FMSF NEWSLETTER ARCHIVE - Spring 2010 - Vol. 19, No. 2, HTML version

Return to FMSF Home Page

F M S   F O U N D A T I O N   N E W S L E T T E R     (e-mail edition)
SPRING 2010 Vol. 19 No. 2
      ISSN #1069-0484. Copyright (c) 2010 by the FMS Foundation
The FMSF Newsletter will be published 4 times  in  2010  by the  False
Memory  Syndrome  Foundation  and delivered electronically. It is also 
available at on the  FMSF website:  Those without
access to the Internet should contact the Foundation. 
           1955 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-5766
                 Phone 215-940-1040, Fax 215-940-1042
        The next e-mail newsletter will be sent in July 2010

Dear Friends, 

The issue of "repressed and recovered memories" wends its sluggish way
through our culture and legal system, most often in the direction
supported by science, but not always. Some recent events demonstrate
how very difficult it is to change deeply-held cherished beliefs.

Opportunity lost. The American Psychiatric Association has posted a
draft of the proposed Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-V (DSM-V) [1]
and invites professionals and the public to comment through April 20
(below). A glance at the section on Dissociative Identity Disorder,
(originally Multiple Personality Disorder) shows no significant change
has been made in spite of the now compelling evidence that the
increase in incidence is iatrogenic. It's disappointing but not
surprising. The movement toward science in the area of repressed
memories will apparently continue to come from the courts as it has
for the past two decades, not from the mental health profession.

The March/April issue of The Psychotherapy Networker, available on the
web,[2] has a terrific description of the highly political processes
involved with the inclusion of a diagnosis is the DSM. Mary Sykes
Wylie's article "The Long Shadow of Trauma" is about a proposed new
trauma entry championed by Bessel van der Kolk, M.D. Called
"Developmental Trauma Disorder" (DTD), the entry has been rejected to
date. Wylie quotes the chair of the DSM Trauma Subgroup, Matthew

  "Their research was almost entirely retrospective, collected from
  different places, under a variety of conditions, using different
  kinds of measurements. They need to identify in advance, not
  retrospectively, what the criteria should be, develop the diagnostic
  instruments to assess them, then go into the field and rigorously
  apply it to see whether the criteria they propose are accurate,
  whether they hold together diagnostically and constitute a diagnosis
  that is sufficiently differentiated from others..."

We wonder if the DID diagnosis truly meets the criteria listed by
Friedman. In the same issue, psychologist Susan Clancy whose new book
The Trauma Myth is described on page 8 writes:

  "The problem is that today, after more than twenty-five years,
  predictions based on the trauma model have not proved accurate.
  Characteristics of the sexual abuse experience related to trauma
  (like how frightening it was, whether penetration or force was
  involved, and how many times it happened,) do not do a good job of
  forecasting the level of long-term psychological harm experienced
  ... Most of the scholars in the sexual abuse field are coming to
  agree that understanding how and why sexual abuse damages victims
  probably has little to do with the actual abuse and a lot to do with
  what happens in its aftermath."

Although understanding the complexity of how abuse may harm
individuals may be increasing, our culture's love affair with the
belief that memory of childhood trauma is "repressed" and later
recovered is still strong as evidenced in some recent legal decisions.
Although the courts have generally been moving in the direction of
determining that there is a lack of a scientific evidence for claims
of repressed memories, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court went
in another direction. Despite an amicus curiae brief signed by one
hundred scientists stating the lack of scientific support for the
notion of repressed memories, the Court upheld the conviction of Paul
Shanley based on the recovered repressed memories of Paul Busa.
(below) Even though the issue before the Court was one of science and
not the guilt or innocence of the accused, the pervasive climate
generated by the ever-growing clergy abuse scandal no doubt played a
role. A feeling for that climate can be found in the comments to an
Australian television documentary about the Shanley case.[3] The
program featured Elizabeth Loftus, Ph.D., and James Chu, M.D., both of
whom were experts in Shanley's trial. A statement by Dr. Chu in this
documentary was similar to his testimony and exemplifies the
pseudoscience that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court finds

  "If you've been repeatedly traumatized, you're actually much more
  likely to block it out eventually than if it's happened once or
  twice. So one theory talks about repression, there is some kind of
  process, itself unconscious, that makes things that are too
  overwhelming or too conflictual not then available to your conscious

The theory flies in the face of what is known about memory. The more
frequently something happens, the more likely it is to be remembered
although details of incidents may be blended.[4]

In a similar misdirection, a judge in Indiana ruled that a jury could
hear repressed-memory testimony. This is a first for Indiana and as
one law professor noted, the decision will likely force the court of
appeals and the Indiana Supreme Court to look at the issue.[5] But the
decision is sufficiently worrisome that we contacted Minnesota
attorney R. C. Barden, J.D., Ph.D., to ask what he thought might be
factors contributing to unscientific legal decisions. (below)
Dr. Barden is convinced that the problem lies in the fact that too
often individual attorneys with no expertise in science try to defend
cases by themselves as in the cases mentioned above. Dr. Barden notes:

  "The medical system ended the ineffectual, horse-and-buggy, 'one
  professional does it all' practice model decades ago. The legal
  system also needs to wake up to the need for multi-disciplinary
  practice. JD-only attorneys should never, ever be permitted to
  litigate 'repressed and recovered memory' cases without the
  supervision and assistance of specialized legal experts."

That admonishment provides a key to looking at repressed-memory cases.
For example, what psychological expertise will the defense attorneys
for the members of the Mohler family in Missouri bring to the table?
Several men in that family have been accused of past abuse based on
recovered memories. Below, a reader from Kansas City adds more
information about that case that was mentioned in the Winter

Recovered-memory nonsense still abounds but a new generation of
"recovered-memory myth-busters" is on the scene to deal with it.
Students of Richard McNally such as Susan Clancy and of Elizabeth
Loftus and members of the FMSF Scientific Advisory Board push the
boundaries of recovered-memory reason forward. (See box below.)

A new generation of "myth-busting" investigative reporters is also on
the job. For example, Doug Mesner has been attending meetings of
people who claim to have been abused by satanic ritual abuse cults and
he then writes about the meetings and the claims on his blog. Doug has
interviewed many retractors, listened to their stories and followed up
by investigating the therapists who helped them believe in what never
happened. Most recently he has brought to the fore some of the
untenable claims of Colin Ross, M.D. (See

Although we wish that the recovered-memory phenomenon would move more
quickly on its way out of our culture, there is no doubt that
fascination with the story elements still propels belief in the
recovered-memory phenomenon, science not withstanding.
[1] Go to:
[2] Wylie, M.S. (2010, March/April). The long shadow of trauma.
    Psychotherapy Networker. Available at:
[3] (2010, March 18). False memories. Catalyst, (Australia) ABC TV
    Science. Retrieved on 3/19/10 from
[4] There are many studies in support. For example: McNichol, S.,
    Shute, R. & Tucker, A (1999). Children's eyewitness memory for a
    repeated event. Child Abuse & Neglect, 23(11), 1127-1139.
     "Children who experience repeated events have increased recall
      for repeated details but confuse the timing of details which
      change across events. The findings support previous suggestions
      that (a) it is unrealistic to expect children to be able to
      report repeated events without some confusion about timimg of
      details and (b) children are resistant to misleading questions
      about abuse."
[5] John Doe76C vs. Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis. No
    62-C9-06-003962. Minn. 2nd Judicial District. Dec 8, 2009. C

/                                                                    \
|          The idea of repression ultimately hurts victims.          |
|                                                                    |
| "What therapists in the sexual abuse field refer to as repression  |
| is actually simple forgetting. Most children who get abused don't  |
| understand it at the time. Thus, it is not a significant           |
| experience when it happens -- it's weird, perhaps -- and so they   |
| forget it, like we forget so many aspects of childhood. Later on   |
| in life they may be asked by a therapist, "Were you sexually       |
| abused as a child?" and this question will cue a memory. When this |
| happens it is not an example of a recovered memory. It is an       |
| example of normal forgetting and remembering.                      |
|                                                                    |
| "The idea of repression ultimately hurts victims. It reinforces    |
| the notion that sexual abuse is and should be a traumatic          |
| experience when it happens -- something done against the will of   |
| the victims. Since for most victims this is not the case, they end |
| up feeling 'alone,' 'isolated' and 'ashamed.'"                     |
|                                      Rogers, T. (2010, January 19) |
|                                The Trauma Myth: The child betrayed |
|        Susan Clancy discusses her controversial theory, and how an |
|        industry designed to help children may hurt them. |
|                                          Retrieved on 1/19/10 from |
| 2010/01/18/trauma_myth_interview |


The public has until April 20, 2010 to comment on proposed changes to
the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) that
is published by the American Psychiatric Association. This book is the
arbiter of what is normal and what is not -- helping practitioners,
guiding the courts, determining insurance reimbursements. The final
version of the DSM is expected to be released in 2013. If you wish to
submit comments, go to

For FMSF Newsletter readers the proposed changes will likely seem
disappointing. Any hope that scientific clarity would shine in the
sections of the manual that previously provided support for believe in
repression and recovery of memories must be abandoned. Disappointment
in the proposed manual extends far beyond FMSF concerns. In addition
to a lack of any conceptual change that might have moved the field
forward, critics have expressed concern that the changes instead will
only increase the number of people who may be classified mentally
ill. Edward Shorter,[1] Professor of the History of Medicine and
Psychiatry at the University of Toronto writes:

  "The latest draft of the DSM fixes none of the problems with the
  previous DSM series, and even creates some new ones."

  "To flip through the latest draft of the American Psychiatric
  Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, in the works for
  seven years now, is to see the discipline's floundering writ large.
  Psychiatry seems to have lost its way in a forest of poorly verified
  diagnoses and ineffectual medications. Patients who seek psychiatric
  help today for mood disorders stand a good chance of being diagnosed
  with a disease that doesn't exist and treated with a medication
  little more effective than a placebo."

