Saturday, February 8, 2014

Neil Brick

In 1995, Neil Brick founded the SMART newsletter. In 1996, SMART was on the Internet and in 1998 SMART started having ritual abuse conferences.

There are now 117 newsletters online at

with many conferences with online transcripts and ordering information

Articles by Neil Brick

Neil Brick has worked hard to build a research base for child abuse and ritual abuse survivors.  Neil Brick has worked to develop advocacy efforts to help survivors and their helpers.

There are online articles with inaccurate information about Neil Brick.  This web page responds to factual errors about Neil Brick and his work.  Those interested in contacting Neil for an interview can write smartnews (delete space before @) for more information.

Neil Brick has always been a strong advocate for people thinking for themselves. Neil has encouraged people to use their critical thinking skills and fully research topics.

In one presentation, Neil stated :
“Please use your own judgment and try to research everything as fully as possible. Don’t accept anything anyone says simply because they say it or claim to be an expert or whatever. Try to check it out for yourself.”

Several of Neil Brick’s articles (listed below) provide readers information on how to avoid being mind controlled and encourage readers to find out for themselves about topics from as many sources as possible.

Neil Brick’s conference presentation transcripts:

Recent Child Abuse Crimes and Efforts to Unite Survivors by Neil Brick

Always Getting Stronger: Giving Survivors a Voice in the World by Neil Brick

The Myth of Panic – Exposing Theories Used to Cover Up Ritual Abuse Crimes by Neil Brick 

Fighting the Spin : The Truth about Child Abuse Cases by Neil Brick

The Move from Blame the Victim to Blame the Helper by Neil Brick

Ritual Abuse, the trenches of the stopping child abuse movement by Neil Brick

Debating The Non-Believers – Getting equal time for Survivors’ Views by Neil Brick

Stopping Ritual Abuse – What can we do today by Neil Brick

The 12-step Healing Process and Survivor Advocacy by Neil Brick

How healing from ritual abuse and mind control works by Neil Brick

How can we advocate for survivors of ritual abuse by example and advocacy? by Neil Brick

Stopping Mind Control and Healing by Neil Brick

My healing and helping others by Neil Brick

My Most Recent Memories and My Personal Growth by Neil Brick

Trigger management and conference safety presentation by Neil Brick

Other papers, articles and transcripts written by Neil Brick

How Childhood Sexual Abuse Affects Interpersonal Relationships by Neil Brick

The Etymological Antecedents of and Scientific Evidence for the Existence of Dissociative Identity Disorder by Neil Brick

The Diagnosis and Assessment of Dissociative Identity Disorder by Neil Brick

The Neurological Basis for the Theory of Recovered Memory by Neil Brick

The Alleged Ethical Violations of Elizabeth Loftus in the Case of Jane Doe by Neil Brick

Propaganda & Mind Control by Neil Brick

Ritual Abuse and Its Political Implications by Neil Brick

Solidarity in the fight against Ritual Abuse and Torture by Neil Brick

Advocacy and Saving Lives by Neil Brick

Ritual Abuse/Mind Control Presentation by Neil Brick

Data proving the existence of recovered memory, ritual abuse, mk-ultra and information on the backlash by Neil Brick

How Cues and Programming Work in Mind Control and Propaganda by Neil Brick

Video on youtube –

Proof ritual abuse and Satanic ritual abuse exists by Neil Brick

Information on harassment and statements about Neil Brick and SMART

Neil Brick’s response to recent attacks regarding the examiner . com and harassment by false memory proponents.

Douglas Misicko alias Douglas Mesner update 7 – Radio Interview Rebuttal
copied with permission from

Friday, November 8, 2013

Douglas Misicko alias Douglas Mesner update 7 – Radio Interview Rebuttal

We recommend you read these pages before reading this page:

These pages will give readers the full background on this subject as well as a rebuttal to Mesner’s comments about ritual abuse and our conference. These pages list many of the comments posted by Douglas Mesner as well as other aliases. These pages will show connections between Mesner and websites like process, and the book “Might is Right.”

Douglas Mesner has continued using insults and attacks against survivors of ritual abuse and the professionals that work with them.  He has harassed and followed survivors and survivor advocates around the Internet for the last several years. Aliases have been used adding additional insults and name calling against survivors.

Radio Interview Rebuttal

Recently, Doug Mesner has continued his attacks on Neil Brick and other ritual abuse survivors. He continues his use of name calling and insults against ritual abuse survivors and their helpers. He repeats the same misstatements about the conference we have rebutted in earlier articles on this website. He calls those he has ideological disagreements with as having delusions and paranoia.

In a radio interview this week, Mesner states “The organization S.M.A.R.T is run by this little shit named Neil Brick, he’s actually when I first saw him, he’s this staggering little moron with this greasy combover and thick glasses, and he’s very short and very frail …” Of course, this physical description isn’t true. Mesner paints a false caricature of an ideological opponent to discredit them in the eyes of the reader. This is a dishonest attempt to discredit someone and their ideas. Neil Brick doesn’t stagger, is a genius (test score), doesn’t have thick glasses and is in excellent physical shape now and was at the conference. This fabricated description is part of the false narrative Mesner paints to back up the other false ideas he promotes to incorrectly discredit ritual abuse survivors.

S.M.A.R.T and Neil Brick have repeatedly contested the so-called factual points of his articles and have disproven many of them. Mesner calls Neil Brick’s story delusional, but has no evidence it is, other than Mesner’s own belief system. Of course, this is not evidence of anyone’s delusion, but evidence of Mesner’s disagreement and nothing more.

