No one will take on Obama, and the Washington establishment, like Newt Gingrich
Fantastic: Obama would like to replicate Detroit’s foibles elsewhere
New York Times scandalized as NYPD is trained on Muslim-perpetrated violence
Detroit boldly choosing to crackdown on the innocent
South Carolina stopped Romney. For now
Cartoon: Down and out
In which I praise Mitt (but explain why I won’t vote for him)
Bernero the gambler sells Main Street for a shot at the slots
The Emergency Financial Manager law is undemocratic, but opponents need an alternative to guard against local fiscal calamities
Memo to Snyder: Don’t stop the radical reforms now!Horror Show in Missouri
November 30th, 2009 | 
Author: 
Pamela Troy
The Mohler case grinds on in Missouri. For those unfamiliar with it, six men in the Mohler family, Burrell Mohler Senior, and his five sons, have been accused of ritually abusing Burrell’s grandchildren back in the ‘80s.
You can find it online, conveniently typed-up.
The memories, we’ve been told, were initially “suppressed” by the 26-year-old woman who came forward with them. She claims that from the age of five to eleven, she was regularly and ritually molested by these men. She claims she was impregnated and forced to have an abortion at the age of eleven, and that the abuse stopped after this.
Her siblings insist the accusations are true, and that she and her sisters wrote down accounts of the abuse while they were children and buried them in jars on the property, as per their abusers’ instructions.
Law enforcement has arrested the accused, even dragging back to Missouri an elderly uncle who’s been living in Florida for the past two decades. The property in question has been dug up. No jars with these written memories have apparently been found.
In fact, we’ve been offered no evidence beyond the accusations. Every now and then I’ll see an excited headline about new “evidence,” and each time that “evidence” turns out to be either another lurid accusation, (They forced two children to help murder a 300 pound man! They made a little girl have sexual contact with a dog! And with a horse! They kept coded lists of murder victims in their Louis L’Amour books!) or something embarrassing but not especially incriminating, like a cache of porn, some of which has been reported to involve incest.
It’s interesting to visit links provided by Kansascity.com, examine the list of what search warrants have uncovered on Mohler property, and compare them with the headlines announcing some of these supposedly incriminating finds. For instance, a single green pamphlet entitled “about the sexual abuse of children” is apparently what prompted the announcement, “Child Incest Pamphlets Found In Search of Mohler Property,” which leaves readers with the impression that a sheaf of pro-incest leaflets had been uncovered.
Under the headline “Evidence Against Mohlers mounts” can be found the announcement that “Also seized were more adult movies, including a pornographic DVD about having sex with ‘Grandma & Grandpa.’” This apparently refers to a VHS listed here (Graphic language). An Internet search on its title seems to indicate that it’s less about incest than about geriatric sex.
This collection of porn is not what one would expect to find in the house of someone who raped his grandchildren until they hit junior high school. The titles revealed in the PDFs of the affidavits (“Senior Stimulation” “Black Dirty Debutantes,” “Virtual Sexuality”) don’t indicate interest in sex with undeveloped girls. It appears to be garden variety dirt involving, at worst, actresses who might be under 17, but are definitely past puberty. And it’s not clear how Burrell Sr’s stash of smut qualifies as mounting evidence that not only he, but his sons (the MohlerS in the headline), were busy raping third graders and murdering occasional adults twenty years ago.
But hey, why should that spoil everyone’s fun? The case has provided an opportunity for people to show off their virtue by rolling around in unrestrained hatred. One blog has speculated about whether this “raping family” carries a “degenerate gene.” Another has referred to the accused as “incestuous hillbillies.” Their religion is being triumphantly cited as if it indicates the accusations are true. Sanctimonious pieces are being written (“Precious years were lost in the Mohler investigation”) that offer token nods to the presumption of innocence, but rely on the presumption of guilt.
And embarrassing questions are going unanswered. Last week a woman surfaced who accused the Mohlers of holding her prisoner in their basement, impregnating her twice, killing one of her infants and burying it in the floor. Where’s the follow up on that? Any infant bones found in that basement? What’s this woman’s story, and can anyone verify that she dropped out of sight long enough to get pregnant twice? What about the jars of notes that were supposedly buried all over the Mohler property? What about the claim about people being murdered by the Mohlers?
The stories we’re hearing should have left behind some level of physical evidence – long-buried jars of notes, dead bodies, scars, etc. But instead of actual human remains, or medical evidence, or even verifiable accounts of disappearances in the area, we’ve gotten convoluted stories. Stolen jewelry from murder victims was kept in wooden boxes, we’ve been told, and coded lists of victims were tucked into copies of popular novels. It’s as if someone, faced with a dearth of evidence, is trying to make objects that they know are owned by the accused seem significant and damning.
So far all we’ve learned for sure is that Burrell Mohler Sr. had a collection of pornography.
This isn’t shaping up into a convincing case of child abuse and murder. It’s shaping up into a long-simmering family feud of estranged relatives and angry exes that’s escalating into a public tragedy.
Posted in Uncategorized
195 Responses to “Horror Show in Missouri”
Leave a Reply
- Listen to compelling 911 tape of 2-year-old trying to help authorities save her great-grandmother's life (AUDIO)
- 'Simpsons' joke about Sharia threat in Dearborn
- Fire Marshal: Too soon to say whether fatal fire at 230 Myrtle in Muskegon is arson; investigation continues
- Electrical problems likely cause of Strong Avenue fire in Muskegon; Investigation ongoing
- WXYZ asks a blogger with no law enforcement experience to weigh in on escort murders
- By the numbers: Detroit has spent $20 million demolishing homes since 2009
- 'Simpsons' joke about Sharia threat in Dearborn
- Age-shy Warren Mayor Jim is officially 69, two years older than he claimed, so let's all move on
RE: witch hunts
You make a pretty good witch.
Pamela, why do you continue ignore the fact that the list of evidence includes pornography with incest themes, very clearly indicated by the list of materials confiscated in the warrant search here and your blogging at the truecrimereport.com website? If you are going to keep downplaying the child molestation likely suffered by these victims, the least you could do is be objective and acknowledge that being sexually aroused by incest is incriminating when you are being charged with raping your own family members.