  "With the DSM-V, American psychiatry is headed in exactly the
  opposite direction: defining ever widening circles of the population
  as mentally ill with vague and undifferentiated diagnoses and
  treating them with powerful drugs."

Psychiatrist and author Sally Satel, M.D.[2] has similar concerns:

  "The problem is that the changes don't really advance psychiatry."
"[A] number of changes proposed for the DSM-V are likely to
inadvertently place large swaths of normal human variation under the
umbrella of pathology."

Ohio neuropsychiatrist John Sorboro, M.D.[3] writes:

  "The DSM-V will officially sanction suffering and dysfunction like
  never before..."

Stephen Murgatroud, M.D.,[4] reminds us that the DSM is not a
"scientific" document and that the classifications are fluid.

  "The DSM itself is problematic. Diagnoses like "homosexuality," once
  classified as an illness, come and go depending on societal
  pressures. By no stretch of the imagination is it a scientific,
  evidence-based document."

Allen Frances, M.D., who headed the DSM-IV and others "question the
entire DSM-V enterprise, arguing that a major revision should have
been put off until there are more hard data on biological causes of
mental disorders."[5] We suspect that many FMSF readers will have
strong opinions and that they will share them with the editors.

[1] Shorter, E. (2010, February 27, 2010). Why psychiatry needs
    therapy. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved on 3/1/10 from
[2] Satel, S. (2010, February 19). Prescriptions for psychiatric
    trouble. Wall Street Journal, W13.
[3] Sorboro, J. (2010). Prognosis negative: Psychiatry and the foibles
    of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual V (DSM-V). Skeptic
    Magazine 15(3), 44-49
[4] Murgatroyd, S. (2010, February 21). Is practicing psychiatry a
    disorder in need of treatment? Troy Media. Retrieved on February
    22, 2010 from
[5] Miller, G. & Holden, C. (2010, February 12). Proposed revisions to
    psychiatry's canon unveiled. Science, 327, 770-771.

                           RUSH TO JUDGMENT
                       A Skeptic in Kansas City

     (This article adds to the information about the Mohler case
          that appeared in the Winter FMSF 2010 Newsletter.)

  | [For law enforcement officers] the level of proof necessary    |
  | for taking action on allegations of criminal acts must be more |
  | than simply the victim alleged it and it is possible...We need |
  | to be concerned about the distribution and publication of      |
  | unsubstantiated allegations of bizarre sexual abuse.           |
  |                                           Kenneth Lanning, FBI |

Dressed in orange jumpsuits and shackled at their wrists, ankles, and
waists, six members of the Mohler family shuffle past local television
news cameras and into a courtroom. Tethered together, they resemble
fish on a stringer with the proud authorities displaying their catch.
On-the-spot reporters read the charges against them, "Forcible rape of
a child; Deviate sexual assault; Use of a child in a sexual
performance." Newspaper accounts are perhaps even more harsh: the
men's booking photos are posted beneath headlines such as "Incest
Allegations Shatter Public image of Church-Going Clan,"[1] or
"Child-Raping Missouri Family May Have Bodies in Yard."[2] Posted on
the internet beneath these stories are reader comments reminiscent of
1692: judgments of guilt and cries for harsh punishment along with
suspicions cast upon any who question the charges dominate the boards.

The men are 76-year-old Burrell Mohler Sr., his four sons, Burrell
"Ed" Jr., David, Jared, and Roland, and Burrell Sr.'s 72-year-old
brother, Darryl Mohler. The arrests were made in November 2009, by
Lafayette County, Missouri authorities based on accusations of
ritualistic crimes against Ed Mohler's (now adult) children from 1988
to 1995. The charges against the men involve numerous alleged child
rapes, sodomy, and bestiality. They are also publicaly accused of
kidnapping, murders, producing child pornography, breeding then
slaughtering babies, performing forced abortions on minors, and
holding an unwilling sex-slave for years in the family basement (but
there have been no charges filed for those allegations).

  |  A hallucination is a fact, not an error; what is erroneous is |
  |  a judgment based upon it."                                    |
  |                                               Bertrand Russell |

The case against the Mohler men first came to Lafayette County
authorities in August 2009, when Ed Mohler's 26 year old daughter
T.A. contacted a western Missouri detective. According to the probable
cause statements: T.A. had "suppressed many of the memories" until
recently. She "identified 8 specific memories of abuse and a 9th that
was perpetrated on her brother... She has many memories of abuse," but
some occurred in other jurisdictions. "She became pregnant and was
made to have an abortion at age 11. She doesn't remember any sexual
abuse after that date."[3]

Even if the word "suppressed" had not been used, the pointed use of
the word "memories" in the report is indicative of repressed memory
accusations. Generally when people report past events they do not do
so under the context of "identifying memories".

After those initial accusations in August, authorities made contact
with, and began to question the other five siblings. On October 7th,
three of the siblings T.A., A.J., and E.M. provided authorities with a
36-page collaborative report detailing several murders they witnessed
spanning two Missouri counties. They were able to lead authorities to
an approximate spot they say they helped to bury one of the murder
victims. On October 29th, T.A. again spoke with the detective, this
time alleging that she recalled her grandfather keeping a female child
in his basement crawlspace. The siblings also told authorities that as
they were being abused, the men told them to write down what was
happening to them. These notes were placed in mason jars then
buried. The siblings say their abusers told them that if they buried
these notes, their memories would also become buried. [4] [5]

A fourth sibling (E.B.) told police that he had once unearthed some of
those jars as a child, but reburied them at the request of his
sisters.[4] Based on these statements, a search warrant was issued for
the farm previously owned by Burrell Mohler Sr. to search for bodies,
other evidence of murder, items from the crawlspace, and the mason
jars.[6] On November 10, 2009, as authorities swarmed the Bate City
farmhouse with backhoes and shovels, detectives from Lafayette and
various other counties were dispatched to arrest Burrell Sr. and his
      | A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth  |
      | has a chance to get its pants on.                     |
      |                                     Winston Churchill |

As the arrests were made public, lead investigator Sheriff Kerrick
Alumbaugh held a press conference. The stated purpose for the
conference was to urge other possible victims to come forward.
Specifically, investigators wished to locate the girl said to have
been held captive in the basement crawlspace.

There were, however, other remarks of interest made during that press
conference. One comment in particular gives further reason to suspect
that all of the accusers are engaged in the recovering of repressed

  Q: "How does the time factor complicate the case?"  
  A: "Time factor always complicates a case. But when memories of this
  come out with the victims, as you talk about it, as you investigate
  it, more comes out." [7]

Alumbaugh also defended the large amounts of county resources used to
investigate the case, insisting the expenditures are important for
protecting children: "You can read the probable cause statements as we
leave and understand that this is money well spent of the tax payer's
dollars to bring these people to justice...They've had a threat to cut
investigators...So, I mean, these are things that are really impacting
our budgets and are very worthwhile to do because of the children."[7]

Possibly most important, were the personal motivations Sheriff
Alumbaugh expressed:

  "You personally attach it to yourself. You have children at
  home. You think about your children, you think about children that
  you know. Our biggest concern right now are those victims and those
  children that are out there that are potential victims. So, each one
  of us takes this very personally."[7]

             } All wrong-doing is done in the sincere  |
             | belief that it is the best thing to do. |
             |                           Arnold Bennet |

Could Sheriff Alumbaugh have been influenced by the rape of a
5-year-old girl in a 2006 case he was involved with which happened
because the man's arrest for another crime had been delayed? By
aggressively pursuing the Mohler men, could he begin to repair his
part in that child's tragedy?

In that 2006 case, the nude, battered body of 41-year-old Marsha
Spicer was found in a shallow grave in Lafayette County. Lorie
Dunfield, a friend of Spicer's, reported to authorities that she
believed Spicer may have been involved with a man named Richard
Davis. Dunfield reported that Richard Davis had recently asked her to
assist him in videotaping the torture and murder of other women during
three-way sex. "He wanted me to help him kill women and get rid of the
bodies." Dunfield said.[8] Lorie Dunfield managed to get away from
Davis, but believed that her friend, Marsh Spicer, may have later
hooked up with him. Sheriff Alumbaugh and his deputies were called to
interview Richard Davis and his girlfriend Dena Riley in regard to the
Spicer homicide.

Richard Davis was already being sought by his parole officer after
serving 16 years for raping and sodomizing a woman at knife point. His
parole officer had been unable to contact him for a drug screening.
Upon arriving at Davis's apartment, investigators noted a video camera
trained on the bed, an open journal with notations about choking and
sex, and marijuana on a table. During that initial interview, Davis's
girlfriend Dena Riley admitted that Davis was into violent sex.

Rather than detain Davis, Sheriff Alumbaugh told Richard Davis and
Dena Riley to leave the premises while he applied for a search
warrant. Alumbaugh and his deputies returned hours later. The
investigators viewed the tape currently in the VCR next to Davis'
bed. It was a "snuff video" of the rape, beating, and strangulation of
Marsha Spicer. It appeared that the couple may have been watching the
video just prior to the Sheriff and deputies' arrival. Regrettably,
since Alumbaugh had not detained Davis and Riley, they had fled the
city. It was eight days before a nationwide manhunt managed to locate
the couple for arrest. During this time, Richard Davis kidnapped and
raped a 5 year old girl. The child's injuries were so severe that she
had to be airlifted to a hospital.

Police Chief Fred Mills defended Alumbaugh's decision, "You can spin
the facts any way you want. But we had no probable cause to arrest
them. What you need for an arrest warrant is a lot more than you need
for a search warrant." Alumbaugh said, "We just didn't have enough
(evidence). We weren't ready to do hard questioning on them."