Mesner analyzes Neil Brick’s motives for having a specific memory of trauma, yet he knows little about Neil Brick and has never had a conversation with him. The fact is that Neil Brick had a memory triggered by specific events that had occured during that weekend. Neil Brick and most survivors critically analyze their memories and make sure that their memories are not influenced by others. Ritual abuse survivors discuss the importance of this a lot. He claims that Neil Brick had an “attack of paranoia.” Of course, he and most survivors do not suffer from paranoia or any other delusional symptoms. To the contrary, many survivors are very concrete in their thinking and do not fully accept any ideas unless they are well proven. Mesner states that Neil Brick “might need some help” without ever having talked to him at length or having any experience in the mental health field, he makes this incorrect statement.

Mesner makes a statement that implies he doesn’t believe that suppressed trauma can cause personal problems, yet this has been proven by scientific research studies to be true. He mentions the backlash after he published his articles. The reality is that ritual abuse survivors wanted to correct Mesner’s repeated misstatements on the Internet and address his personal insults and name calling toward ritual abuse survivors.

Mesner continues his false narrative stating that ritual abuse survivors don’t really care about children and that they don’t care about victims of pedophilia, unless a person is talking about ritual abuse survivors in particular. This is false. One good example is this website . This one website has many articles about all sorts of different types of child abuse, including clergy abuse, cult abuse, organized pedophilia, child trafficking, etc. Many other ritual abuse and child abuse websites cover all of these topics also. He continues by stating that ritual abuse survivors believe that the world owes them everything because they have declared themselves victims. This is not true either. He makes this blanket statement and many others without knowing ritual abuse survivors.

Mesner in essence paints a false picture of ritual abuse survivors and their helpers without any real evidence to try and discredit them. To the best of our knowledge, he has little to no experience dealing with severe abuse survivors and has no training in working with them.

Wednesday, June 19, 2013

Letter of Support for Neil Brick

Letter of Support for Neil Brick:

For the many years we have been active as advocates for survivors of extreme abuse, we have been dismayed that no matter how cogent and consistent the message we deliver, we are regularly shouted down by the backlash that appears so united it speaks with one voice. The survivor movement has many factions with frequently competing agendas and it has been disheartening to see the conflicts that have periodically erupted as differing viewpoints collide.  This prevents us from presenting a united front and detracts from the force of our message.

One strong voice that has emerged from the fray has always concentrated exclusively on getting out the truth of ritual abuse and child sexual abuse in general.  We are speaking of Neil Brick.  Neil founded SMART and in 1995 started publishing a newsletter that included news and items of interest, announcements of books and articles, and in-depth discussions of issues.  For sixteen consecutive years he has organized a conference with the goals of "helping stop future occurrences of ritual abuse, helping survivors of ritual abuse, naming groups that have participated in alleged illegal activities, and uniting those working to stop ritual abuse."  These conferences have done enormous good for the survivor community.  Neil has provided a safe and congenial environment where survivors and their advocates can share, learn, and teach.

Recently Neil has been engulfed in controversies not of his choosing or making.  He has been the target of salacious and slanderous attacks that impugn his integrity, morality, and values.  In the face of this barrage of innuendo and lies, Neil has tried to remain focused on the bigger picture: the survival of the survivor movement.  To this end he has attempted to disconnect himself from the battle that threatens his reputation and direct his energies and passions toward the success of the upcoming SMART conference in August.  Neil’s efforts are laudable and deserve the respect and support of the advocacy and survivor communities.

We ask you to join us in a demonstration of our support for our friend, Neil Brick, and for the courage and compassion at the core of his dedication to survivors and their right to take control of their own lives.  We encourage you all to show your confidence in Neil by committing to attend the SMART conferences whenever you are able.  They are not only a valuable resource from which we all benefit from sharing and learning, they offer us the opportunity for renewal, connection, and integration into the wider world beyond our personal borders. Engaging with one another and joining together to confront the challenging social, criminal, psychological and physical effects of victimization gives meaning to the suffering of survivors past and present, and brings closer a time when we can assert that there will be no future victims to join their ranks.

Neil has our unwavering and unconditional support. Please let him know he has yours too by adding your signatures to this letter of support.


Written by Randy and Pam Noblitt

Endorsed by:

Jean Riseman
Eileen King
Shamai Currim PhD
Laurie Matthew
Nick Bryant
Micaela Martinez
Pamela J. Monday, Ph.D., Austin, Texas
E. Sue Blume, LCSW, Diplomate in Clinical Social Work    
Kathy Downing, Burbank, CA
Jan White
deJoly LaBrier
Lynn Crook, MEd
Wanda Karriker, Ph.D.
Sarah S.
Maria Pirone
Sandra Buck
Patricia Kirby
Connie Valentine
Ginny Fouts
Jan Kraft, M.A., Ed.
Carl Raschke
Spence Everson
Dave Staffen
Mary Jo Schneller
Helen L. McGonigle
Judy Byington, MSW, LCSW, ret
Dana Raphael, PhD
Dale Griffis
Sandra Fecht M.A.
Janet Thomas
Mary Moore
Staci Sprout, LICSW, CSAT
Carmen Holiday
Keely S. Dorran
Julaine Cooper, aka Judith Swanson
Dr Carl Stonier PhD

I want to thank everyone for their tremendous support of my work. I really appreciate all those working together to help stop child abuse.  Sincerely,  Neil Brick

Sunday, June 2, 2013

Douglas Misicko alias Douglas Mesner update 6 – article

Douglas Misicko alias Douglas Mesner update 6 – article

We recommend you read these pages before reading this page:
These pages will give readers the full background on this subject as well as a rebuttal to Mesner’s comments about ritual abuse and our conference. These pages list many of the comments posted by Douglas Mesner as well as other aliases. These pages will show connections between Mesner and websites like process, and the book “Might is Right.”

