Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

leaving · 06-11-2012, 07:45 AM

From all the crap that can go on in Indiana in particular without being investigated, I think there are probably enough fundies in a high enough position to keep allowing this stuff to go on without investigation.

REBurger · 06-13-2012, 11:23 AM

(06-09-2012 08:47 PM)Dude Wrote:
(06-09-2012 08:28 PM)tiarali Wrote: The military also deals with fully formed adults who chose to enter that occupation. It also pays them for their service.

It's possible that you misunderstood the intent of my post (it's just as possible I misunderstood yours, though), so I'll expand on my military post a bit.

I was saying that the Gothardites and Pearls skip the second half of what the military does. They miss the whole point. These folks think the point is to break someone, but it's not. The point is not to create a broken person or instant obedience. Anyone who has been in the military knows that the service doesn't actually value these types of people. What the services want is strong, capable people and their programs build that. The "breaking of the will" that the military does is both exagerrated by those who describe it and only a portion of a larger program in which people are made to feel pride.

You are absolutely right as I served in the Army after leaving the Copley's home. What I experienced in the military and basic training and the methodology adapted by my parents are two very different things. The premise may be similar, but the methods, reasons, and outcomes produce two different types of people! Let's just say Basic Training was FUN! Smile

I would repeat all my service again without a second thought.

REBurger · 06-13-2012, 11:28 AM

(06-10-2012 11:27 AM)DaisyDeadhead Wrote: What is "ATI" that you all keep referring to? I am not finding this acronym on Google. (dumb)

ATI is short for Advanced Training Institute, a program run by Bill Gothard. Check out http://www.recoveringgrace.org for a first-hand inside look at the program. It's NOT good!

REBurger · 06-13-2012, 11:38 AM

(06-10-2012 06:26 PM)Apathetic or whatever Wrote: PLEASE DO NOT MISINTERPRET THIS AS AN ATTACK ON THE GIRL IN THE ARTICLE!

I was wondering why the state did not prosecute in this case. It occurs to me that the prosecutor is probably not convinced that he could win the case. It would be a case, for the most part of her word against his. The defense attorney would no doubt bring up her history of suicidal ideation and hospitalization to cast doubt on her reliability as a witness. They would contrast this, no doubt, with the 'fine upstanding citizen' their client. It may be that the prosecutors are aware of the problem but just do not feel that they can win the case. They may feel that this is enough to cause reasonable doubt or something.

I am not a lawyer, this is just my speculation. I was just trying to consider it from a different point of view. I do not intend to make light of the great suffering that Ruth went through. The details that she provided are enough to convince me of the truth of her claims.

I understand completely what you are saying. And in a way, you are correct. Let me clarify a little bit though.

Molestation cases are some of the most difficult cases to prove. Case in point, only 1-3% of cases tried are convicted. There is no DNA cause there's no rape. Obviously, you won't find many if any direct witnesses. For most cases, you need multiple victims before prosecution is possible.

The point I am trying to make to Indiana is this: You cannot decline to prosecute without conducting an investigation. I reported and submitted video testimony. To this day, I have yet to have an investigator call me and ask me a SINGLE question regarding my case. If they haven't spoken to the VICTIM, how can they say the investigated? And without an investigation, how can they determine my case is unprosecutable? If they destroyed my video testimony, then how can the DA (who never SAW it) make the determination not to further investigate?

You are right, my mental health history would be under attack. But put a child psychologist on the stand and they could provide proof that suicidal tendencies are quite "normal" for victims of sexual abuse. Anything I've done in my past is "fair game" to the defense. We live in a system if someone makes a sexual assault claim and it goes to court, the victim is the one who is tried and condemned. So I'm not too hung up over what the defense could try. I already know they'll besmirch everything about me, but...it's the price one pays for speaking up.

**Naomi** · 06-13-2012, 11:52 AM

(06-13-2012 11:38 AM)REBurger Wrote: To this day, I have yet to have an investigator call me and ask me a SINGLE question regarding my case. If they haven't spoken to the VICTIM, how can they say the investigated? And without an investigation, how can they determine my case is unprosecutable? If they destroyed my video testimony, then how can the DA (who never SAW it) make the determination not to further investigate?

This is wrong, and I'm sorry!! I absolutely admire your courage! Thank you for speaking the truth.

lucrezaborgia · 06-13-2012, 07:11 PM

(06-13-2012 11:38 AM)REBurger Wrote: Anything I've done in my past is "fair game" to the defense. We live in a system if someone makes a sexual assault claim and it goes to court, the victim is the one who is tried and condemned.

Lots of courts are that way. SB's parents lawyer asked him why, at the age of seven, did he never report his abuse to the police? Wtf?