None-the-less, Alumbaugh arrested the six Mohler men with only
accusations from the alleged victims. These men had no parole
violations, no drugs on their nightstands, and no past convictions for
violent rapes. In fact they had no criminal histories at all. There
were no bodies recently discovered in shallow graves, neither were the
men holed up in shabby apartments with meth-addicted girlfriends. The
Mohler men were arrested while at home with their wives or working for
their longtime employers, to be charged with crimes allegedly
occurring decades ago.

Newly appointed prosecutor, Kellie Ritchie filed the charges. It was
while working as assistant DA in Buchanan County that Ritchie began
concentrating on sexual-assault cases. Four years out of law school,
Ritchie was ready for greater responsibility at the same time that her
boss wished to have one prosecutor handle all sexual-abuse cases.[9]
Ritchie readily accepted that challenge and helped to open a
children's advocacy center. Since her February, 2009 appointment to
the Lafayette County office, Ritchie has continued her dedication to
assisting victims of rape, raising awareness through a county Denim
Day, [10] and promising the vigorous prosecution of any in possession
of child pornography. [11] It seems more probable that this focus
could have clouded the prosecutor's judgment in filing charges based
on dubious repressed memory accusations?

                |  An error does not become truth by |
                |  reason of multiplied propagation. |
                |                     Mahatma Gandhi |

The Behavioral Science Unit of the FIB has assisted in investigations
of hundreds of cases in which adults begin to report that they were
victims of extreme abuses as children. Allegations involve multiple
victims and multiple offenders and often include insertion of foreign
objects, witnessing mutilations, as well as sexual acts and murders
being filmed or photographed. In several of these cases, women claim
to have had babies that were turned over for human sacrifice. Such
accusations are most common in rural or suburban communities with high
concentrations of religiously conservative people. According to
Behavioral Science Unit Supervisory Agent Kenneth Lanning:

  "In none of the multidimensional child sex ring cases of which I am
  aware have bodies of the murder victims been found -- in spite of
  major excavations where the abuse victims claim the bodies were
  located. Not only are no bodies found, but also, more importantly,
  there is no physical evidence that a murder took place. Many of
  those not in law enforcement do not understand that, while it is
  possible to get rid of a body, it is even more difficult to get rid
  of the physical evidence that a murder took place."  
                                        -- Kenneth Lanning, FBI [12]

In 1994, the US Government funded a study by The National Center on
Child Abuse and Neglect. Researchers found more than 12,000
accusations of group cult sexual abuse, but none were able to be
substantiated. The principle investigator in that study, Dr. Gail
Goodman, commented:

"While you would not expect to find corroborating evidence in many
sexual abuse cases, you would expect it when people claim the rituals
involved murders, and the reported cases come from district attorneys
or police...If there is anyone out there with solid evidence... we
would like to know about it."[13][14]

Large scale government funded investigations were also conducted in
the states of Michigan, Utah, and Virginia with the same empty-handed
results. If Lafayette County officials were familiar with any of
these reports, they should not have been surprised to find only one
broken jar (no note), a bone fragment (unknown type), some broken
eyeglasses, half a credit card, and a shoe sole in their excavation of
the Bates City farm.[15]

     | It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. |
     | It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.          |
     |                                               Mark Twain |

The Sheriff's press conference proved more fruitful than the farm
excavation. The following day, a woman came forward claiming to have
been held in the basement's crawlspace for several years as a child.
"She recalls becoming pregnant twice while in captivity.  Burrell
Sr. and Ed Burrell, Jr. put the first infant in a box and buried it in
the dirt floor under the window. Days later, the floor was covered in
concrete."[16] Ground penetrating radar was used to locate a
"box-like" area under the concrete and a new search warrant issued.
Detectives returned to the farmhouse, broke open the concrete floor,
but found only dirt. Samples of the dirt were removed for analysis.[17]
Announcements of basement sex-slave and her murdered infant made for
more sensational headlines, although no charges were ever filed in
regard to her. Three weeks later, Sheriff Alumbaugh said that the
woman "is no longer part of this investigation."[18] This proclamation
has not been widely reported.

In addition to the basement captive, a local man whose ex-wife,
Pamela, had once been married to Ed Mohler came forward following the
press conference. Mark Young and Pamela Young divorced in 1993 with
Pamela gaining custody of their son. Pamela then married Ed Mohler in
1999. Mr. Young was interviewed on several television news programs,
as well as with print media, claiming that Ed's ex-wife (mother of the
accusers), Jeanette Mohler (Cyr) had come to him in January 2000
alleging that Ed was abusing Mark and Pamela's son. Mr. Young says
that he then filed complaints and won custody of the boy in an
emergency hearing. Public records show, however, that Mark Young did
not file for custody of his son until 2002.[19] His ex-wife had
already divorced Ed Mohler nearly a year prior, in the Spring of
2001. [20]

The siblings' mother, Jeanette Mohler, told investigators that she
knew about, or suspected the abuse at the time it was happening. "At
the time, complaints by the mother were taken to the head of the
church rather than law enforcement."[21] Bishop Tonga, now retired,
recalls Jeanette's complaints to him. Tonga says he interviewed both
Ed and the siblings and they all denied the mother's accusations. No
further action was taken by the mother or by Mr. Tonga. Only Ed,
Jeanette, and their children were members of Mr. Tonga's congregation.
No complaints were taken to any member of the other men's churches.

The statements made by Jeanette Mohler are puzzling. Just as the
original accusations have expanded to include bestiality, kidnappings,
and murders, they have also expanded in time, now encompassing twelve
years, from 1983 to 1995. Jeanette remained married to Ed throughout
this time, not filing for divorce until 1997. During their divorce,
both Ed and Jeanette continued to attend the Independence Missouri
Mormon Church. It is more probable that it was during this period that
the mother began leveling these complaints against her husband to her
church and possibly to her six children.

          | There are people so prone to exaggeration that |
          | they can't tell the truth without lying.       |
          |                                  Josh Billings |

Defendant Burrell Mohler Sr. has been the most maligned in the media
due to the finding of "incest pornography" at his home. On the day of
his arrest, his wife, Sandra Mohler, voluntarily allowed investigators
into all common areas of the house. (Some areas were excluded as they
are private quarters for an unrelated boarder). According to the
investigator's affidavit, Mrs. Mohler explained to Jackson County
Detective Cathy Covey that she and her husband had arranged for
separate bedrooms "after she had discovered he was viewing magazines
and videos depicting persons involved in sexual activity."[21] (This
statement has been consistently misquoted in the press.) Mrs. Mohler
reported that although they had begun to sleep separately, both had
full access to all areas of the residence. She indicated that her
husband commonly used the computer in her room because he had never
set-up internet access for the computer in his basement bedroom.

Mrs. Mohler also "had full permission to enter his sleeping area
downstairs".[22] She stated that on two occasions she had looked in
hidden areas of her husband's bedroom to find his pornography. She
told Detective Covey that she had taken away the magazines she found
most objectionable and locked them in her file cabinet. Mrs. Mohler
voluntarily supplied the investigators with the key to that filing
cabinet. The magazines she had locked away included five digest style
magazines which showed photos of adult models, engaged in sexual
activity, with narratives depicting incestuous relationships.[22]
"Incest is, in fact, sexual relations between individuals of any age
too closely related to marry. It need not necessarily involve an adult
and a child."[12] Those five magazines are the most widely reported
finding to imply the guilt of all six men, although none of them
involve children or even models who appear to be children. The primary
stash of pornography, later found in Burrell Sr.'s sleeping quarters,
consisted of at least 65 more magazines, movies, and books -- none of
which were incest related.[23] In fact, many of these were
specifically about and for senior citizens. One DVD has the words
"Grandma and Grandpa" in the title and has been falsely reported as
"incest porn" when in fact it is about sexuality between aging

Many observers have noted that the search inventories included many
unmarked or hand labeled videos. It is been speculated that those
tapes may contain child pornography but the information has not been
released to the public. In fact, some articles on the case have
falsely reported that illegal pornography was seized. Possession of
child porn in the state of Missouri carries a maximum 10-year
sentence. None of the men have been charged with this or any other
offense resulting from the searches. Despite the wide assortment of
accusations, the men are charged only with the crimes in which no
physical evidence would necessarily be expected.

            | They were distinguished for ignorance for  |
            | they had just one idea and that was wrong. |
            |                          Benjamin Disraeli |

When asked where the accusing Mohler siblings reside, Sheriff
Alumbaugh states that they are "from all over right now."[7] While
this is true, the primary accuser resides in the college town of
Provo, Utah and two other siblings show previous addresses in Provo.
Provo, Utah is home to the Brigham Young University run by the Morman
Church. For a city of only 42 square miles, it has seen more than its
share of repressed memory scandals.[24]

The student Counseling Center at BYU offers therapy to students for
abuse issues. The Center's website asserts, "Some individuals have
little or no memory of being sexually abused and its impact upon them
until adulthood." [25] The Center also recommends books by repressed-
memory therapists, Lynn Finney, Beverly Engel, and Noemi Mattis, as
suggested reading. In 1993, psychologist Carol Tavris commented on
books such as these:

  "The authors of these books all rely on the one another's work as
  supporting evidence for their work; they all endorse and recommend
  one another's books to their readers. If one of them comes up with a
  concocted statistic -- such as "more than half of all women are
  victims of childhood sexual trauma" -- the numbers are traded like
  baseball cards, reprinted in every book and eventually enshrined as
  fact.  Thus the cycle of misinformation, faulty statistics and
  invalidated assertions maintains itself...." -- Tavris, C. (1993,
  January 3). Beware the incest machine. New York Times Book Review,