You want to focus on the few allegations that we don’t currently see enough evidence for a prosecutor to build a case about – but that does not mean the police haven’t uncovered things that have not yet leaked to the media, or that these men did not molest these witnesses – who importantly were often allegedly witnesses to the abuse of the others, corroborating their stories. An interesting example, though, is mention of a horse. I find that odd, because I have not read that detail in a single piece of news coverage. It would be appreciated if you could cite your reference for us to share in the information. I even saw some articles that referred to remnants of broken jar uncovered at the property. You can bet if there was even the slightest trace of some paper near that jar that forensics are going crazy trying to get something from it. You should be cheering on the police tearing up of that basement floor so that the CAN eliminate that part of the investigation from the admissible evidence of incest porn + 6 witnesses + a 7th person who is convinced that one of the Mohler’s abused his son, as well. The sooner they do that, the sooner you could breathe a sigh of relief that the only thing they might be found guilty of is group rape, right? Don’t forget, the police is still going through a stack of porn that could be completely legal, or buried in hours of burned DVD footage, for example, maybe there is something illegal. Who knows how many hours they have to scan through to determine that.
Embarrassing questions? What is embarrassing is that up to 7 people are willing to testify that at least some of the accused are abusers. There’s nothing embarrassing about the on-going investigation to collect evidence for any of the other accusations. You should withhold the same judgment you preach on the side of the innocence/guilt issue, since you’re not the judge or jury, either, until the remainder of the evidence is presented in court. You’re so quick to doubt their guilt about any of it, as if due process is supposed to teach us as individuals not to draw our own conclusions based on what we learn. It doesn’t make it a “witch hunt” to say at least the accused Sr. with incest porn is suspect or that the alleged abuse sounds cultish, so get over your “Salem Witch Trial” persecution complex. The witnesses themselves coming forward should hopefully be enough to convince a judge and jury and get these men locked up for the rape and incest. If the murder could not be proved is going to be peripheral to first resolving those charges.
Wow, I have to take you to task for these comments, as well, Pamela:
“An Internet search on its title seems to indicate that it’s less about incest than about geriatric sex…This collection of porn is not what one would expect to find in the house of someone who raped his grandchildren until they hit junior high school.
So, it’s OK to speculate on what type of porn someone who would molest the children in their own family would have (as if we would even know without some statistical hindsight/study of that), but not about whether someone who has incest porn might commit incest. Or perhaps, when you are a disgusting old man, you collect porn that has sex with grandparents themes because a) He is a grandparent who gets off on the idea that his family members want to have sex with him, to b) normalize the behavior to yourself or c) in hopes of showing it to children, and normalizing the behavior with them. He would still have been a disgusting old man 10 or 15 years ago to the children. But I suppose since the young girls in the porn aren’t proven to be underage, that means he isn’t attracted to junior high school nieces and nephews, otherwise he would have had some “junior high school girl” porn. Great logic!
If he’s found guilty of possessing anything that is marketed as underage porn and any of the girls in it is prove to be younger than 18, he should die in prison for that alone. Maybe he managed to hide or get rid of some illegal porn or there would have been something more convincing to you in his stash.
Lastly, let’s look at this little gem, in light of your other posts qualifying your differentiation between child molestation that involves pre-pubescent and pubescent kids:
“It appears to be garden variety dirt involving, at worst, actresses who might be under 17, but are definitely past puberty.”
Say some of the girls in the porn confiscated are 14 and have clearly reached puberty, how are you defending that, knowing the law doesn’t currently allow possession of pornography depicting minors?
The fact is, underage girls don’t get into pornography consensually in the the same way as adults, so it should not be treated so carelessly/lightly by people like you with looser guidelines of what should define statutory rape. There is no legal contract a child can enter into with a porn photographer/director to give consent, even if there was a desire on their part to make that transaction. So, instead, they are often coerced or trafficked into doing it. Do you honestly think a 16 year old that gets past the underage radar benefits economically in any substantial way from being in porn?
You should speak up in defense of changing age-of-consent laws, because this is essentially what you are arguing for. Instead, you are glossing over child abuse. Are you suggesting we should look the other way if people have pornography with girls between the ages of 12 – 17, provided they at least appear to have gone through puberty?
If not, clarify. If so, this pretty much confirms what I was hoping to get out of you by soliciting more debate from you on truecrimereport.com. It implies that you believe that statutory rape should not be punished as severely if the girl is merely pubescent. So, in a nutshell, you feel that because a 12 or 13 year old has developed breasts, some pubic hair, and the ability to conceive, that it might be more forgivable for an adult man to have sex with that child. Either that, or you chose your words VERY poorly and in the other comments I am referring to.
Wow, I have to take you to task for these comments, as well, Pamela:
“An Internet search on its title seems to indicate that it’s less about incest than about geriatric sex…This collection of porn is not what one would expect to find in the house of someone who raped his grandchildren until they hit junior high school.”
So, it’s OK to speculate on what type of porn someone who would molest the children in their own family would have (as if we would even know without some statistical hindsight/study of that), but not about whether someone who has incest porn might commit incest. Perhaps, when you are a disgusting old man, you collect porn that has sex with grandparents themes because a) One is a grandparent who gets off on the idea that his underage family members want to have sex with him, to b) normalize the behavior to yourself or c) in hopes of showing it to children you intend to molest, and normalize the behavior with them. He would still have been a disgusting old man 10 or 15 years ago to the children. But I suppose since the young girls in the porn aren’t proven to be underage, that means he isn’t attracted to junior high school nieces and nephews, otherwise he would have had some “junior high school girl” porn. Great logic!
If he’s found guilty of possessing anything that is marketed as underage porn and any of the girls in it is prove to be younger than 18, he should die in prison for that alone. Maybe he managed to hide or get rid of some illegal porn or there would have been something more convincing to you in his stash.
Lastly, let’s look at this little gem, in light of your other posts qualifying your differentiation between child molestation that involves pre-pubescent and pubescent kids:
“It appears to be garden variety dirt involving, at worst, actresses who might be under 17, but are definitely past puberty.”
Say some of the girls in the porn confiscated are 14 and have clearly reached puberty, how are you defending that, knowing the law doesn’t currently allow possession of pornography depicting minors?
The fact is, underage girls don’t get into pornography consensually in the the same way as adults, so it should not be treated so carelessly/lightly by people like you with looser guidelines of what should define statutory rape. There is no legal contract a child can enter into with a porn photographer/director to give consent, even if there was a desire on their part to make that transaction. So, instead, they are often coerced or trafficked into doing it. Do you honestly think a 16 year old that gets past the underage radar benefits economically in any substantial way from being in porn?
You should speak up in defense of changing age-of-consent laws, because this is essentially what you are arguing for. Instead, you are glossing over child abuse. Are you suggesting we should look the other way if people have pornography with girls between the ages of 12 – 17, provided they at least appear to have gone through puberty?
