they cannot believe they do not reflect reality. There was a well known case of a woman who was raped while a TV program was on and somehow the person on the TV was, in her mind, the criminal. He was eventually convicted of her rape even though he had been on TV at the time of the rape. There was enough difference in the estimated times that it could be made to fit. DNA proved him to be not guilty and the woman finally realized that she actually had no idea what the criminal looked like. All I am saying is that the reports from either side may be as much of the truth as can be provided. The details and circumstances will be called into question. There is sometimes a fine line between rape and consensual sex which one party later regrets. "Recovered" memories of children in a couple of day-care trials resulted in innocent people being locked in prison for decades. This is a case that should never go to trial. Someone should be working on a fair and just way to address the wrong and be certain that it does not happen in the future. A trial will do nothing good for anyone. Thanks, Rational. I took a psychology course in college (Psychology 101) and it was a great course and I remember much of what you wrote here being mentioned during the course. I wasn't implying that psychiatrists/psychologists couldn't "lead" people into "remembering" something. I do know that that happens. But, I do have an issue with that being the theory that is being floated for this case as this is implying that the sister worker is lying. May I surmise that you have heard the same "theory" being floated about this case? Are we sure that the psychiatrist/psycfhologist was in reference to the female or I was wondering if some kind of abberration of behaviours might be being tossed out there for the male?
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 23, 2012 18:43:50 GMT -5
Do u know how hard it is for victims to speak out, Rational, only to be re abused again. No wonder there is so much abuse in the world. It is the victim who is held under suspicion as much as the offender. This was one of the reasons that many females did not report their rapes, esp. date or acquaintance rapes because it would end up where the police would say that the female "asked for it". and then had to holler rape to keep in good stead with her parents/significant others. That was the main reason I never reported mine...I knew exactly what the police in this area at that time, did to females who did report acquaintance rape and even sometimes just rape from some joe blow!
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 23, 2012 18:45:35 GMT -5
I have a very good idea of how hard it is for victims to speak out and how rarely an offender ever owns up but instead offers denials and rationalisations. I work with victims every day and have with many offenders over the years. Tell us why it is some victims do forget some details until a later date and some victims can't forget one second of the violation of their selves...oplease
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 23, 2012 19:16:39 GMT -5
I have a very good idea of how hard it is for victims to speak out and how rarely an offender ever owns up but instead offers denials and rationalisations. I work with victims every day and have with many offenders over the years. Sounds like we may have worker in the same fields. Victims often do not come forward. Victims are often accused of being at fault. Victims are not always victims. Victims do not always remember the facts as they were. I have found it is best to look at statements as unproven stories until shown to be otherwise. It is not a matter of not believing or believing. It is a matter of evaluating the available data and arriving at the conclusion the data supports.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 23, 2012 19:20:09 GMT -5
The entire discussion of false memory and so on, is incidental to the point you are making. The fact is that this person has already decided that LW is clear and SW is in the wrong based on little or no actual information. The problem with that as a prevailing attitude is the resistance created for people to come forward when they are wronged for fear that they won't be believed. Exactly. The validity of the information provided by either side is unknown. I mentioned the false memories because many people believe that an eyewitness is the best source there is.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jul 23, 2012 19:24:39 GMT -5
I have a very good idea of how hard it is for victims to speak out and how rarely an offender ever owns up but instead offers denials and rationalisations. I work with victims every day and have with many offenders over the years. Sounds like we may have worker in the same fields. Victims often do not come forward. Victims are often accused of being at fault. Victims are not always victims. Victims do not always remember the facts as they were. I have found it is best to look at statements as unproven stories until shown to be otherwise. It is not a matter of not believing or believing. It is a matter of evaluating the available data and arriving at the conclusion the data supports. I'm truly curious, Rational. How should the authorities handle a rape case when there is no physical evidence available just "her story against his story". If both stories are plausible, then what to do? (I am not referring to the LW-SW case.)
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 23, 2012 19:25:56 GMT -5
I wonder where all of those that were reported to be coming forward are? The case must be weak if it can't stand on it's own. The 8 people I mentioned are people who have come forward to the investigator. I have heard no additional information.
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Jul 23, 2012 19:49:47 GMT -5
I have a very good idea of how hard it is for victims to speak out and how rarely an offender ever owns up but instead offers denials and rationalisations. I work with victims every day and have with many offenders over the years. Tell us why it is some victims do forget some details until a later date and some victims can't forget one second of the violation of their selves...oplease The mind processes things in different ways. Often an event is too traumatic for the mind to cope so it burys it, so to speak. Or in other cases it haunts them in flashbacks and memories or both. Symptoms of Post Traumatic Stess Disorder. Intrusive thoughts, flashbacks, reliving it and/or blanks. In certain events people lose their memory for a period of time. An inability to recall parts of the trauma(s)
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 23, 2012 20:03:03 GMT -5
Rat, as someone who was abused as a child and took years to come forward I resent any implication that memory of abuse is not clear. Resent it as you wish but you have demonstrated the problem. People do not make up their memories intentionally. They drift and can actually grow more vivid with time. And they are so believable to the person that at times nothing, even when presented with facts that make the memory impossible, can shake their belief. This has been a well researched area. psychology.about.com/od/findex/g/false-memory-definition.htmHow this relates to the law: cogprints.org/599/1/199802009.htmlThese are much the same words that people say about things they 'remember'. They even get clearer with time. No one is saying that you will not remember. False memory does not mean you forget only that the facts are not always correct. Her statement regarding the fact that for a while she did not remember it. That and the research that has been done in this area demonstrating just how poor people are when it comes to recalling traumatic events.I have memories I will never forget. But when I was talking with my siblings it turns out that we have very different memories of the same events.Do you consider death to be at the impact of the second shot or pronouncement of death at Parkland Hospital?
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Jul 23, 2012 20:13:12 GMT -5
One of the aspects of Post Traumatic Stress is the inability to remember parts of the event.
You need to now do some researching on how many false memories are there compared to true memories and how many false claims compared to true ones.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2012 20:43:06 GMT -5
Rat, you have not gone to meeting in how many years? 40+ How do we know what you say about your experiences in meeting is true?? Do you have a better memory then the rest of us?? When was the last time the workers had a meal or stayed at your house. Oh that right they don't go to your house. If you have not experienced these things in so many years how do you know what you remember is true??? You like to go after people that have experiences things in the past few years or months. You love to tell us your experiences that were many years ago, and we are to believe they are true??
|
|