Lynn Finney is known for her promotion of self-hypnosis to recover
memories of abuse, and for her belief that fully one-third of all
women have been victims. In fact, Finney's one-third statistic leads
BYU Counseling Center's website page for students seeking therapy.[25]
One of Finney's former patients, Martha Beck, authored the 2005 book
Leaving the Saints. Beck is a Provo native, a therapist, and past
professor of Sociology at BYU. It was while teaching at BYU, that Beck
recovered memories of ritual abuse. In her book, Beck brags of her
cruel confrontation with her 90 year old ailing father, "I grin, but
my father is not amused. He looks longingly toward the hotel room
door, apparently realizing I'm not about to let him leave."[26] All
seven of Beck's siblings have expressed outrage and condemned these

Beverly Engel espouses, "If you still have a hard time believing a
survivor...look at your own history for signs that you yourself may
have been abused and are in denial." Engel gives a list of symptoms to
assist the reader in determining if they have been abused and are in
denial. Those symptoms include: feeling ugly; a tendency to apologize;
feeling helpless; or problems in relationships.[28]

Also recommended by the BYU Counseling Center is the 1993 publication
Confronting Abuse.[25][29] Compiled by three Brigham Young University
professors, Confronting Abuse is a collection of essays on ritual and
sexual abuse. In it, repressed-memory practitioner, Neomi Mattis,
describes the abuse she's helped her patients to uncover:

  "In addition to all combinations of sexual intercourse genital,
  anal, and oral between child and adult or child and child (forced),
  victims are penetrated genitally or rectally with all kinds of
  objects, and are forced to submit to sexual activity with animals."
  "They are forced to participate in all of the crimes, including
  sacrifice of animals; the torture and sometimes murder of babies,
  including in some cases the infants of young girls required to bear
  children specifically for sacrifice; the torture and sometimes
  murder of adults; and the systematic disposal of bodies."

Mattis explains why evidence of these crimes is never found, despite
in-depth investigations:

  "Cultists include professionals, such as morticians and butchers,
  who are skilled at disposing of evidence."

She goes on to explain why many of the reports are verifiably false, 

  "The victims are programmed to dissociate, so that they do not
  recognize or remember parts of their own experience or

As for the seemingly normal, often charitable, outward lives of the
accused in these child-rapes, murders, and torture, Mattis offers
this, "[The Perpetrators are also] dissociative and thus unaware of
their other cult-involved selves." * By this logic, any one of us
could be not only victims, but also perpetrators of these crimes and
never know it.

Just eight miles outside of Provo, the infamous "Greenbaum" [30]
lecturer, Corydon Hammond operates a therapy office. In 2004, Hammond,
along with Bennett Braun and Roberta Sachs of Chicago, settled a
malpractice lawsuit against them by retracting repressed-memory
patient Elizabeth Gale. In the $7.5 million settlement, Hammond's
portion was $175,000.

         | Two things are infinite: the universe and human |
         | stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. |
         |                   attributed to Albert Einstein |

It seems to be the perfect storm: A divorce with bitter custodial
parent; the repressed-memory pied pipers of Provo; a lead investigator
with an agenda; a newly appointed prosecutor who has specialized in
sexual abuse cases; and regular sensationalist misinformation
distributed in the media. Having made the allegations so public and
over-extending county monies on the investigation, the likelihood that
the charges will be dropped due to the lack of evidence is greatly

An entire generation has come up since the hysteria of the 1980's and
early 1990's. We saw then how easily the hysteria spreads from one
sibling to the next, to investigators, prosecutors, child services,
the media, and to the public. Each points to the other as evidence
that their beliefs are reasonable. At that time, it was daytime talk
shows like Sally Jesse Raphael or Phil Donahue that disseminated these
shocking tales to gullible audiences. Today, the internet has taken
the place of those talk shows and it seems that audiences are just as

[1] Bradley, D. (2009, November 23). Incest allegations shatter public
    image of church-going clan. Kansas City Star. Retrieved on 3/7/10
[2] Martinez, E. (2009, November 12). Child-raping Missouri family may
    have bodies in yard. CBS News. Retrieved on 3/7/10 from
[3] Schroer, Det. C. (2009, November 3). Mohler Probable Cause. 
    Lafayette Co., MO
[4] Schroer, Det C. (2009, November 9). Mohler Affidavit. Lafayette
    Co., MO
[5] Reported by Sgt. Collin Stosberg, Missouri Highway Patrol.
[6] Bates City Farm Search Warrant Authorization 11/9/09; Judge
[]7] Alumbaugh, Sheriff. (2009, November 11). Press Conference.
[8] Krajicek, D. (2005). Serial Killers: Partners in Crime: Ricky and
[9] Cooper, R. (2009, November 29). Former local attorney involved in
    huge case. St. Joseph News Press.
[10] Parmon, J. (2009, April 29). Rally shows support for victims of
    rape. The Lexington News.
[11] Ritchie, K.W. (2010, January 25). First Year Report. 
[12] Lanning, K. (1992). Investigators guide to allegations of ritual
    child abuse. Behavioral Science Unit & National Center for the
    Analysis of Violent Crime.
[13] Goleman, D. (1994, October 31). Proof Lacking for Ritual Abuse.
    New York Times.
[14] Goodman, G. et al. (1994). Characteristics & sources of
    allegations of ritual child abuse. Clearing House on Child Abuse &
    Neglect Information.
[15] Burns, Det. Ray. (2009, November 10). Return and Inventory.
    Lafayette Co., MO.
[16] Schroer, Det. C. (2009, November 12). Affidavit. 11/12/09 Det. C
    Schroer; Lafayette Co., MO
[17] Burns, Det. Ray (2009, November 13). Return and Inventory.
    Lafayette Co., MO
[18] Kelleher, M. (2009, December 2). Jared Mohler Returns to Court.
    Fox 4.
[19] Pamela Young-Robinson-Mohler v Mark Young MO Case #7CV193002524
[20] Burrell Edward Mohler v Pamela Robinson-Mohler MO Case
    #01FC204320 (2001).
[21] Lederle, Officer M. (2009, November 10). Affidavit. Boone Co.,
{22] Wilson, Sgt. Arnold (2009, November 10). Affidavit/Inventory.
    Jackson Co., MO.
[23] Cole, Det. & P. Kelley (2009, November 20). Return and Inventory.
    Jackson Co., MO.
[24] Wakefield, H. & Underwager, R. (1992). Uncovering memories of
    alleged sexual abuse: The therapists who do it. IPT Journal,
    Vol. 4. "Following the single article in the Provo weekly paper
    (about the FMS Foundation), in three days, over 150 families in
    this single geographical area called to report their experience."
[25] Brigham Young University Career and Counseling Center:
[26] Beck, M. (2005). Leaving the Saints. Crown Publishing.
[27] Petersen, B.J. (2005). Response to Leaving the Saints. Farms
    Review, 17(2), 217-251.
[28] Engel, B. (1989). The Right to Innocence. Ivy Books.
[29] Horton, A.L., Harrison, A.L., Harrison, B.K. & Johnson, B.L.
    (1993). Confronting Abuse. Deseret Book Co.
[30] Hammond, C. (1992, June 25). "Greenbaum Speech " originally known
    as "Hypnosis and MPD: Ritual Abuse" Presented at the Fourth Annual
    Eastern Regional Conference on Abuse and Multiple Personality.
    Washington DC.
/                                                                    \
|  This study found that in cases of alleged abuse with no claims of |
|  repression or amnesia by the accusers, only 22% of accused passed |
|  polygraphs. In cases where accusers claimed a period of amnesia,  |
|  91% of accused passed polygraphs.                                 |
|                                Abrams, S. & Abrams, J. (1995)  |
|                        False memory syndrome vs. total repression  |
|                       Journal of Psychiatry  and Law, 23, 283-294  |

                     NEW BOOKS: THE GOOD AND....

                           The Trauma Myth:
    The Truth About the Sexual Abuse of Children and Its Aftermath
                           Susan A. Clancy
                          2010  Basic Books

The Trauma Myth is sure to anger many readers because it challenges a
treasured belief of our society: child sexual abuse is necessarily
traumatic. Psychologist Susan Clancy states at the beginning of The
Trauma Myth that child sexual abuse is prevalent and that it is
clearly damaging to victims; there is no argument there. She argues,
however, on the basis of compelling empirical evidence, that the
causes of the problems may be highly complex rather than a consequence
of "trauma."

The author notes that for decades the cultural and therapeutic
assumption has been that all child sexual abuse is traumatic for the
victims. As a result of ten years of interviewing more than two
hundred people about their past sexual abuse and of analyzing the
research literature, Clancy found that for most children sexual abuse
may be uncomfortable and confusing, but it is not necessarily
terrifying (traumatic). As adults, many of these people often redefine
the experience and then feel shame and guilt because they believe that
at the time they must have consented to the abuse since it happened
yet was not traumatic for them. The trauma model of sexual abuse not
only does not help these people, it makes matters worse for them.

In a very readable style, Clancy describes the history of the trauma
model for sexual abuse and the politics that have embedded in into our
culture. She shows how the model both harms and silences most victims
of abuse and especially how it ignores what science has shown. She
argues that victims of child abuse will be better served if therapists
pay attention to what the research shows and move beyond the trauma
model for treatment.  The Trauma Myth should be of interest to all and
especially to those who have a personal or professional interest in
child sexual abuse.

  Loftus, E.  & Frenda, S.J. (2010, March 12). Bad theories can harm
  victims. Science Vol. 327, 1329-1330.