If not, clarify. If so, this pretty much confirms what I was hoping to get out of you by soliciting more debate from you on truecrimereport.com. It implies that you believe that statutory rape should not be punished as severely if the girl is merely pubescent. So, in a nutshell, you feel that because a 12 or 13 year old has developed breasts, some pubic hair, and the ability to conceive, that it might be more forgivable for an adult man to have sex with that child. Either that, or you chose your words VERY poorly and in the other comments I am referring to.
There is one more thing to add: the senior Mohler’s wife who first confiscated his stash and kept it under lock and key until the police were finally exposed to it has admitted that she brought child abuse allegations to the attention of a church leader several years ago. So, if they have a signed statement on that, that makes a 7th witness, plus the eighth person who believes his son to have been molested by at least one of the Mohlers.
Thank god there are some other articulate people taking apart your flimsy argument/softpeddling of child molestation, statutory rape and incest, Pamela, now that I read the rest of the comments. You really need to find better causes/pick better battles than this one.
There is basically zero basis for the idea of a “family feud” in any of the articles I have read. They supposedly presented a normal appearance to people, aside from seeming “weird.” If they were like the Hatfield and McCoys, ready to poison each other, why are you the only one suggesting that?
Face reality: Family members who don’t have a reason to hate the patriarchs don’t go to the trouble of making up and corroborating stories sure to ruin their respective lives. If they felt loved and supported by those people in healthy ways as children, their concern would be caring for them as they got older, not holding them accountable for their sins, as they seem to be bravely doing. Unless there is some undisclosed enormous family fortune we have not heard about from these humble farm folk that letting their father/grandfather/uncle rot in prison would free up for the accusers, I don’t see a motive.
No neighbors have made comments about feuds, nor any family members I have read quoted. Your denial and glossing over of the facts is why you sound like you have an agenda/bias. In fact, the comments here downplaying the evidence we do know about all have a consistently generic quality. They all sound the same. Like robots when you repeat yourselves and copy each others’ comments.
Right on, Dale! You are a hell of a smart individual! Pamela, he DESTROYED your whole piece, right here. Your editorializing borders on pro-child abuse, pro-cult propaganda to me, lady. People like you who spread misinformation and skew the facts to make their arguments are dangerous. I hope one day to see you all disappear from all the objective internet sites, you fakes!
In terms of evidence that is withheld from the public, i.e. the possibility of a human bone: the point is, the police are likely to allow the public to understand at first that some sign of human remain is indicated. Then, they continue to work as the chatter dies down, the bulldozers come in, but as quietly/suddenly as possible so that they don’t have people a few steps ahead of them tampering with a crime scene overnight. In other words, by the time they publicly announce they are going to start digging, I hope they are smart enough to have delayed that announcement until after all the information of those logistics and area thus far is secured.
You think they have armed guard all night on every crime scene where they are still gathering evidence, as protection against Creepy Cousin? There might just be one more shady one who isn’t willing to denounce them because maybe he’s just a little too close to the situation. Of course, when these types of group rape charges are investigated, we always know every single perpetrator was accounted for the the round up, right? Right? Riiiiiiiiiggggggghhhhht.
The combing of the scene takes time. Often, evidence that was missed can be discovered by crime scene clean up, when the pre-trial is already underway. In the meantime, the police lock the doors, put yellow tape tape out and hope for the best in case they need to return to a scene when forensic reports are in. They can’t patrol the perimeter of ever inch of acreage throughout that process. They are busy trying to narrow down where to start digging first if the investigation needs to progress from the house to the yard. Not every small town police force has the resources to do the babysitting and follow-up that needs to be done to exhaust all possibilities.
A friend or other family who is either in denial about the signs they overlooked could be complicit, or maybe condones this sort of ugly dysfunctional family shit, in my opinion, should be thoroughly questioned. People get impassioned in defense of those they love, because of some retarded “blood is thicker than water/protect your own” kind of mentality. But that’s where what’s good, fair, right and moral must prevail over the bias of any personal allegiances. Please, any relatives of the Mohlers who knew something, anything, I don’t mean that as an insult to any of you. It’s just a fact of correlation. That is why I make this appeal to you – If you know you saw any signs of child abuse in that family, look deep into your heart and do the right thing – come forward and atone for your family’s sins by making sure justice is served. Every bit of information will help resolve the truth , which must prevail, and hopefully a gradual ceasing to your family’s suffering.
Break a cycle of abuse that is all too common among families by holding those accountable for their actions. We can’t ever hope to live in a civil society if people look the other way when something is evil and aren’t brave enough to upset someone they love who needs mental help and constant supervision, as well as to be removed from society where they might harm other children. The world should be safer for the rest of us who know this type of behavior is wrong.
Everyone else: never put it past anyone to help suppress or get rid of evidence for a relative or friend who is incapacitated by incarceration. You get a phone call in jail, and your attorney may not have the best scruples in the world about passing information to your family.
I believe this is her on facebook, no?
http://www.facebook.com/people/Pamela-Troy/1738042272
Let her know what you think about her high quality “journalistic” style of editorializing. Blog away, Pamela! Poison the internet with your support for pederasty!
You know what I like to also do, is just look at the facebook pages of people in the midst of child pornography trials, just to remind myself that they look like everyone else. How can anyone resist? I especially enjoy identifying those enemies, because the cases are so cut and dry and I don’t have to listen to people like Pamela’s bleeding heart whining about them. You either had a thousand images of men raping babies on your computer, or you didn’t – lock them all up and throw away the key!
These are not children, so spare us the comparisons to impressionable children having memories implanted by therapists. A) will one of the child molestation/ritual sexual abuse naysayers tell me, what does a therapist have to gain from pushing the idea of group molestation on an adult, B)what do 6+ family members have to gain from tearing their family apart besides some closure and vindication they suffered at the hands of people they would surely be terrified of and disgusted by were any of the allegations shown to be true?
People come up with such scenarios in their pursuit of giving the benefit of the doubt, to where it starts to sound ridiculous. Maybe they were mad at their dad, uncle, and grandfather or somehow their being locked up benefited them?
So, let me speculate as wildly as Perry and Pamela play devil’s advocate. Why would only one side of the family, the one harassed/threatened into secrecy the most effectively be complaining about being abused? Maybe the others were too creeped out by the rest of the family to have much contact, or can’t risk the discomfort to be the only other squeaky wheel in what’s left of the family siding with the accused, for example, and in-law who was never quite comfortable with the other men on that side of the family.