Douglas Mesner has continued using insults and attacks against survivors of ritual abuse and the professionals that work with them.  He has harassed and followed survivors and survivor advocates around the Internet for the last several years. Aliases have been used adding additional insults and name calling against survivors. article

On approximately May 25, 2013, Mr. Mesner published an article on the about the Castlewood Treatment Center and its founder Mark Schwartz. This article originally contained another attack against Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T.

In the original article at the in 2009, Mr. Mesner wrote about 2009 S.M.A.R.T. conference he attended. He attended without telling S.M.A.R.T. he was a reporter. The media is not allowed into the presentations at the S.M.A.R.T. conference for the safety of the conference participants, who are survivors of child abuse and their supporters. He cancelled his conference check immediately after attending the conference without notifying S.M.A.R.T.

In 2011, in written correspondence with the, Mr. Brick was notified by the that Mr. Mesner had agreed to stop writing about Mr. Brick and his organization.

In the original 2013 examiner article, Mr. Mesner  repeated the fact that one display table out of many at the conference had a hat (as well as many other items) used to protect the wearer from electromagnetism. He took this one thing totally out of proportion to attack the conference. He repeated the fact that one woman at the conference talked about supernatural occurrences in her abuse story. He used these two occurrences at our conference to attack and insult our conference and our work, ignoring the strong research base backing the reality of ritual abuse and the many presentations at our conference verifying the reality of ritual abuse. In the original article, he used the terms “lunacy” and “delusional assertions” to further insult the work of S.M.A.R.T.  Mr. Mesner continues taking facts out of context and using these to disparage Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T.

S.M.A.R.T. has written rebuttals about different parts of Mesner’s conference report.

Neil Brick called the to request removal of the section of the article about S.M.A.R.T., due to its misrepresenting and insulting the work of S.M.A.R.T. The article was taken down temporarily pending further discussion.

Before this could occur, it is believed Mr. Mesner put the article back up under a different url. Mesner had apparently removed the name “Neil Brick” and “S.M.A.R.T”, and instead had the word “Censored” with hyperlinks which go directly to his article about the 2009 S.M.A.R.T. conference. In the one paragraph about S.M.A.R.T., Mr. Mesner links six times to his articles, either about the S.M.A.R.T. conference or the law suit. Furthermore, Mr. Mesner mentions who and what is censored in the comment section below the article.

Mesner writes in the comment section, “If ever there are factual disputes with any of my articles, I am happy to correct any error.” S.M.A.R.T. believes this not to be the case. Mr. Mesner has been notified of factual errors and has not changed these. One example was the title of his examiner article itself, “Mark Schwartz, accused of malpractice, removed from Castlewood clinic staff.” There is no evidence presented that Dr. Schwartz was “removed” from the Castlewood Clinical Staff. The two articles Mr. Mesner links to in the comment section state Dr. Schwartz “stepped down.” To the best of our knowledge, this was never corrected before the article was taken down.

In the comment section, Mr Mesner stated that Mr. Brick made “incessant phone calls” to the examiner. This is not true also and is another exaggeration of Mr. Mesner’s. He states the “Examiner pulled the article out of convenience.” No, the examiner pulled the article pending further investigation.


Later, the paragraphs in the examiner article mentioning Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T were deleted, but the comment in the comment section about Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T. remained.  After this, the entire article was deleted from the .  Then it appears he was terminated as an editor by the (by his account at a new Internet article).

At a new article about all this, he wrote about a woman called Julaine, who spoke at our conference.

This is what she wrote for us in rebuttal to him previously:

“As a speaker at the conference as well as “named” throughout this commentary, I am amazed and appalled at the inclusion of a seriously flawed “report” from a man who canceled his check that was to pay for his attendance….and then failed to check his “facts” about not only myself but others in attendance as well.  His errors include such small details as my age and health, reason for sitting at a table (too many papers to juggle standing up), and larger ones such as misquoting and putting words in my mouth.  My presentation is on tape, and it would have been easy for him to verify any of his shaky “facts”, but he chose to make fun of our pain, as well.”

In the new article about his no longer being at the, he writes about his interactions with the  Neil Brick did send the correspondence indicating errors in Mr. Mesner’s article about Castlewood, which included information about Mr. Brick and S.M.A.R.T.
In the new article, Mr. Mesner writes “In fact, Brick was just awarded some type of honors from an organization that (a former member of the Castlewood clinical staff) is a board member of…”  Neil Brick is unaware of receiving any award from anywhere.  This appears to be a total fabrication.

In the new article, Mr. Mesner quotes his private correspondence with the  and some of their replies. As a general rule, private correspondence is kept private.

In the new article, Mr. Mesner keeps mentioning the word “harassment.” S.M.A.R.T. believes this is not true.  Some correspondence was made as needed to let the examiner know about the problems with the article.