  Zuger, A. (2010, January 26). Abusing not only children, but also
  science. New York Times. Retrieved on 3/5/10 from

/                                                                    \
|            Excerpt from an Interview with Susan Clancy             |
|                                                                    |
| QUESTION: Your previous book [Abducted] was a takedown of          |
| recovered memory. [The Trauma Myth] also takes a very negative     |
| view of recovered memory. Why are you so opposed to the idea of    |
| recovered memory?                                                  |
|                                                                    |
| CLANCY: Because it doesn't exist. There is not one single research |
| study showing that people exposed to horrifying, overwhelming,     |
| painful events "repress them" and recover them later on....What    |
| therapists in the sexual abuse field refer to as repression is     |
| actually simple forgetting. Most children who get abused don't     |
| understand it at the time. Thus, it is not a significant           |
| experience when it happens -- it's weird, perhaps -- and so they   |
| forget it, like we forget so many aspects of childhood. Later on   |
| in life they may be asked by a therapist, "Were you sexually       |
| abused as a child?" and this question will cue a memory. When this |
| happens it is not an example of a recovered memory. It is an       |
| example of normal forgetting and remembering.                      |
|                                                                    |
| The idea of repression ultimately hurts victims. It reinforces the |
| notion that sexual abuse is and should be a traumatic experience   |
 | when it happens -- something done against the will of the victims.|
| Since for most victims this is not the case, they end up feeling   |
| "alone," "isolated" and "ashamed."                                 |
|                                      Rogers, T. (2010, January 19) |
|                                The Trauma Myth: The child betrayed |
|                   Susan Clancy discusses her controversial theory, |
|                                                 |
|                                          Retrieved on 1/19/10 from |
|  |

     From Birth to Rebirth: Gnostic Healing for the 21st Century
                             C.V. Tramont
                        2009 Swan-Raven & Co.

A description[1] of From Birth to Rebirth on the publisher's website
says that the book::

  "is the heart-warming true story of a dedicated obstetrician whose
  interest in hypnosis develops into a passion for using past-life
  regression as an exciting healing modality. After making his way
  through the rigors of medical training and the trenches of daily
  practice, Dr. Tramont now finds himself evolving into a pragmatic

The description is accurate but does not begin to capture the degree
to which the author believes the stories that his patients weave.
There is no dispute that research has shown that hypnosis can be
beneficial in some medical situations. There is absolutely no
empirical evidence, however, that age regression enables a person to
access the past or to think like a child. Tramont seems unaware that
in his use of hypnosis and past life regressions, he is facilitating
the creation of elaborate fantasies by his patients.

Although books promoting age regression seem to appear on a regular
basis, Tramont rises above the crowd with his chapter on "Future-Life
Progression" The author believes that his patients can also see the
future. He lists some of their predictions -- predictions for more
than 50 to thousands of years in the future. Predictions can be
verified. Fortunes could be made if his patients made accurate
predictions. Unfortunately, nothing is presented that could be tested
anytime in the reasonable future.

It is challenging to consider why the myth of age regression holds
such appeal, especially given the potential for devastating harm that
can result as it did with the recovered memory movement.

[1] Retrieved on 3/22/10 from

/                                                                    \
| Sadly, stories of ritual abuse live on despite the fact that       |
| neither the FBI nor the police have ever been able to uncover      |
| physical evidence of such.                                         |
|                                                                    |
|                           RITUAL ABUSE:                            |
|                  |
|                                                                    |
| "Ritual/satanic/sadistic abuse survivors have often been           |
| disbelieved due to the extreme and bizarre nature of these types   |
| of abuse, and the secrecy that surrounds it. However, it is        |
| important to remember that ritual/satanic/sadistic abuse does      |
| happen. The more our society denies its existence, the greater the |
| vulnerability of potential victims. Although there are still few   |
| studies that document ritual/ satanic/sadistic abuse, more         |
| survivors are speaking out, and service providers are documenting  |
| the number of clients with such histories. Assessment of the       |
| prevalence rates of this type of abuse is further complicated by   |
| difficulty in tracking the groups who commit this type of          |
| abuse. Also, due to the severity of the abuse, many survivors      |
| repress the memories for many years -- or may never remember. .."  |

                       L E G A L   C O R N E R
                              FMSF Staff

                 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
              Upholds the Conviction of Paul Shanley[1]
            Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Paul Shanley,
       Supreme Judicial Court, Middlesex County, No. SJC-10382
On January 15, 2010, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a
decision that affirmed the 2005 guilty judgment of defrocked Roman
Catholic priest Paul Shanley for sexually abusing Boston fireman Paul
Busa when he was a young child. The evidence presented in the trial
were Busa's recovered repressed-memories. During the trial, prosecutor
Martha Coakley told the jury that they should believe Busa because he
suffered "dissociative amnesia" caused by the emotional trauma.

After the trial decision, Cambridge appellate attorney Robert F. Shaw,
Jr., petitioned the Supreme Judicial Court to consider Shanley's
appeal for a new trial. Among the issues raised by Shaw was the
argument that in the trial, prosecutors failed to demonstrate that
"repressed-memory" evidence is admissible and that Shanley's trial
lawyer inadequately challenged "repressed-memory" evidence.[2]

In support of the Shanley appeal, one hundred scientists signed an
amicus brief [3] that stated

  "'Repressed-recovered memories', 'dissociative amnesia' and related
  concepts are best described as pernicious psychiatric folklore
  devoid of convincing scientific evidence. Such theories are quite
  incapable of reliably assisting the legal process. In our collective
  opinion, these unsupported, controversial notions have caused
  incalculable harm to the fields of psychology and psychiatry,
  damaged tens of thousands of families, severely harmed the
  credibility of mental health professionals, and misled the
  legislative, civil, criminal, and family legal systems into many
  miscarriages of justice."

The Supreme Judicial Court decision was unanimous. Justice Robert
Cordy wrote: "In sum, the judge's finding that the lack of scientific
testing did not make unreliable the theory that an individual may
experience dissociative amnesia was supported in the record, not only
by expert testimony but by a wide collection of clinical observations
and a survey of academic literature."

A footnote in the decision may leave the Supreme Judicial Court a big
door out of the repressed-memory pit. Cody seemed to say that in the
future the Court might toss a conviction if the only evidence is based
on recovered-memories. Cordy wrote in a footnote:

  "We do not consider whether there could be circumstances where
  testimony based on the repressed or recovered memory of a victim,
  standing alone, would not be sufficient as a matter of law to
  support a conviction.'"

Attorney Shaw has filed a Petition for Rehearing pointing out, among
other issues, that the Court offered no analysis of all the materials
presented in the appeal, none of which were available to the trial

[1 The slip opinion can be found at:
[2] See FMSF Newsletter, 18 (2) for background. Another issue raised
    was ineffective counsel. Shanley's trial lawyer Frank Mondano was
    also the lawyer who represented grandparents Shirley and Ray
[3] Barden, R. C. (2009, August). Brief of Amicus Curiae of the
    International Committee of Social, Psychiatric, Psychological,
    Cognitive Science, Neuroscience, and Neurological Scientists
    submitted in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Paul R. Shanley,
    No. SJC-10382,Supreme Judicial Court, Middlesex Ct. Massachusetts.
[4] Ellement, J.R. & Saltzman, J. (2010, January 15). Defrocked priest
    Shanley is a victim of "injustice,'' his attorney says. Boston
    Globe. Retrieved on 1/17/10 from

/                                                                    \
|  Future reviewers will cringe at this science-illiterate opinion.  |
|                                                        R.C. Barden |

                       Indiana Judge Rules that
            Jurors May Hear Repressed-Memory Testimony [1]
              John Doe RG vs Archdiocese of Indianapolis

In January, Marion Superior Court Judge David Dryer ruled that the
jury in a clergy sex-abuse trial could hear repressed-memory
testimony. This may be the first time that an Indiana jury has been
allowed to hear evidence about repressed-memory, although previously
judges have heard repressed-memory testimony in statute of limitations

The facts of the case were not contested. There are 13 lawsuits filed
against former priest Harry Monore who has confessed that he abused at
least five of the people who have brought suits. John Doe RG's suit,
however, is the only one that involved repressed memories. Only two
other cases are currently moving toward trial because the statute of
limitations had expired in the cases. The repressed-memory case is
expected to be the most contested of the three, and both sides have
lined up memory experts.

According to Henry Harlson, professor at the Indiana University School
of Law: "Ultimately, this is going to force the court of appeals and
the Indiana Supreme Court to make a determination on the use of
repressed memory in cases of this nature." [2]

Attorney for John Doe RG is Patrick Noaker of Jeff Anderson and
Associates in Saint Paul, Minnesota.  John S. (Jay) Mercer of
Indianapolis, Indiana represents the Archdiocese.

[1] See FMSF Newsletter, 18 (4) 2009.
[2] King, R. (2010, January 22). Ruling in priest sex abuse case may
    set precedent. Indianapolis Star. Retrieved on 1/25/10 from


Note: Dr. Barden's comments are for educational purposes only and do
not constitute legal advice of any kind to anyone.

THE 1990s?

BARDEN: During my Ph.D. psychology graduate training at Minnesota, UC
Berkeley, and the Palo Alto VA/Stanford Medical Centers I became
increasingly interested in how people of all ages successfully cope
with complex stress. Two national research awards gave me time to
explore a wide range of interests. While working in hospitals with
multidisciplinary surgical teams, I became interested in improving
national standards of medical care for children. Legal and legislative
processes were clearly the most powerful and effective way to
implement broad systemic changes so I attended Harvard Law School.
While in law school, with colleagues in medicine, economics, and law
we drafted and later published multidisciplinary legislation to reform
U.S. Emergency Medical Care and Injury Prevention Systems for Children
(See, Harvard Journal on Legislation, 1993). This legislation became
nationally known and its key goals have been enacted in some form in
many states. I then returned to my home town of Minneapolis and was
practicing corporate and health care law while preparing additional
multidisciplinary legislative reform efforts. Litigating complex
science intensive malpractice cases under the intense glare of the
national media was something I had never even considered.