Anyone who has been exposed to abuse in their life understands the dynamics of how dysfunctional families cover up the reality, understands that sometimes human beings everyone around you only knows to respect for their achievements, success, involvement in the community and outer appearances are not always what they appear. Or maybe, like Philip Garrido, ALMOST EVERYONE knew they were creepy, but chose to ignore the signs. When you are abused and make it to an adult without perpetuating the same cycle of abuse, you realize people who you thought you cared about and who were supposed to be caring about you instead sometimes do sick things merely because of their inability to resist their own horrible impulses, because of their own innate selfishness. That’s a reality that too many people live with every day, and either struggle to come to terms with some semblance of a normal adult family situation with their rapists to keep the peace with their mother and extended family, or keep their distance. Mothers and other relatives who look the other way need to take more weight of the blame for this type of behavior.
The sooner people who commit any similar or related types of offenses (on a scale from groping their daughter or son inappropriately, to raping them) recognize they need help and cannot fit into our society in the same way as free individuals, the easier we will be able to combat the problem of sexual abuse.
I would add to this that those aroused by child, incest porn because it has been normalized to them through their own abuse experiences, or porn depicting violence or degradation of women where it is impossible to know whether consent was given should seek psychological help and pray for forgiveness for the atrocities they have already exposed themselves to. Don’t bother accusing me of being anti-porn or pro-censorship, though. I am neither.
Does it not surprise anyone else that the only case of memories being influenced by therapists that people like Pamela can ever come up with are the McMartin investigation? Does everyone remember the Presidio investigation, where at least one of the defense’s “experts” connected with testimony against the methods by therapists posted an article condoning sex with children on a NAMBLA type of website and lowering the age of consent? Just because people like Michael Aquino get off looking clean, doesn’t mean they weren’t guilty to begin with, just influential enough or lucky enough not to get caught or smart enough to leave too little physical evidence. People like him know there will always be the Pamela’s of the world willing to play devil’s advocate and skew the objectivity of the blogosphere.
That’s why I pressed Pamela on the other site I posted above to tell us if she had any association with Aquino, because her blogs sounded like the same propaganda about witch hunts and satanic ritual abuse “scares” as the misinformation Pamela herself has acknowledged Aquino and his cronies posts on various websites in his defense.
In regards to Pamela’s “I object to what happened to Peggy McMartin, Ray Buckey, Kelly Michaels, Michael Aquino, Clyde Ray Spencer, John Stoll, C. Renee Althaus, Rick Althaus, and many others,” – go examine the facts of some of these cases. First of all:
1. Peggy McMartin and Ray Buckey were tried in ONE case – the McMartin investigation. Rattling off multiple names in that case is a trick Pamela used before, as if they are separate cases – a misleading way to make the examples of supposedly falsely accused people seem to be of greater extent, when we know there are hundreds more of correctly accused and proven child molesters every year. So, just how big a problem in our society is false accusations of incest and rape?
2. Start with just the wikipedia entries for the cases she is mentioning and decide for yourself if these people were released or won appeals based on innocence or legal loopholes. Here’s an example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wee_Care_Nursery_School
Note how this entry contradicts itself, by saying in the beginning “the decision was overturned after five years in prison, on the basis of improper and coercive interviewing of the children involved. They had been the sole witnesses, their testimony being offered as the only sources of evidence during the trial,” and then later:
“The prosecution produced expert witnesses who said that almost all the children displayed symptoms of sexual abuse.”[5]Prosecution witnesses testified that the children “had regressed into such behavior as bed-wetting and defecating in their clothing. The witnesses said the children became afraid to be left alone or to stay in the dark. They also testified that the children exhibited knowledge of sexual behavior far beyond their years.”[5] Some of the other teachers testified against her.”
Note also that her release after serving time in prison was not so much an indication of innocence of all charges as lack of a fair trial.
3. The children of Clyde Ray Spencer reversed their stories after he served 20 years in prison. It still doesn’t prove they weren’t telling the truth the first time, or why the detectives or whoever reported him for child abuse were so convinced of his guilt.
4. John Stoll you get a pass on because I have already written too much and am too tired to go and research any deeper. I will only say I was unsatisfied with the reporting on it I did find.
5. The Althaus case, I can’t even find any indication that anyone was sentenced in that. Sounds like the charges were completely dropped? So their lives were upset/temporarily disrupted by the inconvenience of child abuse accusations. They apparently have a child with borderline personality disorder, so I am sure this is the least of their worries now, and not the best example of this.
So, regarding those “many others,” what else have you got, because so far you are only getting a pass on the McMartin defendents, who I’m not convinced weren’t guilty, but merely not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. You have the Stoll case, and that’s about it in terms of anything concrete.
Aquino, I am absolutely convinced is capable of and probably did molest children and commit other atrocities, because of his general shadiness, involvement with the development of MK-Ultra, associations with Nazism, as well as the philosophies behind satanism overall. I don’t need to even elaborate on that, as there is such a wealth of information out there on Aquino, easy to verify with the Freedom of Information Act documents, official statements released by the government in the last quarter century, and the research of committed individuals like John Decamp.
You’re going to have to come up with something better than one or two debatable cases to drum up any support for a “Satanic scare,” a “witch hunt” or the problem of “false memories.”
Perry, I can’t believe you commended Carlos for supposedly raising a good point after these comments he made:
“And so what if the grandfather or one or two of the uncles had sex with them? If it happened, it happened. It didn’t kill them. They need to get over it…
Everybody gets laid…
Evrybody always whine about victims right this and victims rights that. What about grandpas right to get laid.”
Carlos is either diabolically dangerous himself, exceptionally stupid, pretending that sexual abuse of children is psychologically or physically damaging, or he simply finds it funny to joke about rape and incest. Chances are, and I mean this in all seriousness, he was molested himself or is a child molester himself. He doesn’t have the moral compass to know it is wrong, and therefore not funny, because it was probably part of his own every day experience growing up, being molested. Therefore, he downplays it by suggesting essentially “it wasn’t that bad,” i.e. “Everyone got laid.”
I doubt he is capable of making any good points on any topic. He barely deserves a second thought, as he hasn’t contributed anything meaningful to this dialogue, but if you hadn’t patronized him, Perry, I wouldn’t have had to waste any more time thinking about him.
Perry, what are you suggesting, because there are no physical signs left to prove abuse 20 years later, that there should be some sort of statute of limitations on how long you are allowed to wait to work up the nerve to disrupt your whole family to do what is right? You really need to go home with some of your comments, Perry. You seem like you have good intentions, but you only end up parroting Pamela and making some really weak points.