Douglas Mesner also writes “Remarkably, Examiner never questioned what the facts were…”  The examiner did request Neil Brick to send them information about problems with the article, and this was sent.

Other Internet Information

Other supporters of Mr. Mesner also wrote about Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T. in regard to Mesner’s Castlewood article.

A supporter states Mr. Brick promotes harmful and inaccurate information to the public.  This is obviously not true. Everything published by Neil Brick and S.M.A.R.T. is primarily from scientific and mainstream media sources. The information published by S.M.A.R.T. has helped many trauma survivors and their helpers

The harassment of trauma survivors and their supporters continues, but survivors and their helpers still continue to publish their research and work. They continue to speak out for themselves and other survivors.  The most important thing is to not be silenced, regardless of the harassment, insults and inaccurate statements made by the false memory syndrome proponents.

copied with permission from:

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Recent Child Abuse Crimes and Efforts to Unite Survivors

from a transcript at the 2012 conference

During the last year there have been some major developments in the child abuse prevention field.  Several legal cases developed involving either cover ups or the networking of serial child abusers.

Probably the most famous case is the case of Jerry Sandusky and Penn State.

This case includes many media reports over the last few months. Sandusky faced 52 criminal counts for alleged abuse involving ten boys.

It was reported he wrote intimate letters to the victims. He had a charity, which tried to help children from disadvantaged families and broken homes. Sandusky kept a private list of boys the charity was helping. It is believed this list may have been a list of potential targets for him to abuse. Victims alleged that contact with Sandusky began with showering together and progress to abuse over time.

In June, Pennsylvania prosecutors considered bringing criminal charges against former top Penn State University officials for allegedly concealing what they knew about Sandusky’s  conduct.

Sources stated, that former university President Graham Spanier and others discussed whether they were obligated to tell authorities about a 2001 allegation involving a late-night encounter in a Penn State shower room between Sandusky and a young boy, both of whom were naked. They decided not to inform social services agencies. Later it was found that they decided this after meeting with Joe Paterno. It was alleged that Sandusky threatened  a victim that if he told, he would never see his family again.  Descriptions during the trial included ways Sandusky “groomed” his victims, including giving them tickets to football games. Three people in the late 1990s or early 2000s saw Sandusky in the showers with boys, one alleged he saw behavior that could be seen as sexual. There were also allegations of abuse in Sandusky’s basement. One victim hesitated talking to legal authorities, stating “Who would believe kids?”

During an interesting interview with NBC’s Bob Costas before the trial, Sandusky stated,
“And I didn’t go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I’ve helped. There are many that I didn’t have – I hardly had any contact with who I have helped in many, many ways.”

In late June, Sandusky’s adopted son stated he was molested also. Sandusky was found guilty on dozens of child sex abuse charges. There were convictions related to all 10 sexual abuse victims on 45 counts of sexual abuse. Two former Penn State officials face charges of perjury and failure to report suspected abuse in an alleged cover-up of the incident.

This case has important ramifications for the child abuse protection field.  It showed how institutions could cover up abuse for years. It shows how perpetrators find victims, groom them and threaten them so they don’t talk.  It shows how many people didn’t believe that he was abusing children, even verbally attacking those that stated he did.

I want to read a quote from an article in Boston Magazine.
In the Wake of Jerry Sandusky – To prevent child abuse, something has to change. So why won’t it? By Barry Nolan 6/25/2012

After the verdict came down in the Jerry Sandusky case, Linda Kelly, the Pennsylvania State Attorney General, stood before the assembled press and said something very important. She said: “One of the recurring themes of the witness’ testimony was … ‘Who would believe a kid?’”

Yes indeed, who would take the word of a mere child over that of a beloved coach like Jerry Sandusky about sexual abuse? Even though we know that such terrible crimes are far too common and the numbers are staggering, we can’t believe it. So, from 2005 to 2006 about 135,300 children were sexually abused.
Who would take the word of a child against a respected adult even though we know that in up to 93 percent of the time, the child knows his abuser and as many as 47 percent of the perpetrators are family members.
Who would take the word of a child even though in the vast majority of cases the only witness to child sex abuse  is the child?

The ugly truth about child sexual abuse is that we really don’t want to hear about it. And far too much of it happens after an initial complaint about a perpetrator has been made and it’s not investigated thoroughly.
Take the tragic sex abuse scandal in the Catholic Church, and just imagine how things could have been different if there had been real listening and forceful action early on. There were 10,667 complaints of sexual abuse against 4,392 priests and deacons between 1950 and 2002 and yet no serious or thorough investigation took place. And so the abuse was allowed to continue. Until the Globe’s Pulitzer Prize winning series compelled self-examination and change….

The first child to make a complaint in the Sandusky case came forward 14 years ago. But who was going to believe a kid over Jerry Sandusky? So the complaint was not thoroughly investigated and, tragically, the abuse continued….

Back in 1993, most people simply didn’t want to believe the awful things a kid had to say about what Jackson did behind closed doors. After all, Michael Jackson was a lavishly talented and beloved public figure. But Dimond, and a few others, listened carefully and pursued leads and looked at the evidence. And the awful truth began to come out. The boy in that case would eventually accept a settlement from Jackson that was widely reported to be in the range of $20 million.

I asked her for her thoughts on the bigger picture, the Sandusky case, the scandal in the church, and the Jackson matter. Here is part of what she sent me in an e-mail:

“Pedophiles are really the very person you think they could never be. They are the most charming, personable, charitable, and kid-friendly people you would ever want to meet. They pay their taxes, they go to church, they cloak themselves in acts of charity and they say they just want to help you raise your child by being a positive influence in their lives … Too often detectives believe the perpetrator’s version of events and they are freed to violate again.”