During that time period (1992-1994) I began to receive calls from
former science and medical school colleagues concerned about a very
dangerous "treatment" approach called recovered-memory therapy. "Now
that you are a lawyer can't you do something to stop this quackery
that is destroying thousands of families?", they would ask. As I
investigated these cases, the national experts in litigation told me
winning financially viable lawsuits was "impossible" because
psychotherapy lacked clear standards of care and talk-therapy damages
were too vague and difficult to prove to juries. Given this widespread
opinion, large law firms like the one that employed me were not at all
interested in fronting the large sums of money required for
"experimental" lawsuits. In contrast, I became increasingly convinced
that JD lawyers (lawyers with no special scientific training) -- even
the very best ones in the country -- simply did not comprehend the
relevant science and had never worked in effective multidisciplinary
science-law teams.

News of a $500,000 plaintiff's verdict in the Ramona [1] malpractice
case in California generated some interest in the possibility of
additional suits but did not solve the essential concerns. Upon close
inspection the very wealthy plaintiff, Mr. Ramona, had apparently
self-funded the litigation and despite winning a jury verdict had
reportedly actually lost money on the case. Even worse, the case was
an unusual "third party" claim and thus likely to have been overturned
on appeal. In sum, a financially viable recovered-memory therapy
malpractice lawsuit was still considered "impossible".

Fortunately, the Ramona story did result in my being interviewed in
several national media outlets -- the Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles
Times, American Bar Journal and others -- on the "meaning" of the
unusual Ramona verdict. This national media attention softened the
resistance of our law firm's most prominent litigator, Edward
M. Glennon, who joined my requests for funding. Ed's support enabled
us to obtain the financing to conduct two "impossible" jury trials
with team member Christopher Yetka. The Hamanne (95)[2] and Carlson
(96)[3] jury verdicts, both apparently records at that time for length
of trial and size of verdict (both over $2 million), received world-
wide media attention. Such suits were finally viewed as financially
viable. From that time forward I was able to place cases across the
country with solid law firms, set up science-law teams and begin to
litigate throughout the U.S. I went on to manage and litigate several
hundred multidisciplinary "science intensive" litigation cases by
setting up science-law multidisciplinary teams in over 30 states. We
were successful in about 98% of those cases.

When our team's $10 million settlement in the Burgus v. Braun[4] case
was reported on page 1, column 1 of the NY Times in 1997, the war was
essentially over. When I spoke at a national convention of physicians,
medical school professors, and hospital directors a few months after
the Burgus news, the hospital executives told me they were shutting
down all MPD and related hospital units because following the Burgus
case they now viewed each of their "recovered memory patients" as
"walking multi-million dollar liabilities". Thousands of patients were
thus freed from the harmful influences of recovered-memory therapy
programs. Over the next few years the recovered-memory therapy
industry collapsed rather rapidly leaving only mopping up operations
through criminal, civil, and licensing systems across the country.

The abuse scandals of the Catholic Church briefly revived some
"recovered memory" issues as plaintiffs sought ways to file otherwise
long-lapsed cases. Unfortunately, some attorneys defending the church
struggled to properly distinguish reliable abuse claims from
"recovered memory" cases and some apparently attempted to litigate the
RM cases using JD-only, pre-Hamanne, "horse and buggy" legal methods -
too often with negative results. By failing to engage the national "A
team" and eliminating RM suits as junk science cases, local attorneys
encouraged the filing of more RM suits. By settling these suits
instead of distinguishing them from credible cases, local attorneys
poured enormous financial resources back into the collapsed RM


BARDEN: Frye-Daubert-Kumho legal hearings are used to examine the
reliability and usefulness of expert witness testimony. In these
hearings, if the theory or testimony cannot be shown to be reliable
and helpful to the court it must be excluded to protect the integrity
of the legal process. See, Grove, W. M. and Barden, R.C. (2000)
Protecting the Integrity of the Legal System: The Admissibility of
Testimony from Mental Health Experts Under Daubert/Kumho Analyses,
Psychology, Public Policy and Law, Vol 5, No. 1, 234-242. Excerpts
reprinted in Fisher, George (Prof. Stanford Law School), Evidence:
University Casebook Series, Foundation Press -- West Group, New York,
2002, pg. 688.


BARDEN: Frye-Daubert-Kumho legal hearings to exclude junk science
testimony on "repressed and recovered memories" were (and remain) a
large part of our success in such cases. By blocking the introduction
of "recovered memory" testimony we protected the integrity of the
process, destroyed the opposition's main arguments, and obtained
ruling after ruling dismissing these junk science cases.


BARDEN: As a former faculty member in law and medicine, let me begin
with a general statement on the nature of the legal and medical
professions. One hundred years ago the typical medical professional
would travel door to door in a horse and buggy dispensing not-very-
effective and often quite dangerous health care. Early in the 20th
century, following Professor Flexner's report on the effectiveness of
medical training, medicine began to reform, conform to scientific
findings, improve in effectiveness, and move towards multidisciplinary
teams of professionals. Think of the modern surgical unit with
surgeons, radiologists, anesthesiologists, nurses, pharmacists, and
other professionals working together to produce care far beyond "horse
and buggy medicine." Unfortunately, even in the 21st century, the
legal system remains mired in "horse and buggy" methodology. In many
trials, even trials involving highly complex and controversial
science, JD-only attorneys are the persons controlling the process.
This reliance on antiquated legal methodology, has been a disaster in
many areas of the law but especially in family law and "recovered
memory" civil and criminal cases.

Not knowing all of the details of the lost Frye-Daubert-Kumho cases, I
am limited to offering general reasons as to what apparently went
wrong in some of these unfortunate cases. The first thing to emphasize
in our analysis is the overwhelming success of the multidisciplinary
team method I call "science-intensive litigation". From general
consulting efforts in Hungerford (97)[5], Engstrom (97)[6], Bourgelais
(05)[7] and other cases to our complete courtroom hearings in Hamanne
(95), Carlson (96), Quattrocchi (99)[8] , Rivers (05)[9], Keenan (09)
and others, we have enjoyed rather uniform success in excluding RM
testimony and experts. This success depends upon the careful creation
of multidisciplinary teams of highly qualified national expert
professionals. For example, our recent success in the Keenan (2009,
MN) case involved Elizabeth Loftus (Ph.D., national research
psychology expert in memory and memory contamination, methodology,
acceptance in the field of memory, history of the RM movement, and
related areas), Harrison Pope (MD research-clinical psychiatry expert
in methodology, diagnosis, DSM, history of the RM movement, bio-
medical issues, acceptance in the field of psychiatry, and others),
William Grove (Ph.D. research-clinical psychologist and expert in
testing, diagnosis, assessment, clinical judgment, DSM, acceptance in
the field of clinical psychology, and related issues) and myself
(Ph.D., J.D. research-clinical psychologist and trial counsel
specializing in the litigation of science issues). An even wider range
of national experts including Richard Ofshe, Ph.D., Paul McHugh,
M.D. and others has also been essential in earlier cases. In my
opinion, involving the "A team" of national science and legal experts
is the single most important ingredient for success in such cases.

In stark contrast to the "A Team" method, too many lawyers mistakenly
believe that they, as JD-only attorneys, can sufficiently comprehend
and effectively use complex social science information in real time in
high speed verbal battles with RM experts. In my experience, even the
most talented and experienced nationally renowned JD-only attorneys
are not even remotely capable of effectively cross-examining RM
experts who are often highly trained, compelling professionals who
have spent years polishing misleading presentations of RM "science".
In addition, JD-only attorneys, in my opinion, are quite incapable of
conducting effective redirect examinations of our own national
experts. The information involved is simply too scientifically
complex, involves too many areas of overlapping confusions, is
happening too rapidly even for in-trial consultants, and is difficult
to summarize for legal analysis by the court. Questions that leave
confusing holes in our own expert's presentations are often easily
clarified in real time during court proceedings but only if the
attorney asking the questions is very, very, very familiar in detail
with the relevant research literature. JD-only attorneys cannot
possibly display this kind of detailed, professional knowledge of the
fields of memory contamination, diagnosis, clinical judgment,
psychological testing, social science methodology, history of
psychology, misconduct of RM leaders, etc, etc. Relating this again to
the health care system, even the very best, kindest, and most highly
motivated dentists should not attempt heart transplants.

As a specific example of the "A team" method at work, I was conducting
a cross examination of a highly skilled RM expert. At my counsel table
was a box of dozens and dozens of peer-reviewed published research
articles on trauma, repressed memory, cognition, developmental issues,
suggestibility, clinical judgment, medication effects, the DSM, etc.
When the RM "expert" would misstate the research, I would pull out the
relevant article, turn to the appropriate section and ask the "expert"
to read the correction into the record. The court quickly understood
that this expert could not be trusted. The idea that even the very
finest of JD-only attorneys could conduct such an examination is

A second example involves an expert testifying with regard to
psychological assessment issues. The expert was discussing MMPI
reports and the resulting diagnostic recommendations. Unfortunately
for the expert, the most relevant MMPI scales were not stable over
time and the test in question was quite out of date. The expert had
failed to report this serious methodological error to the court. The
error and the failure to report the error were both violations of
licensing rules. The court quickly understood that this expert could
not be trusted. The entire case turned on this cross examination. The
idea that even the very finest of JD-only attorneys could conduct such
an examination is fanciful. A third example involves the issue of the
history of misconduct by RM experts. This is always a difficult issue
and given their academic backgrounds even our own experts do not like
to discuss it. As someone who served as a Special Assistant State
Attorney General for Utah in 2004 and 2005, I look forward to this
part of the case. The failure to fully, fairly, and accurately display
the sordid history of misconduct -- including criminal misconduct -- by
leaders of the RM movement is, in my opinion, perhaps the most serious
and common error of JD-only attorneys in such matters. A fourth
example involves experts offering different answers to the very same
questions when those questions are asked by a JD-only attorney or by
an attorney with two national research awards who has participated in
licensing revocation actions against a number of professionals in the
expert's field of study. Several of the most prominent RM experts
refuse to participate in cases where they will be examined by an
attorney who is also a national expert in their own field.