Obviously, I meant “pretending that sexual abuse of children is NOT psychologically or physically damaging.” This is what I hate most about all you child abuse naysayers, those of you who downplay the severity of it: When police confiscate thousands of images of child porn (I’ve noticed the people tried for this seem to be obsessive in their pursuits. So far, I have rarely seen anything that revolved around just a few pictures, or even a few dozen. It’s always hundreds to thousands), that can mean from infancy to teenagers. Keep this in mind an adult having sex with an infant could be a physically damaging attack! That’s number 1, number 2 is, the fact that children cannot legally consent makes adults having sex with children of anything other than legal age of consent RAPE.
When someone too emphatically play devil’s advocate about child abuse, it starts to appear they are blaming puritanical perceptions of sex as the unjust cause of the child sexual abuse taboo. It could mean many things, but the rarest of those possibilities is probably that they are simply crusaders for due process and the notion of “innocent until proven guilty.” As if anyone with a high school diploma should need some random blogger to give them a civics lesson and an explanation of constitutional rights.
They are most likely supporters of an organization like NAMBLA, prone to collecting child pornography, protecting a child molester they know, or perhaps too ashamed to come to grips with what they went through. Either that or they still don’t realize that it is not only illegal, it is also abnormal. The only excuse left is that they didn’t understand it was illegal, but as we know, ignorance of the law is not a valid excuse for breaking it. If nature intended teenage children to have sex after the age of puberty, they are meant to be having sex with other children their age. There NEED TO be clear age of consent laws on the books in every state, and we need to discourage them being relaxed – deal with it. If you don’t like it, move to the Netherlands, I hear they are really lenient on molesters there. Better yet, free to kill yourself.
Following the laws related to age of consent and not committing incest isn’t that difficult. At least none of us who don’t sink to such disgusting levels of depravity as child molestation or raping our children find it challenging. If you do have a problem with abiding by laws against child molestation or incest, please, please, please, get help. Turn yourself in. Or kill yourself. Take your pick.
LE has been awfully quiet for days now. I wonder what they’re doing? Are they reading that Louis L’Amour book, too late discovering the true source of the allegations?–Begin with the massacre of twenty-seven innocent men…Mix with a pack of vicious killers…and a beautiful, terror-stricken girl.
God has ordained that these men walk free. In Biblical times, holy men often slept with their young kin, and it was sanctioned by the Almighty. All of you who want these men to be lynched are like the shrieking whores of Babylon.
The Biblical remark I just posted was just a joke, sarcasm, for those of you who don’t get jokes, and I think that is everyone who want these men to be convicted.
In all seriousness, I stand behind the Mohler men 100% and I would even trust (and welcome) for them watch my own children. Everyone except the accusers and a handful of their supporters say these men are the salt of the earth. The incest porn proves nothing. The allegations to a bishop years ago prove nothing. These women’s tales of rape and bestiality cannot be believed!
Having two Julies is confusing. Only the first of this string of Julie comments is mine.
I think the North Star National should be renamed the Brown Star National.
I’d like to add that I also would be happy for any of the Mohler men to babysit my children. Be real! They appear to be wonderful men.
Interesting that the media circus shut down as soon as one defendant retained a lawyer. I wonder what happened. Did the lawyer threaten the sheriff with a lawsuit for defamation?
i am also named perry. Please do not confuse me with other perrys. I am a survivor of a lot of ritual wickedness and was unable to remember until my parents died. So, since LE messed up with The Mcmartin case we are to never believe another case that is similar? I of all people know that someone looking creepy is not enough to return an indictment of guilt. After 2 decades of torture I imagine the accusers would look more creepy than the accused. I know I look creepy. sometimes people look at Me and they get a look on Their face. The look reminds Me of the face Dr. G makes when she is using the pruning shears during an autopsy. Yeah… That hurts. I would to the Lord that Evil people did have a mark so we would know whether someone is Sadistic. Unfortunately, I have found that some evil people hide. You know the type. A wolf dressed as a sheep. So there is a Herd of Sheep. Where is the Herd located? A wolf would love a whole flock of Sheep. It may be difficult to imagine that Men and Women can appear normal and also be Sadistic Monsters but I assure You it happens. It has a past, a present, and if some people have Their way it will have a future. A Wolf, using the Bible, can ahnihilate children. I know this to be true personally. The powers that be are ordained of God. If only Police had been called in earlier. Rather, if only They had seriously pursued the allegations. I have been a psychiatric in-patient 5-10 times. I’m a certified problem but I would rather remain being “IT” than to pass being “IT” to another. I despise the fear I endured. I despise the Shame of being had by a Freak Show. I despise more Wolves dressed like Sheep. And I also despise a congregation of Ostriches that bury Their heads in the sand and careth not that The flock is being destroyed from within. The thought of a child being left at The Farm to determine his worth is appaling to Me. A witch hunt…Ha. I trust in God. The powers that be are ordained of God. Trust that. Live in The Light. The Law is not to be feared. The wicked flee when no one pursues. Here I stand on The hearth of Hell playing with matches. A mans enemies will be They of his own household. Matthew 10: 32.
For the pro-incest, pro-child abuse Julie, it is interesting that you think of pointing out that incest is ordained by god at least once in the old testament as a “joke.” I don’t get THAT particular sense of humor, but it is stupid for you to suggest that being suspicious of the accused has any correlation to someone not having a sense of humor. Anyway, I am hoping you could defend the other comments you made a little better:
“I would even trust (and welcome) for them watch my own children.”
Is this because you know them personally? Why would you trust strangers whose own family accuse them of rape and incest to watch your children? You want to increase the likelihood they will be raped, because you condone pedophilia, or what? Just to prove a point? Because you are a risk-taker? Was that just another “joke?” Where are you coming from? What makes you think they are even good parents, let alone babysitters, if you don’t believe they are incestuous rapist pedophiles? Apparently, they didn’t earn any loyalty from the adults making the accusations. That would be the first sign they were good parents, absence of that.
“The incest porn proves nothing. The allegations to a bishop years ago prove nothing.”
Please clarify how that Mohler’s own wife revealing to a church leader that he was raping his relatives proves nothing. When you put that together with more than 5 witnesses and a collection of incest porn, how do you rationalize not seeing an indication of guilt here? How can you and Pamela refuse to see any correlation between someone who masturbates to incest themes and someone who will commit actual incest? Is it because you relate to arousal over incest themes in porn? Do you or someone you know find that erotic?