Louis J. Freeh, the former federal judge and director of the F.B.I. spent seven months invesitgating the Sandusky scandal at Penn State. (from Abuse Inquiry Faults Paterno and Others at Penn State By KEN BELSON July 12, 2012 NYT)

His report stated:
The most senior officials at Penn State had shown a “total and consistent disregard” for the welfare of children, had worked together to actively conceal Mr. Sandusky’s assaults, and had done so for one central reason: fear of bad publicity. That publicity, Mr. Freeh said Thursday, would have hurt the nationally ranked football program, Mr. Paterno’s reputation as a coach of high principles, the Penn State “brand” and the university’s ability to raise money as one of the most respected public institutions in the country….
In 2000, a janitor at the football building saw Mr. Sandusky assaulting a boy in the showers. Horrified, he consulted with his colleagues, but decided not to do anything. They were all, Mr. Freeh said, afraid to “take on the football program.” “They said the university would circle around it,” Mr. Freeh said of the employees. “It was like going against the president of the United States. If that’s the culture on the bottom, then God help the culture at the top.”

….One new and central finding of the Freeh investigation is that Mr. Paterno, who died in January, knew as far back as 1998 that there were concerns Mr. Sandusky might be behaving inappropriately with children. It was then that the campus police investigated a claim by a mother that her son had been molested by Mr. Sandusky in a shower at Penn State. Mr. Paterno, through his family, had insisted after Mr. Sandusky’s arrest that he never knew anything about the 1998 case. In fact, he had testified under oath before the grand jury hearing evidence against Mr. Sandusky that he was not aware of the 1998 investigation.
But Mr. Freeh’s report asserts that Mr. Paterno not only knew of the investigation, but followed it closely. Local prosecutors ultimately decided not to charge Mr. Sandusky, and Mr. Paterno did nothing. Mr. Paterno failed to take any action, the investigation found, “even though Sandusky had been a key member of his coaching staff for almost 30 years and had an office just steps away from Mr. Paterno’s.” “In order to avoid the consequences of bad publicity,” the most powerful leaders of Penn State, Mr. Freeh’s group said, “repeatedly concealed critical facts relating to Sandusky’s child abuse from the authorities, the board of trustees, the Penn State community and the public at large.”….

Freeh Report on The Pennsylvania State University

The independent report by Louis Freeh and his law firm, Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP, into the facts and circumstances of the actions of The Pennsylvania State University surrounding the child abuse committed by a former employee, Gerald A. Sandusky

In mid July it was found that Penn State did not fully cooperate in the Sandusky prob, according to the state’s governor.  Coach Joe Paterno (the long time coach and football icon at Penn Sate had his statue removed.

In July, the NCAA levied unprecedented sanctions against the program for its role in the sexual abuse scandal involving former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky, fining the school $60 million, imposing a four-year postseason ban on Penn State football, significantly reducing the number of scholarship players the team can field over the next four years and placing the program on probation for five years. All of Penn State’s football program wins from 1998 to 2011 were vacated.

Another large international child-porn network was uncovered this year.
….Authorities have identified more than 140 young victims so far and say there is no end in sight as they pore through hundreds of thousands of images found on the suspects’ computers. They are also trying to determine whether the men who talked about murder and cannibalism actually committed such acts or were just sharing twisted fantasies….

Robert Mikelsons, a 27-year-old day care worker who baby-sat the boy, was arrested. On his computer were thousands and thousands of images of children being molested and raped….

Photos and online chats found on computers owned by Diduca and Mikelsons led to more than three dozen other suspects in seven countries, including Canada, Britain, Germany, Sweden and Mexico. The oldest victim in the Netherlands was 4, the youngest just 19 days old….

Mikelsons also received an 18-year sentence, followed by indefinite psychiatric commitment, after confessing to sexually abusing more than 80 children….

Vast international child-porn network uncovered  By DENISE LAVOIE AP Legal Affairs Writer Aug 4, 2012 BOSTON (AP)

Another large case was Operation Ore – the UK wing of a huge FBI operation.
(50 police officers arrested in child porn raids Wednesday, Aug 01 2012)

Operation Ore is the UK wing of a huge FBI operation which traced 250,000 paedophiles worldwide last year through credit card details used to pay for downloading child porn. The names of British suspects were passed on by US investigators. Suspects were traced through the Landslide web site – a gateway to an international collection of child pornography sites. Thomas Reedy, who ran the web site and earned millions from it, is now serving several life sentences in the US.

The Boy Scout case is also a large case revealing repeat child abuse allegations.
Boy Scout files reveal repeat child abuse by sexual predators
Los Angeles Times review of Boy Scout documents shows that a blacklist meant to protect boys from sexual predators too often failed in its mission.
By Jason Felch and Kim Christensen, Los Angeles Times August 5, 2012
For nearly a century, the Boy Scouts of America has relied on a confidential blacklist known as the “perversion files” as a crucial line of defense against sexual predators….

Scouting officials say they’ve used the files to prevent hundreds of men who had been expelled for alleged sexual abuse from returning to the ranks. They’ve fought hard in court to keep the records from public view, saying confidentiality was needed to protect victims, witnesses and anyone falsely accused….
A Los Angeles Times review of more than 1,200 files dating from 1970 to 1991 found more than 125 cases across the country in which men allegedly continued to molest Scouts after the organization was first presented with detailed allegations of abusive behavior….