Some lawyers attempt a "half-baked" solution to these problems by
having a medical or psychological expert in the courtroom to assist
them or write questions during examinations. This approach is
certainly far better than having JD-only attorneys go it alone but not
nearly as effective as the full "A team" method. The very fine
world-class experts we involve in these cases became international
experts by becoming highly specialized. Thus none of them can cover
the entire range of issues needed to win these hearings including
clinical judgment limitations, lie detection, research methods,
statistical issues, medication, DSM, medical, history of misconduct by
RM experts, recent research findings in a range of professions, local
licensing rule restrictions, legal evidentiary issues, evidentiary
presentation issues, and related quandaries. A JD-only attorney would
need at least 3 experts in the courtroom with them at all times
somehow rapidly coming up with and communicating complex questions in
real time. For obvious reasons this has never been accomplished or
even attempted.

In sum, I fear that lawyers who continue to use "horse and buggy"
legal methods will continue to lose cases they really should win and
these losses will fuel attempts to revive the RM industry.


BARDEN: It is very difficult to understand, isn't it? Some attorneys
never conduct the minimal investigation necessary to find out about
the history of successes in these cases. Given the international news
coverage our trials generated such information is readily available.
Other lawyers, tragically, are informed and simply refuse to involve
the "A Team" believing they, as experienced JD-only attorneys, can
handle all cases. Tragically, they often find out too late that "horse
and buggy law" often works very poorly indeed in complex social
science hearings. Finally, economic considerations can also play a
role some well-intentioned but misinformed attorneys are "penny wise
and pound foolish" -- trying to reduce costs in litigation but ending
up losing many, many times the amount saved in settlements or losing
verdicts. At some point our "A team" may lose a Frye-Daubert-Kumho
hearing and these decisions may become more complex but at this point
the choices and consequences seem rather clear.

[1] See FMSF NsltrVol.  3   No.  6,  1994
[2] See FMSF NsltrVol.  4   No.  8,  1995
[3] See FMSF NsltrVol.  5   No.  3,  1996
[4] See FMSF NsltrVol.  6   No. 11,  1997
[5] See FMSF NsltrVol.  5   No.  3,  1996
[6] See FMSF NsltrVol.  4   No.  6,  1995
[7] See FMSF NsltrVol. 14   No.  3,  2006
[8] See FMSF NsltrVol.  8   No.  4,  1999
[9] See FMSF NsltrVol. 15   No.  1,  2006

                      History of Completed Cases
  in Which R.C. Barden Participated as a Consultant or Trial Counsel

See, e.g., Hamanne, et al. v. Humenansky, Ramsey County Minnesota File
No. C4-94-203, Judge Betrand Poritsky, June 30, 1995, Transcript page
83-84. "The Frye hearing has been concluded and we are still on the
record... It's my finding, first, that the theory a person can block
out of awareness [repress or dissociate] a long stream of [traumatic]
events and subsequently recall them accurately is not supported by
experts in the field. And further that there is no agreement by
experts that there is general agreement that such [recovered memory]
evidence is reliable and trustworthy. That's the Frye standard. As to
the Daubert standard, it is also my ruling that such [recovered
memory] evidence is not reliable nor helpful to the jury."

See, Carlson v. Humenansky (Minnesota Trial Ct), Judge Betrand
Poritsky (January, 1996). Judge Poritsky again found (as he had in
Hamanne v. Humenansky) that repression and recovered memories were
unreliable concepts, not accepted by the relevant scientific
community, not helpful to a jury and thus inadmissible.

See, Engstrom v. Engstrom California App., 2nd App. Dist., Div 2, (CA
1997) "[Repressed memory] is not generally accepted as valid and
reliable by a respectable majority of the pertinent scientific

See, State of New Hampshire v. Hungerford and State of New Hampshire
v. Morahan 698 A.2d 1244 (N.H. 1997) "The phenomenon of recovery of
repressed memories has not yet reached the point where we may perceive
these particular recovered memories as reliable."

See, State of New Hampshire v. Walters 697 A.2d 916 (N.H. 1997) "[W]e
conclude, as we did in Hungerford , that " [t]he indicia of
reliability present in the particular memories in [this] case[] do not
rise to such a level that they overcome the divisive state of the
scientific debate on the issue."

See, State of Rhode Island v. Quattrocchi, C.A. No. P92-3759
(R.I. 1999) [on remand from the Rhode Island Supreme Court 681 A.2d
879 (R.I. 1999)] "The State has not met its burden of establishing
that repressed recollection is reliable and admissible as scientific

See, State of New Hampshire vs. Bourgelais, Docket No. 02-S-2834,
Judge T. Nadeau, April 4, 2005. "the State's motion [to use repressed
memory evidence at trial] is denied... the court determines, based on
the law and the evidence, that the reliability of memory retrieval has
not been sufficiently established..."

See, Rivers v. Father Flanagan's Boys Town, Doc 1024, Case No. 743,
Nebraska State Court Judge Sandra L. Dougherty, November 25, 2005. "In
conclusion, the Court finds and concludes that Rivers has not met his
burden of establishing that repressed and recovered memory is reliable
and admissible as scientific evidence or that it is properly applied
in this case. The Plaintiff's evidence lacks the scientific
reliability and proper application necessary to admission under Rule
702 and Daubert/Schaferman. As a result, the Courts finds and
concludes that the Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 1 (banning all
testimony regarding repressed and recovered memories) shall be

See, Duffy v. Father Flanagan's Boys Town, Case No. 8:03CV31, United
States District Court for the District of Nebraska, Memorandum and
Order of January 26, 2006 by Hon. Laurie Smith Camp, U.S. District
Judge. "[Plaintiff] Duffy filed a motion of withdrawal of expert
testimony on the issue of repressed memory.... [thus] judgment will be
granted to [Defendant] as a matter of law."

See, Keenan v. Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis and Diocese of
Winona, Case No. 62-C9-06-003962, December 8, 2009, 2nd Judicial
District, Judge E. Johnson after an exhaustive multi-week hearing
found, "Plaintiff failed to meet his burden of proof under the
Frye-Mack standard of showing that the concept of repressed and
recovered memory is generally accepted in the relevant scientific
community" ..."Inclusion of the diagnosis of dissociative amnesia in
the DSM-IV does not establish general acceptance of that diagnosis"...
"Plaintiff failed to meet his burden of proof under the Frye-Mack
standard of showing that the theory of repressed and recovered memory
is reliable and trustworthy based on well-recognized scientific
principles because of the significant methodological flaws in the
studies presented by plaintiff in support of that theory and the lack
of any test to show reliability. Defendant's Motion to Exclude Expert
Testimony under the Frye-Mack standard is hereby GRANTED."

*                           N O T I C E S                            *
*                                                                    *
*            S O M E   B O O K S   O F   I N T E R E S T             *
*                                                                    *
*                          THE TRAUMA MYTH:                          *
*   The Truth About the Sexual Abuse of Children and its Aftermath   *
*                          Susan A. Clancy                           *
*                                                                    *
*                         REMEMBERING TRAUMA                         *
*                         by Richard McNally                         *
*                      Harvard University Press                      *
*                                                                    *
*          S. O. Lilienfeld, S.J. Lynn and J.M. Lohr (eds.)          *
*                  New York: Guilford Press (2003)                   *
*                                                                    *
*                         PSYCHOLOGY ASTRAY:                         *
*  Fallacies in Studies of "Repressed Memory" and Childhood Trauma   *
*                   by Harrison G. Pope, Jr., M.D.                   *
*                            Upton Books                             *
*                                                                    *
*                            Karl Sabbagh                            *
*                   Oxford University Press (2009)                   *
*                                                                    *
*                      MAKING MIND and MADNESS                       *
*                    From Hysteria to Depression                     *
*                Chapter 3: "A Black Box Named Sybil"                *
*                       Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen                        *
*                     Cambridge University Press                     *
*                                2009                                *
*                                                                    *
*                TRY TO REMEMBER: PSYCHIATRY'S CLASH                 *
*                 OVER MEANING, MEMORY, AND MIND                     *
*                         Paul McHugh, M.D.                          *
*                     Washington, DC: Dana Press                     *
*                                                                    *
*                                                                    *
* The video made by the Rutherford family is the most popular video  *
* of FMSF families. It covers the complete story from accusation, to *
* retraction and reconciliation. Family members describe the things  *
* they did to cope and to help reunite. Of particular interest are   *
* Beth Rutherford's comments about what her family did that helped   *
* her to retract and return.                                         *
*                   Available in DVD format only:                    *
*                      To order send request to                      *
*                    FMSF Video, 1955 Locust St.                     *
*                      Philadelphia, PA  19103                       *
*    $10.00 per DVD; Canada add $4.00; other countries add $10.00    *
*               Make checks payable to FMS Foundation                *
*                                                                    *
*                       WEB SITES of INTEREST                        *
*                                                                    *
*              http:/               *
*                          Elizabeth Loftus                          *
*                                                                    *
*                      *
*                       Against Satanic Panics                       *
*                                                                    *
*                   *
*            The Lampinen Lab False Memory Reading Group             *
*                       University of Arkansas                       *
*                                                                    *
*                 http:/                 *
*                  The Exploratorium Memory Exhibit                  *
*                                                                    *
*                        *
*              Site for retractors run by Laura Pasley               *
*                                                                    *
*                                   *
*                  Site of Investigative Journalist                  *
*                                                                    *
*                                 *
*                     French False Memory Group                      *
*                                                                    *
*           http:/           *
*             The Bobgans question Christian counseling              *
*                                                                    *
*                     http:/                      *
*                   Illinois-Wisconsin FMS Society                   *
*                                                                    *
*                   http:/                    *
*                             Ohio Group                             *
*                                                                    *
*                       *
*               Matt Stone's updates on Australia FMS                *
*                                                                    *
*                       http:/                        *
*                    British False Memory Society                    *
*                                                                    *
*              http:/              *
*               Information about Satanic Ritual Abuse               *
*                                                                    *
*                     http:/                     *
*                   Parents Against Cruel Therapy                    *
*                                                                    *
*                    http:/                     *
*                     Site run by Brian Robinson                     *
*                     contains information about                     *
*                Christchurch Creche and other cases.                *
*                                                                    *
*                   http:/                    *
*                        National Child Abuse                        *
*                     Defense & Resource Center                  *
*                                                                    *
*                   http:/                    *
*                  Excerpts from Victims of Memory                   *
*                                                                    *
*               http:/               *
*                           Ross Institute                           *
*                                                                    *
*                  http:/                  *
*                 FMS in Scandanavia -- Janet Hagbom                 *
*                                                                    *
*                        http:/                         *
*                National Center for Reason & Justice            *
*                                                                    *
*                   http:/                   *
*            English language web site of Dutch retractor            *
*                                                                    *
*                      http:/                      *
*             This site is run by Stephen Barrett, M.D.              *
*                                                                    *
*                    http:/                    *
*           Contains information about filing complaints.            *
*                                                                    *
                F M S    B U L L E T I N    B O A R D