If thoughts of incest was a primary source of arousal for someone, they would seek porn that fulfills that desire, hence the nauseating demand for subjects like Family Taboo or Family Secrets, or whatever they were called. Getting off on the fantasy of that would be the refuge for someone drawn to the actual behavior depicted – between bouts of raping children, obviously. The latter would likely be the other outlet for those urges.
And so, why do you assert “These women’s tales of rape and bestiality cannot be believed,” in your opinion? You certainly have not supported that statement. Just what do you know about these women (and men, apparently) that we don’t? They are supposedly the “Salt of the Earth” because they work and go to church? Big deal. Or are you merely jumping to the opposite conclusion as us because you’re such a crusader for due process? I seriously doubt that explanation, so you’d have to do better than that. Please give full disclosure if you are personally acquainted with the family, it is only fair.
Pamela, I am missing something. I can’t find any comments Dale made about you personally OR your husband. Who is your husband, another blogger on here? Paulette asked a rhetorical question about your husband, is that what you meant?
Dale is right, though, you will owe these people an apology for being one of the most vocal, supposedly arbitrary, people online championing the innocence of the accused in the face of the validity of witness testimony. If some technicality spares these guys from incarceration, we won’t feel sorry for them or owe anyone an explanation of speculating on their guilt. Even if there are no murders proven, the incest is pretty cut and dry, here. And for that, they forfeited the right to their privacy or a life without some shaming. They won’t deserve any of my pity or apologies for the fact that their acts and secret ritualistic abuse of their relatives subjected them to scrutiny and an exercising of the legal system we are all beholden to.
Pamela, I am missing something. I can’t find any comments Dale made about you personally OR your husband. Who is your husband, another blogger on here? Paulette asked a rhetorical question about your husband, is that what you meant?
Dale is right, though, you will owe these people an apology for being one of the most vocal, supposedly arbitrary, people online championing the innocence of the accused in the face of the validity of witness testimony. If some technicality spares these guys from incarceration, we won’t feel sorry for them or owe anyone an explanation for speculating on their guilt. Even if there are no murders proven, the incest is pretty cut and dry, here. And for that, they forfeited the right to their privacy or a life without some shaming. They won’t deserve any of my pity or apologies for the fact that their acts and secret ritualistic abuse of their relatives subjected them to scrutiny and an exercising of the legal system we are all beholden to.
Julie, “the Real Julie,” you are awesome! This is all because of the feminist movement and the PC (politically correct) movement. Well that ___ is not allowed in my home! And I bet you don’t allow it in yours.
We live in a culture in which children are encouraged to be rebellious and to bear witness against their parents, and this is encouraged by a movement (feminism) that encourages women to rebel and pathologize behavior, like on Oprah. Pop psychologists on Oprah every day tell us we are being abused. Feminists, PC clowns, you will be defeated, and the Truth will reign Supreme.
J, leave Pamela alone. She is in the right. You are in the wrong.
The end of the Oprah Show is just the begnning, losers!
It is no coincidence that Oprah had Sarah Palin on her show about the same time she announced she was ending her show. Sarah Palin’s faction is big and very powerful, much more powerful than Harpo Studios, and Palin & her people will bring back the old, tried and true ways. J, Dale, Marette, people like you will be left in the dark with your self help books and astrology and New Age. I have already made this a reality in my own home and I continue to home-school my children in these old ways so they will be ready when the power balance shifts.
“Pamela: Which is why the publicly labeling of someone as a child abuser needs to be based on solid evidence — not merely pointed fingers.”
So if you are suggesting Dale is incorrect above, you should explain what compromises you would suggest in the cases you WOULD support arresting a suspect. Basically, what you are saying is that because of at least one case where something could not be proven (McMartin – don’t even try to use Presidio, because you KNOW at least some of those people were guilty and got off. Anyone can figure that out from the facts of that case), all witness testimony should be considered irrelevant, unless it can be corroborated with physical evidence.
This is where I am blowing the whistle on your agenda, Pamela, and I’m adding Julie to that. I suspect you know each other and that’s why the show of solidarity in support of child abuse/incest. Seems that your wish is that you could “fix” the law so that, in addition to allowing adults to have sex with pubescent adolescents and teenagers, anyone thorough enough to get rid of all traces of material evidence will NEVER have to be held accountable for pedophilia or incest. That would be a travesty of justice for investigators to ignore witnesses as if they are all making their stories up unless they could prove physical evidence first. THAT assumes guilt on the part of accusers.
What would make that philosophy so convenient for child abusers is how hard it is to prove sexual abuse in the first place, the span of time that often passes until victims can bring themselves to report it (certainly much harder to do as a child, physically dependent on your abusers), and the lack of physical evidence for far too many cases where abuse did in fact occur. And the convenience of that technicality is precisely what I assume you LIKE about the idea of changing the law, hence my suggestion that you have a bias and an agenda. I suppose you would say, though, that if a pubescent 11 year old couldn’t be proven in a medial exam to have had her rectum or vagina torn by rape, that it “wasn’t that traumatic?” The fact that she waited so long made it not worth the trouble/risk of disrupting someone’s life, since it wasn’t so horrible for her to risk her safety reporting it before that? In your world, her father’s semen has to be collected inside her before we are going to take her seriously? Otherwise, she’s probably lying because therapists supposedly influenced memories in the McMartin children? That’s awful and far more dangerous than people jumping to conclusions about these men!
That point of view is what I think makes you pro-incest, and pro-child abuse. This is the exact same strategy employed by Aquino when he wants to defend himself or have other satanists pretending to be objective third parties defending him online.
Gee, let’s all applaud Julie for teaching sympathy for pedophilia and morals like the suggestion that incest isn’t so bad in her homeschooling! I can’t believe you changed the subject to Oprah and Palin, and suggested that reports of rape were empowered by the dangerous *gasp* feminism! Oh dear! Women having equal rights and their voices heard, how scary! Let’s hide our eyes and ears from their suffering. Oprah never told me I was being abused. Never watched her show, or read any self-help books. But if I was sexually abused and in denial about it, as you appear to be (as either the abused or the abuser of your own children, possibly), perhaps I would see it like you do. Perhaps I would convince myself that it wasn’t that bad, that it was consensual, or that it introduced me to sex in a positive way.
