Message #9 board "P_Metaphysical (Mag Articles)"
Date : 22-Jan-93 15:57
From : Simon Novali
To : All
Subj : Lanning (6 of 11)
note that many of those espousing these theories are using the long-
since-discredited numbers and rhetoric of the missing children
hysteria in the early 1980s. Yet "Stranger-Abduction Homicides of
Children", a January 1989 _Juvenile Justice Bulletin_, published by
the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention of the
U.S. Department of Justice, reports that researchers now estimate
that the number of children kidnapped and murdered by nonfamily
members is between 52 and 158 a year and that adolescents 14 to 17
years old account for nearly two-thirds of these victims. These
figures are also consistent with the 1990 National Incident Studies
previously mentioned.
We live in a very violent society, and yet we have "only" about
23,000 murders a year. Those who accept these stories of mass human
sacrifice would have us believe that the satanists and other occult
practitioners are murdering more than twice as many people every
year in this country as all the other murderers combined.
In addition, in none of the cases of which I am aware has any
evidence of a well-organized satanic cult been found. Many of those
who accept the stories of organized ritual abuse of children and
human sacrifice will tell you that the best evidence they now have
is the consistency of stories from all over America. It sounds like
a powerful argument. It is interesting to note that, without having
met each other, the hundreds of people who claim to have been
abducted by aliens from outer space also tell stories and give
descriptions of the aliens that are similar to each other. This is
not to imply that allegations of child abuse are in the same
category as allegations of abduction by aliens from outer space. It
is intended only to illustrate that individuals who never met each
other can sometimes describe similar events without necessarily
having experienced them.
The large number of people telling the same story is, in fact, the
biggest reason to doubt these stories. It is simply too difficult
for that many people to commit so many horrendous crimes as part of
an organized conspiracy. Two or three people murder a couple of
children in a few communities as part of a ritual, and nobody finds
out? Possible. Thousands of people do the same thing to tens of
thousands of victims over many years? Not likely. Hundreds of
communities all over America are run by mayors, police departments,
and community leaders who are practicing satanists and who regularly
murder and eat people? Not likely. In addition, these community
leaders and high-ranking officials also supposedly commit these
complex crimes leaving no evidence, and at the same time function as
leaders and managers while heavily involved in using illegal drugs.
Probably the closest documented example of this type of alleged
activity in American history is the Ku Klux Klan, which ironically
used Christianity, not satanism, to rationalize its activity but
which, as might be expected, was eventually infiltrated by
informants and betrayed by its members.
As stated, initially I was inclined to believe the allegations of
the victims. But as the cases poured in and the months and years
went by, I became more concerned about the lack of physical evidence
and corroboration for many of the more serious allegations. With
increasing frequency I began to ask the question: "Why are victims
alleging things that do not *seem* to be true?" Many possible
answers were considered.
The first possible answer is obvious: clever offenders. The
allegations may not seem to be true but they are true. The criminal
justice system lacks the knowledge, skill, and motivation to get to
the bottom of this crime conspiracy. The perpetrators of this crime
conspiracy are clever, cunning individuals using sophisticated mind
control and brainwashing techniques to control their victims. Law
enforcement does not know how to investigate these cases.
It is technically possible that these allegations of an organized
conspiracy involving taking over day care centers, abduction,
cannibalism, murder, and human sacrifice might be true. But if they
are true, they constitute one of the greatest crime conspiracies in
history.
Many people do not understand how difficult it is to commit a
conspiracy crime involving numerous co-conspirators. One clever and
cunning individual has a good chance of getting away with a well-
planned interpersonal crime. Bring one partner into the crime and
the odds of getting away with it drop considerably. The more people
involved in the crime, the harder it is to get away with it. Why?
Human nature is the answer. People get angry and jealous. They come
to resent the fact that another conspirator is getting "more" than
they. They get in trouble and want to make a deal for themselves by
informing on others.
If a group of individuals degenerate to the point of engaging in
human sacrifice, murder, and cannibalism, that would most likely be
the beginning of the end for such a group. The odds are that someone
in the group would have a problem with such acts and be unable to
maintain the secret.
The appeal of the satanic conspiracy theory is twofold:
---- (1) First, it is a simple explanation for a complex problem.
Nothing is more simple than "the devil made them do it". If we do
not understand something, we make it the work of some supernatural
force. During the Middle Ages, serial killers were thought to be
vampires and werewolves, and child sexual abuse was the work of
demons taking the form of parents and clergy. Even today, especially
for those raised to religiously believe so, satanism offers an
explanation as to why "good" people do bad things. It may also help
to "explain" unusual, bizarre, and compulsive sexual urges and
behavior.
---- (2) Second, the conspiracy theory is a popular one. We find it
difficult to believe that one bizarre individual could commit a
crime we find so offensive. Conspiracy theories about soldiers
missing in action (MlAs), abductions by UFOs, Elvis Presley
sightings, and the assassination of prominent public figures are the
focus of much attention in this country. These conspiracy theories
and allegations of ritual abuse have the following in common: (1)
self-proclaimed experts, (2) tabloid media interest, (3) belief the
government is involved in a coverup, and (4) emotionally involved
direct and indirect victim/witnesses.
On a recent television program commemorating the one hundredth
anniversary of Jack the Ripper, almost fifty percent of the viewing
audience who called the polling telephone numbers indicated that
they thought the murders were committed as part of a conspiracy
involving the British Royal Family. The five experts on the program,
however, unanimously agreed the crimes were the work of one
disorganized but lucky individual who was diagnosed as a paranoid
schizophrenic. In many ways, the murders of Jack the Ripper are
similar to those allegedly committed by satanists today.