Contacts & Meetings :

  See Georgia
  Kathleen 907-333-5248
    Pat 480-396-9420
  Little Rock
    Al & Lela 870-363-4368
    Jocelyn 530-570-1862 
  San Francisco & North Bay
    Charles 415-435-9618 
  San Francisco & South Bay 
    Eric 408-738-0469
  East Bay Area
    Judy 925-952-4853
  Central Orange County
    Chris & Alan 949-733-2925
  Covina Area 
    Floyd & Libby 626-357-2750
  Colorado Springs
    Doris 719-488-9738
Central Florida - Please call for mtg. time
   John & Nancy 352-750-5446
    Wallie & Jill 770-971-8917
  Chicago & Suburbs - 1st Sun. (MO)
    Eileen 847-985-7693 or Liz 847-827-1056
  Indiana Assn. for Responsible Mental Health Practices
    Pat 317-865-8913 & Helen 574-753-2779
  Wichita -- Meeting as called
    Pat 785-762-2825
   Sarah 337-235-7656
  Portland -- 4th Sun. (MO)
    Bobby 207-878-9812
   Carol 410-465-6555
  Andover -- 2nd Sun. (MO) @ 1pm
    Frank 978-263-9795
  Greater Detroit Area
    Nancy 248-642-8077
  Terry & Collette 507-642-3630
  Dan & Joan 651-631-2247
  Springfield -- Quarterly (4th Sat. of Apr.,
                 Jul., Oct., Jan.) @12:30pm
    Tom 417-753-4878 & Roxie 417-781-2058
  Lee & Avone 406-443-3189 
  Jean 603-772-2269 & Mark 802-872-0847
  Sally 609-927-4147 (Southern)
  Albuquerque -- 2nd Sat. (BI-MO) @1 pm 
    Southwest Room -Presbyterian Hospital
    Maggie 505-662-7521(after 6:30pm) or Sy 505-758-0726
  Upstate/Albany Area
    Elaine 518-399-5749
  Susan 704-538-7202
    Bob & Carole 440-356-4544
  Oklahoma City
    Dee 405-942-0531 
  Portland area
    Kathy 503-655-1587
  Wayne (includes S. NJ)
    Jim & Jo 610-783-0396
    Jo or Beverly 713-464-8970
  Keith 801-467-0669
  See Oregon
  Katie & Leo 414-476-0285 or
  Susanne & John 608-427-3686

  Vancouver & Mainland 
    Lloyd 250-741-8941
  Victoria & Vancouver Island
    John 250-721-3219
  Roma 204-275-5723
    Adriaan 519-471-6338
  Eileen 613-836-3294
    Ken & Marina 905-637-6030
    Paula 705-543-0318
  514-620-6397 French and English
  FMS Association fax-972-2-625-9282
  Colleen 09-416-7443
  Ake Moller FAX 48-431-217-90
The British False Memory Society
  Madeline 44-1225 868-682

|          Do you have access to e-mail?  Send a message to          |
|                                         |
| if  you wish to receive electronic versions of this newsletter and |
| notices of radio and television  broadcasts  about  FMS.  All  the |
| message need say is "add to the FMS-News". It would be useful, but |
| not necessary,  if you add your full name (all addresses and names |
| will remain strictly confidential).                                |
The False Memory Syndrome Foundation is a qualified  501(c)3  corpora-
tion  with  its  principal offices in Philadelphia and governed by its
Board of Directors.  While it encourages participation by its  members
in  its  activities,  it must be understood that the Foundation has no
affiliates and that no other organization or person is  authorized  to
speak for the Foundation without the prior written approval of the Ex-
ecutive Director. All membership dues and contributions to the Founda-
tion must be forwarded to the Foundation for its disposition.

PAMELA FREYD, Ph.D., Executive Director

FMSF Scientific and Professional Advisory Board,         April 1, 2010

AARON T. BECK, M.D., D.M.S., U of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA;
TERENCE W. CAMPBELL, Ph.D., Clinical and Forensic Psychology, 
    Sterling Heights, MI;
ROSALIND CARTWRIGHT, Ph.D., Rush Presbyterian St. Luke's Medical
    Center, Chicago, IL;
JEAN CHAPMAN, Ph.D., University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI;
LOREN CHAPMAN, Ph.D., University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI;
FREDERICK C. CREWS, Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, CA;
ROBYN M. DAWES, Ph.D., Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA;
DAVID F. DINGES, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA;
HENRY C. ELLIS, Ph.D., University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM;
FRED H. FRANKEL, MBChB, DPM, Harvard University Medical School;
GEORGE K. GANAWAY, M.D., Emory University of Medicine, Atlanta, GA;
MARTIN GARDNER, Author, Hendersonville, NC;
ROCHEL GELMAN, Ph.D., Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ;
HENRY GLEITMAN, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA;
LILA GLEITMAN, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA;
RICHARD GREEN, M.D., J.D., Charing Cross Hospital, London;
JOHN HOCHMAN, M.D., UCLA Medical School, Los Angeles, CA;
DAVID S. HOLMES, Ph.D., University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS;
ROBERT A. KARLIN, Ph.D. , Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ;
ELIZABETH LOFTUS, Ph.D., University of California, Irvine, CA;
SUSAN L. McELROY, M.D., University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH;
PAUL McHUGH, M.D., Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD;
HAROLD MERSKEY, D.M., University of Western Ontario, London, Canada;
ULRIC NEISSER, Ph.D., Cornell University, Ithaca, NY;
RICHARD OFSHE, Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, CA;
EMILY CAROTA ORNE, B.A., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA;
LOREN PANKRATZ, Ph.D., Oregon Health Sciences Univ., Portland, OR;
MICHAEL A. PERSINGER, Ph.D., Laurentian University, Ontario, Canada;
AUGUST T. PIPER, Jr., M.D., Seattle, WA;
HARRISON POPE, Jr., M.D., Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA;
JAMES RANDI, Author and Magician, Plantation, FL;
HENRY L. ROEDIGER, III, Ph.D. ,Washington University, St. Louis, MO;
CAROLYN SAARI, Ph.D., Loyola University, Chicago, IL;
MICHAEL A. SIMPSON, M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P., M.R.C, D.O.M., Center for
    Psychosocial & Traumatic Stress, Pretoria, South Africa;
RALPH SLOVENKO, J.D., Ph.D., Wayne State University Law School,
    Detroit, MI;
JEFFREY VICTOR, Ph.D., Jamestown Community College, Jamestown, NY;
HOLLIDA WAKEFIELD, M.A., Institute of Psychological Therapies, 
    Northfield, MN;
CHARLES A. WEAVER, III, Ph.D. Baylor University, Waco, TX

   Advisors to whom we are grateful who are now deceased:

DAVID A. HALPERIN, M.D., Mount Sinai School of Medicine, 
    New York, NY; 
ERNEST HILGARD, Ph.D., Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA; 
PHILIP S. HOLZMAN, Ph.D., Harvard University, Cambridge; 
HAROLD LIEF, M.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; 
MARTIN ORNE, M.D., Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, 
    Philadelphia, PA; 
CAMPBELL PERRY, Ph.D., Concordia University, Montreal, Canada; 
THEODORE SARBIN, Ph.D., University of California, Santa Cruz, CA;
THOMAS A. SEBEOK, Ph.D., Indiana University, Bloomington, IN; 
MARGARET SINGER, Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, CA; 
DONALD SPENCE, Ph.D., Robert Wood Johnson Medical Center, 
    Piscataway, NJ.

                     YOUR CONTRIBUTION WILL HELP
                   Please Fill Out All Information
                             Please Print

       __Visa: Card # & exp. date:_____________________________

       __Discover: Card # &  exp. date:________________________

       __Mastercard: # & exp. date:____________________________

       __Check or Money Order:_________________________________

      Signature: ______________________________________________

      Name: ___________________________________________________


      State, ZIP (+4) _________________________________________

      Country: ________________________________________________

      Phone: (________)________________________________________

      Fax:  (________)_________________________________________

                    THANK YOU FOR YOUR GENEROSITY.
Fms-news mailing list