In at least 50 cases, the Boy Scouts expelled suspected abusers, only to discover later that they had reentered the program and were accused of molesting again.
One scoutmaster was expelled in 1970 for sexually assaulting a 14-year-old boy in Indiana. Even after being convicted of the crime, he went on to join two troops in Illinois between 1971 and 1988. He later admitted to molesting more than 100 boys, was convicted of the sexual assault of a Scout in 1989 and was sentenced to 100 years in prison, according to his file and court records.,0,5822319.story

A landmark Philadelphia priest sex-abuse trial occurred this year.
Allegations were made Msgr. William J. Lynn moved accused priests around to different parishes, enabling them to prey upon other children.

“Prosecutors say Lynn, 61, covered up child sex abuse allegations, often by transferring priests to unsuspecting parishes.  Lynn’s motive was to avoid scandal and any potential loss of money for the church, they argued. His job was to supervise 800 priests, which included investigating sex abuse claims, from 1992 to 2004. The defense said Lynn tried to handle documented cases of pedophile priests, making a list in 1994 of 35 accused predators and writing memos to suggest treatment and suspensions.”

Jury breaks without verdict in Philadelphia church abuse case June 7, 2012 PHILADELPHIA (Reuters),0,7146796.story

Philadelphia Priest Trial: Jury Reaches Split Verdict In Case Of Monsignor William Lynn By MARYCLAIRE DALE 06/22/12 PHILADELPHIA
“A Roman Catholic church official was convicted of child endangerment but acquitted of conspiracy Friday in a landmark clergy-abuse trial, making him the first U.S. church official branded a felon for covering up abuse claims. Monsignor William Lynn helped the archdiocese keep predators in ministry, and the public in the dark, by telling parishes their priests were being removed for health reasons and then sending the men to unsuspecting churches, prosecutors said. Lynn, 61, served as secretary for clergy from 1992 to 2004, mostly under Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua….He was convicted of only a single endangerment count, which carries a possible 3 1/2- to seven-year prison term. The jury could not reach a verdict for Lynn’s co-defendant, the Rev. James Brennan, who was accused of sexually abusing a 14-year-old boy in 1999….
The jury, however, did find that Lynn endangered the victim of defrocked priest Edward Avery, who pleaded guilty before trial to a 1999 sexual assault.

As many people know, the West Memphis Three were released from prison last year after spending 18 years there. One of them was on death row before he was released.
The three entered what are known as Alford pleas, which in essence is that they admit there is enough evidence to possibly convict them, but at the same time they don’t have to admit guilt. The court then pronounced them guilty. This event revived interested in the West Memphis Three case. Many believe that the murders of the three eight year old boys were occult crimes. These murders occurred on a full moon and court testimony stated that the three murders belonged to a teenage cult.  A great deal of information has been written about the case from the perspectives of those that believe they were innocent and those that believe they were guilty.

The movies that have been or are being produced about the case are from the perspective of those that think they are innocent.
Most of the easily accessible information on the case on the Internet is from the perspective of those that think they are innocent.  I will list some resources for the perspective of those that think they are guilty below.
One good webpage for information on this case is

Our webpage with information on the day care cases from the perspectives of the alleged victims has an article titled “West Memphis 3 confession, witness corroboration and physical evidence”

Another good page with information is
This is the most extensive web page on the case on the Internet, with information from both sides of the case, including many documents.

Dale Griffis, the longtime cult researcher, also has information on his perspective of the case, at:
Dale Griffis – West Memphis Three Case Information

Todd Moore wrote the below article in response to an editorial published in the Jonesboro Sun by Chris Wessel. He is the father of one of the West Memphis Three  murder victims.  Father of WM3 murder victim certain who killed 3 boys By Todd Moore
Guest Columnist  Opinion Section of the Jonesboro Sun on Tuesday, June 12, 2012

These many cases show the repeated cover ups of child abuse crimes and how child abuse exists worldwide.  The cover ups of these crimes are similar to the techniques used to cover up ritual abuse crimes today.

As survivors, we should educate ourselves about these cases and learn from them.  For many years, clergy abuse crimes were covered up. The Sandusky case was not investigated. Many of the techniques used against survivors in these cases are being used against ritual abuse survivors today. Abused children were not believed. Through hard work, some are now being believed.

Often times, what is missing from our side of the story is the research, which can help unify the survivor movement. This research strengthens our stories, and shows patterns across all areas of child abuse. Some of those on the other side want to divide us up.  Don’t let them. Make sure everyone hears our story and the stories of other abused survivors.  Continue to speak out.

The most important thing is to help others.  By speaking out, we do this.

Remember “Your silence will not protect you.”  Please continue to speak out. Thank you.

Saturday, August 27, 2011

The Myth of Panic – Exposing Theories Used to Cover Up Ritual Abuse Crimes

From a transcript from the 2011 Ritual Abuse Conference

A variety of theories have been used to cover up and deny ritual abuse crimes. The old arguments of therapists somehow planting ideas in their clients’ minds had brought back from previous years to deny ritual abuse crimes. Ideas of social suggestion have also been brought back to deny the realities of the crimes perpetrated against children.