If your child's molestation was perpetrated by a sophisticated
satanic cult, there is nothing you could have done to prevent it and
therefore no reason to feel any guilt. I have been present when
parents who believe their children were ritually abused at day care
centers have told others that the cults had sensors in the road,
lookouts in the air, and informers everywhere; therefore, the
usually recommended advice of unannounced visits to the day care
center would be impossible.
6. ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS
Even if only part of an allegation is not true, what then is the
answer to the question "Why are victims alleging things that do not
*seem* to be true?" After consulting with psychiatrists,
psychologists, anthropologists, therapists, social workers, child
sexual abuse experts, and law enforcement investigators for more
than eight years, I can find no single, simple answer. The answer to
the question seems to be a complex set of dynamics that can be
different in each case. In spite of the fact that some skeptics keep
looking for it, there does not appear to be one answer to the
question that fits every case. Each case is different, and each case
may involve a different combination of answers.
I have identified a series of possible alternative answers to this
question. The alternative answers also do not preclude the
possibility that clever offenders are sometimes involved. I will not
attempt to explain completely these alternative answers because I
cannot. They are presented simply as areas for consideration and
evaluation by child sexual abuse intervenors, for further
elaboration by experts in these fields, and for research by
objective social scientists. The first step, however, in finding the
answers to this question is to admit the possibility that some of
what the victims describe may not have happened. Some child
advocates seem unwilling to do this.
-- a. PATHOLOGICAL DISTORTION.
The first possible answer to why victims are alleging things that do
not *seem* to be true is *pathological distortion*. The allegations
may be errors in processing reality influenced by underlying mental
disorders such as dissociative disorders, borderline or histrionic
personality disorders, or psychosis. These distortions may be
manifested in false accounts of victimization in order to gain
psychological benefits such as attention and sympathy (factitious
disorder). When such individuals repeatedly go from place to place
or person to person making these false reports of their own
"victimization", it is called Munchausen Syndrome. When the repealed
false reports concern the "victimization" of their children or
others linked to them, it is called Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. I
am amazed when some therapists state that they believe the
allegations because they cannot think of a reason why the "victim",
whose failures are now explained and excused or who is now the
center of attention at a conference or on a national television
program, would lie. If you can be forgiven for mutilating and
killing babies, you can be forgiven for anything.
Many "victims" may develop pseudomemories of their victimization and
eventually come to believe the events actually occurred. Noted
forensic psychiatrist Park E. Dietz (personal communication, Nov.
1991) states:
"Pseudomemories have been acquired through dreams (particularly if
one is encouraged to keep a journal or dream diary and to regard
dream content as 'clues' about the past or as snippets of history),
substance-induced altered states of consciousness (alcohol or other
drugs), group influence (particularly hearing vivid accounts of
events occurring to others with whom one identifies emotionally such
as occurs in incest survivor groups), reading vivid accounts of
events occurring to others with whom one identifies emotionally,
watching such accounts in films or on television, and hypnosis. The
most efficient means of inducing pseudomemories is hypnosis.
"It is characteristic of pseudomemories that the recollections of
complex events (as opposed to a simple unit of information, such as
a tag number) are incomplete and without chronological sequence.
Often the person reports some uncertainty because the pseudomemories
are experienced in a manner they describe as 'hazy', 'fuzzy', or
'vague'. They are often perplexed that they recall some details
vividly but others dimly.
"Pseudomemories are not delusions. When first telling others of
pseudomemories, these individuals do not have the unshakable but
irrational conviction that deluded subjects have, but with social
support they often come to defend vigorously the truthfulness of the
pseudomemories.
"Pseudomemories are not fantasies, but may incorporate elements from
fantasies experienced in the past. Even where the events described
are implausible, listeners may believe them because they are
reported with such intense affect (i.e. with so much emotion
attached to the story) that the listener concludes that the events
must have happened because no one could 'fake' the emotional aspects
of the retelling. It also occurs, however, that persons report
pseudomemories in such a matter-of-fact and emotionless manner that
mental health professionals conclude that the person has
'dissociated' intellectual knowledge of the events from emotional
appreciation of their impact."
-- b. TRAUMATIC MEMORY.
The second possible answer is *traumatic memory*. Fear and severe
trauma can cause victims to distort reality and confuse events. This
is a well-documented fact in cases involving individuals taken
hostage or in life-and-death situations. The distortions may be part
of an elaborate defense mechanism of the mind called "splitting" -
The victims create a clear-cut good-and-evil manifestation of their
complex victimization that is then psychologically more manageable.
Through the defense mechanism of dissociation, the victim may escape
the horrors of reality by inaccurately processing that reality. In a
dissociative state a young child who ordinarily would know the
difference might misinterpret a film or video as reality.
Another defense mechanism may tell the victim that it could have
been worse, and so his or her victimization was not so bad. They are
not alone in their victimization - other children were also abused.
Their father who abused them is no different from other prominent
people in the community they claim also abused them. Satanism may
help to explain why their outwardly good and religious parents did
such terrible things to them in the privacy of their home. Their
religious training may convince them that such unspeakable acts by
supposedly "good" people must be the work of the devil. The
described human sacrifice may be symbolic of the "death" of their
childhood.
It may be that we should anticipate that individuals severely abused
as very young children by *multiple* offenders with *fear* as the
primary controlling tactic will distort and embellish their
victimization. Perhaps a horror-filled yet inaccurate account of