So now, it’s only political correctness that causes us to go after child abuse rather than look the other way as long as they seem to enjoy it and have reached puberty? It must really make you distraught that everyone else is imposing their “laws” and “morals” on you, preventing you from openly raping your children, huh? If everyone was as smart as you and knew that it was only political correctness perpetuating the incest taboo, we’d all understand that they actually like it, wouldn’t we. That makes Pamela right and me a loser, does it? Why doesn’t it surprise me that you think Sarah Palin is going to save us, Julie? You’re far too stupid to have any sort of meaningful debate. At least the same couldn’t necessarily be said about Pamela. She just lost the argument when she admitted she didn’t see sex with pubescent kids as unconditionally wrong, revealing her m.o., as far as I’m concerned.
J, thank you for the dose of reality. I, too, thought it was strange that Ms. Troy held Michael Aquino up as an upstanding citizen whose life had been ruined because of child abuse allegations. The more I read about that case, the more I doubt his innocence.
Several of the other people she mentions, as you rightly point out, were never convicted, so doesn’t that go against her argument that all these innocent people are being convicted for crimes against children they didn’t commit? I’ve given up trying to sort out her logic, though, because her logic makes special exceptions for crimes committed against children. Why don’t we also institute statutes of limitation for crimes against the mentally ill or challenged? Surely they are not “reliable” victims. And while we’re at it, let’s do something about elderly accusers, with their high rate of senility and all. And on and on. Perhaps only white female bloggers in their 60s should be fully protected under the law.
People like Pamela Troy scare me because (1) at first glance, she appears to be a disinterested party, (2) she puts herself out there as an expert (“I’ve been reading about witch hunts for more than 20 years”), though it appears to me she has no training in psychology and the “reading” she refers to is a handful of true-crime paperbacks, (3) she masquerades as a journalist, though it appears to me she has no journalistic training or experience and is just a blogger/Internet gad-about, and (4) she is using whatever small bully pulpit she has to pound the accusers in this awful case, when we all know that they are already having hellish days since this news broke.
J said: “Please clarify how that Mohler’s own wife revealing to a church leader that he was raping his relatives proves nothing. When you put that together with more than 5 witnesses and a collection of incest porn, how do you rationalize not seeing an indication of guilt here?”
——
I can’t speak for whoever you directed that question to, but I certainly don’t see any indication of guilt. As I read the news stories, the wife had suspicions years ago, which were denied by all the children at the time. Now they say otherwise, and so one has to ask, were they lying then, or are they lying now? If they all repressed their memories and now all recovered them, that’s not going to be admissible. Not without physical evidence, and commercial porn is not evidence of a crime (though it may explain the wife’s suspicions to begin with). Suspicions and the presence of porn in one household out of six (probably the national average) doesn’t amount to a hill of beans. It wouldn’t take much for me to see guilt, though. One photo, for instance, one human bone of the right vintage. Even one missing person who fits the description would be a start. But no, the sheriff’s department has made all sorts of lurid suggestions and backed it up with nothing that would suggest they have any case at all. As does their recent silence.
So, Julie, to be specific, you think if a man has multiple incest theme titles (NOT just a “pamphlet” – “Family Secrets,” “Family Touch,” etc, etc.) in his collection of porn, that has no relevance to allegations of his committing incest? Isn’t it obvious that there is a correlation between someone who is aroused by that and someone who would commit the actual act of incest? I would even speculate that the majority of people who are motivated enough by their urges to collect porn with that subject matter actually cross the line at some point, or contemplate it every time they masturbate to incest porn. On the other hand, if you know people who have a totally innocent, healthy incest fetish/fantasy, I’m open to hearing that perspective. And I say that sincerely, because I think it is hard to defend the idea that owning incest porn doesn’t “mean anything,” or imply an interest in molesting one’s children, uless you are relating to your own exposure to or experience with it, and can argue for it being pure roleplay. I think it possibly could be argued, but it would be difficult to, and the burden of proof to argue that falls on those of you who don’t see a correlation.
I just personally think it comes from somewhere, if the majority of civilization has taboos against it and show restraint. Collectors of incest porn, in my opinion, have issues, which are most likely, having been sexually molested by family. That doesn’t necessarily make them horrible people, but if they are collecting it toying with the idea of it, tempting themselves to take the impulsion further, then they do need help.
For me, it’s a no-brainer. Albeit in need of the corroborating evidence (6+ family members being aware of the incest), but an indication of guilt, nonetheless. I’m going to go and dig for references that you claimed above:
“As I read the news stories, the wife had suspicions years ago, which were denied by all the children at the time. Now they say otherwise, and so one has to ask, were they lying then, or are they lying now?”
I have read nothing that indicated they denied it then, so if you care to help, please cite your/a source for that information. The obvious answer, though, to why any kid denies child abuse is that it is a) completely humiliating and b) totally dangerous to them to turn their victimizer in. Not to mention the fact that as children, the person often has conflicted feelings of allegience/love for the person, and, at the same time, hopefully – if observing the families of their peers indicates it – that what they are experiencing is wrong and abnormal. So, imagine a 10 year old trying to process those mixed emotions, of knowing something isn’t quite right about it, having a degree of dependence on the abuser, and the rest of the family revolving around the abuser to some extent.
These are the primary reasons that so much abuse goes unreported, and why it is so irresponsible, dangerous, and out of touch with reality for people like yourself to go around demanding that physical evidence be provided first, before eye witness accounts are taken seriously. Imagine how offensive it is to victims who are brave enough to turn their abusers in that some peoples’ first reaction to their claims is to jump to the conclusion that they are guilty of lying, betraying their whole family, willing to see people who were supposedly good parents locked up. There is no logic to that assumption, especially in light of the lack of evidence for any supposed “family feud.” Again, just how much would you have to hate someone (and why would you possibly hate them that much) for an adult to subject their own family to that? What amount of money and level of greed would be behind that? Thank god there are people in law enforcement with more empathy than you protecting the alleged victims and future victims from these men.
As far as all of you who don’t have an agenda but keep returning to the similarities of this case with the ritualistic abuse from the 80s as an argument for why these claims seem too outrageous to be true, didn’t it at least ever occur to you that part of the reason these types of claims aren’t taken more seriously more often is that mentality that it ‘just couldn’t be?” Did you stop to consider that precisely because it is so difficult to prove, it continues to go on under our noses? We, the public, to borrow Dale’s phrase, don’t have to accept that the exhaustion of “innocence until proven guilty” absolutely means the defendents in these cases weren’t guilty. We do have to make peace with the fact that a strong enough case could not be presented, for whatever reason (many often technicalities), and that people who may or may not have been guilty continue to live freely. Not to mention, surprise, surprise, sometimes guilty people walk because of connections, money, a network of other organized criminals protecting their behavior, etc, etc, etc.