A new version of the denial of these crimes is called “panic.” Not surprisingly, one of the early major proponents of this theory aligned themselves with the false memory movement. Many working in the false memory movement were accused or even convicted of child abuse crimes.  Others in this movement worked to exonerate those accused of child abuse crimes.

Proponents of the theory of panic often compare modern events to the “witch hunts” of the middle ages. Of course, the major difference is that ritual abuse crimes did occur. The use of the term “witch hunt” is using propaganda to connect two different ideas, one disliked (actual witch hunts) with real child abuse crimes. This propaganda technique is called transfer.

Other propaganda techniques, like name calling, are also used by false memory proponents. False memory proponents also repeat the same ideas and phrases to get them to stick in people’s minds. The use of rhymes, like “Satanic Panic” is also used to get ideas to stick in people’s minds.

Panic theorists may state that the increased awareness of ritual crimes is only due to social exposure and social influence. However, they ignore the fact that this increased awareness may simply be the increased awareness of real crimes that have real evidence backing their existence, like ritual abuse crimes. They ignore evidence showing these crimes to have occurred, ignoring and even purposefully burying evidence that shows these crimes may have occurred.

These ritual abuse crimes had been covered up for years, but due to the increased awareness of child abuse crimes in general and the increased rights of women and children to be treated respectfully and equally, these ritual abuse crimes were being exposed and heard.

Child abuse crimes were denied by society for centuries until social movements in the 1960′s, 70s and 80s began to expose the high frequency of these crimes.  Before this era, incest was incorrectly  perceived to be a rare occurrence in our society.  Likewise, clergy abuse crimes were perceived to be nonexistent and few would believe that a priest was capable of raping children.  Now we know that not only is this possible, but that some of these crimes were covered up for years.

Certain panic theorists deny that ritual abuse crimes do not exist simply because others that may have participated in them, such as family members, deny they have occurred. Of course, people participating in these crimes may deny they occurred for a variety of reasons, including amnesia or not wanting to admit they participated in the rape, torture and even murder of others.

The theory of panic is used by some theorists to deny all ritual abuse crimes. Where a criminal may have been convicted and lost several appeals, the crime is written off by panic theorists as a “miscarriage of justice” even though the victims themselves emphatically stated when they were adults they were abused and there was physical evidence of abuse. This happened in the Amirault case.

Other cases may be overturned, yet the victims’ voices are lost in the future telling of the accounts of these cases and may be purposefully deleted from public accounts. Those working to make sure that victims accounts are heard may be harassed or banned from working in public areas where these accounts are told. One place to find the victims side of the story is at our website in the article :

Day Care and Child Abuse Cases

This page has information on the McMartin Preschool Case, Michelle Remembers, the Fells Acres – Amirault Case, the Wenatchee, Washington Case, the Dale Akiki Case, the Glendale Montessori – Toward case, the Little Rascals Day Care Center case, Fran’s Day Care case, the Baran case, the Halsey case, the West Memphis 3 case, the Friedman’s case,   the Christchurch Civic Creche sex abuse – Peter Ellis case, the Ramona case and the West Point Day Care Case.

We have a separate page for the McMartin Case, at:
McMartin Preschool Case – What Really Happened and the Coverup

There is little evidence to prove actual contagion among different parts of the population showing that ritual abuse accusations were part of a panic. This is especially true in the criminal cases. In many of these crimes there were reports of strong changes in the children’s behavior and even physical evidence of abuse. Just because there is an increased awareness of ritual abuse crimes does not in itself mean that there was any contagion or actual social influence. One would have to examine each individual criminal case and find out if the victims had heard about other cases and had not actually been abused. This has never been done.

The theory of panic has been used like a blanket to deny all ritual abuse crimes. Even with cases with conclusive evidence and convictions, the convictions themselves are attacked as being part of a panic of the 1980s and 1990.

This theory erroneously backs the idea that therapists plant ideas in their client’s minds. The idea of implantation has little evidence, yet it is repeated until believed by those promoting the theory of panic. Research has shown it is very difficult to convince most people that abuse crimes occurred in their histories. It is more likely that people will deny being abused due to social and familial pressures.

The theory of panic, like other social denial theories, ended up causing a great deal of harm in the child protection movement.  People that came forward after this, describing ritual abuse crimes, were less likely to be believed. This social denial has allowed these crimes to continue after a brief period in history where they were exposed.

What needs to happen is:

1) Making sure that the victims’ sides of the stories of ritual abuse crimes are heard in as many places as possible.

2) Exposing the incorrect techniques used by false memory proponents and panic theorists. Showing their work and ideas to be incorrect and when possible, showing their true motives for developing these theories.

3) Not allowing panic theorists to use their theory like a blanket covering all cases.

4) Forcing panic theorists to actually prove their case and show clear social influence in each case where they claim social influence actually occurred.

5) Not allowing the harassment and attacks of the panic theorists and false memory proponents to slow down our work to expose their techniques and to tell the stories of the victims of these crimes.

Let’s discuss ways we can do this.

Always Getting Stronger: Giving Survivors a Voice in the World

Transcript from the 2011 ritual abuse conference

The Child Abuse Survivor Movement has been under strong attack for the last twenty years. At the same times, it has grown stronger and developed a strong research base. Survivors that have healed are now able to help other survivors that are beginning to heal from ritual abuse. Many survivors now have blogs and web pages telling their stories and presenting the research that backs up their stories.

Many of the child abuse crimes of the past that were either ignored, seen as acceptable or covered up, are now given coverage in the media, seen as detrimental to children and society and the cover ups are now being exposed.

Child abuse is seen by most media outlets and researchers as being clearly traumatic. Most understand that the traumatic effects of child abuse cause clear symptoms that are detrimental to child abuse survivors. Those that misrepresent the fact that child abuse trauma symptoms are some sort of myth have been rebutted and answered.

Those attacking the child abuse survivor field and child abuse research have picked and chosen the less believable aspects of the field to attack, like ritual abuse and dissociation, especially dissociative identity disorder (formerly called multiple personality disorder.)

They have misrepresented the research, literature and criminal cases in both areas, ignoring the large research base showing that both ritual abuse and dissociative identity disorder are realities. They claim that those that believe in dissociation, hurt the child abuse research field, yet most that claim this actually do little or nothing to try and stop child abuse crimes.

Some of those skeptical of certain child abuse crimes insult and harass those working in the child abuse field in an attempt to silence them. There are several documented occurrences of this on the Internet and in the literature. This harassment is meant to silence those that attempt to expose different child abuse crimes, including those in the fields of ritual abuse, dissociation and trauma.

Other skeptics have done whatever they can to make sure that accurate research on child abuse and ritual abuse crimes does not make it into the public arena. It has been difficult at times to get accurate information into the media and mainstream websites.

The problem of survivors getting a voice to speak out with all of this going on is problematic.

How do we as researchers and survivors organize and demand if necessary in large enough numbers that:

1) The media needs to cover the issue of ritual abuse and dissociation more thoroughly and fairly.

2) The misinformation about certain ritual abuse crimes and dissociative identity disorder is accurately rebutted with our own scientific research.

3) Those that insult and harass researchers in our field are accurately exposed and that the techniques they use to unfairly manipulate public opinion are also exposed.

How do we develop a common voice strong enough to withstand the attacks on our movement?

1) Organize

a) Develop a group solely dedication to research and advocacy.

One that will develop a research base that will cover all of the child abuse cases and books of the last thirty years and then make this public to rebut all of the misinformation that has been made public about these cases.

2) Speak out

a) Make sure that everyone hears our side of the story.

Everyone gets a blog and/or a web page.  They put their story on it and list all of the research in our field that backs their story.

3) Debate when necessary and when prudent.

Our voices are not heard in the public arena. Repeated attacks on the realities of the crimes committed against us are not answered. We need to answer every attack, with letters to the editor, our own articles, our own comments, our own web pages.

Where are our voices?

We need to commit a certain amount of time everyday to getting our stories out.  This is a crucial time to do this. The attacks will continue, the question is what will our answer be to these attacks.  Will we be too busy to reply?  Will we ignore requests to help? Or will we do everything we can to make sure that these crimes will not be repeated in the future by exposing them now.

The anti-clergy abuse movement has shown how this can be done.  For years, they were not believed.  Skeptics stated that priests could not do the things they have been accused of doing.  Those committing these crimes told the children and parents they would not be believed when they talked about the abuse.  And for many years, they weren’t believed.  But they are now.  Because they organized.  Because they spoke up.  Because they did not stop or block each others efforts in their own movement to expose child abuse crimes, but instead they worked together, had conferences, had press releases and fought in the courts and the media for recognition.  And now they have received it. Even certain members of the church admit these crimes occurred.

So, where are our voices?

Where are our ritual abuse conferences?

Where are our ritual abuse websites?

Where are our letters to the editor?

Where are voices in the public arena?

Are we believed when we tell our stories or is the false label of “panic” slapped on all our suffering, emotional scars and evidence.

We have a choice.  We can be silent, or we can all organize. I propose we organize. I propose we start a group today, right now, that will work on developing a research base to answer every skeptics’ response to the crimes committed against us. I propose that every one of us create their own website and conference in their own area to educate the public about ritual abuse crimes.  I propose the we have regional groups across the country linked together working to expose these crimes.

I propose that each and every one of us commit 30 minutes a day to doing this.

We can organize by e-mail. I will develop an e-mail group for this purpose. We can call it “The Ritual Abuse Survivors Research and Advocacy Group.” Our group will have two parts, one for advocacy and one for research. The advocacy group will publish the research group’s work.  We will have chapters nationwide and in as many countries as we can.

This group will work with the other groups already out there and add to the voices survivors presently have. It will coordinate research and advocacy efforts with the other groups. It will build on the research and advocacy of these groups.

This way we can all leave the conference stronger. This way we can continue getting stronger.  This way we can have give all survivors a voice in the world.  We will be heard.  Our research will be heard. Our voices will be heard.  And the crimes that were committed against us will stop.  No more children will be abused. No more children will be hurt.

We all need to decide what kind of world we want to see in twenty years. One where children are abused and not believed, or one where children aren’t abused and those that abuse them are held accountable.

No one will fight our battles for us.  We need to fight them ourselves. Let’s start now.  We can change the world and our voices will be heard.  We will no longer be silenced. Those that attack us and spread misinformation about the crimes committed against us will be answered.

Let’s start now.  Please tell me your ideas for our group and let’s move forward. In one year from now, our group will have a strong research and advocacy base. We will give all child abuse and ritual abuse trauma survivors a safe place to be heard, to get the research they need to answer those that refuse to believe them, to answer societies’ denial of our trauma and reality and to make the reality of our stories public to all.

Let’s start now. Please tell me your ideas about how we can be heard.  Please tell me your ideas about how we can make this organization successful.  Thank you.