But god forbid a judge or jury ever maintain that stubborn perspective that “these claims are just too weird.” God forbid! If I buried my head in the sand about every heinous crime like that (Stowell in Ohio living with the stench of corpses, for example, leaves me puzzled still, yet we KNOW it’s true), I couldn’t ever watch the news, because I would assume it was all fiction, concocted by people with sick imaginations.
J: “So, Julie, to be specific, you think if a man has multiple incest theme titles (NOT just a “pamphlet” – “Family Secrets,” “Family Touch,” etc, etc.) in his collection of porn, that has no relevance to allegations of his committing incest?”
—
No, I don’t consider that evidence of criminal acts. Were there real evidence of his guilt, pamphlets and magazines might go to his motivation or to his mental state, just as a novel with an identical murder found in a murder suspect’s home might suggest the murderer had cribbed it. But by itself, such material doesn’t prove anything if you don’t have a body. Or a murder weapon, or even a person missing. And that’s the problem for law enforcement. The women have reported so many crimes and described so many crime scenes that evidence must be there. If not a hair, a bone, or a photo is found after so much searching, then the sheer abundance of claims suggest that they are false claims.
This is about evidence, not empathy. You don’t destroy people’s lives with baseless charges.
“j: But god forbid a judge or jury ever maintain that stubborn perspective that ‘these claims are just too weird.’ God forbid! If I buried my head in the sand about every heinous crime like that (Stowell in Ohio living with the stench of corpses, for example, leaves me puzzled still, yet we KNOW it’s true), I couldn’t ever watch the news, because I would assume it was all fiction, concocted by people with sick imaginations.”
Testify! What you say right here, j, makes more sense than anything Pamela Troy or “the Real Julie” (I wouldn’t brag about being either one of the “Julies,” by the way) has said yet. Neither one of those heifers wants this to even be investigated.
Marette: “Testify! What you say right here, j, makes more sense than anything Pamela Troy or “the Real Julie” (I wouldn’t brag about being either one of the “Julies,” by the way) has said yet. Neither one of those heifers wants this to even be investigated.”
—
Ah, the psychology of the mob. Attack anyone who asks for evidence. Ironically, you say I don’t want this investigated, but it seems that you are the one who doesn’t want an investigation. You just want to hang the men now. For you they are guilty based solely on accusations.
Julie, aka “the Real Julie,” you don’t know what evidence they have. Perhaps they have but the accusers’ statements to go on. Perhaps they do have a human bone. Perhaps they have a videotape of one or more of these men sexually abusing one or more of the girls and boy. Fact is, you don’t know. None of us do, save the prosecutors and police. And the defendents and victims. So why do you want so desperately that these men not be investigated?
Regarding the “weirdness” of the allegations, read a little bit about the Josef Fritzl case. Check out the Colleen Stan case. Jaycee Dugard. Elizabeth Smart. And of course the case j points to, the Sowell case in Ohio. Jeffrey Dahmer. John Wayne Gacy. How weird are these cases?
Julie, j is completely right. You just say the same thing over and over again, with the same poor writing skills as Ms. Troy. Are you Ms. Troy? She has “gone silent,” in your words. Does that mean she’s got nothing else?
No, you’re wrong. I’d like to see a thorough investigation. I’d like to see a fair trial. You’d like for these men simply to be given a pass, it seems, because allegations of child abuse “ruins lives.” Well, child abuse is a real life-ruiner, too, Julie, in much more fundamental ways. But you don’t even seem to acknowledge that.
Marette, I’ve looked at the statements of what was recovered during the searches. If there was any evidence of wrongdoing, it wasn’t on there. If there was any human bones (rather than a bone of undetermined type), do you think the task force would have been disbanded? If there was, don’t you think they would have returned to the farm with heavy equipment and dug up everything in sight?
“Dale: Several of the other people she mentions, as you rightly point out, were never convicted, so doesn’t that go against her argument that all these innocent people are being convicted for crimes against children they didn’t commit? I’ve given up trying to sort out her logic, though, because her logic makes special exceptions for crimes committed against children. Why don’t we also institute statutes of limitation for crimes against the mentally ill or challenged? Surely they are not ‘reliable’ victims. And while we’re at it, let’s do something about elderly accusers, with their high rate of senility and all. And on and on. Perhaps only white female bloggers in their 60s should be fully protected under the law.”
Do you write for a blog or newspaper, Dale? You’re an excellent writer, and I share your common-sense sensibility. I’d be a faithful reader!
But Julie, they aren’t baseless charges! Eyewitness accounts aren’t supposed to be assumed as “lies until proven true!” You can only make that claim if you believe the accusers are lying, which you haven’t supported at all.
Re: your comment: “I don’t consider that evidence of criminal acts….But by itself, such material doesn’t prove anything if you don’t have a body. Or a murder weapon, or even a person missing.
I am associating those materials with INCEST! Not murder. I’ve said, first things first, to me. I believe these men abused the adults accusing them as children, period. That would be criminal acts. Again, you want to focus on what we don’t see enough evidence to prove yet, whereas I am saying I don’t believe 6 or more individuals stand to gain anything by disrupting this family and making allegations. Their claims should, and were, taken seriously. That’s also part of how the law is supposed to work.
“If not a hair, a bone, or a photo is found after so much searching, then the sheer abundance of claims suggest that they are false claims.”
Buy it doesn’t prove they weren’t molested! That is going to, at the very least, hold up in court, because a) there are multiple witnesses, b) it was reported to the church leader and recorded and c) the guy collected incest porn!
So, at the very least, the eldest Mohler appears very guilty. By extension, when the same people who caused police to uncover a history of reported abuse, PLUS incest porn, accused the rest of the men, the others will naturally have a very difficult time proving their innocence, as it should be.
Julie, I believe you are distorting Marette’s words here to fit your own agenda:
“Ah, the psychology of the mob. Attack anyone who asks for evidence. Ironically, you say I don’t want this investigated, but it seems that you are the one who doesn’t want an investigation. You just want to hang the men now.”
I have not personally attacked you for calls for evidence. I’ve pointed out, again and again, that eyewitness testimony IS PART OF THE BODY OF EVIDENCE. Likewise, please highlight where Marette has supposedly called for the hanging of these men, with or without a trial. She has not.
Julie: “For you they are guilty based solely on accusations.”
WRONG!!! They appear guilty based on corroborating evidence, and we are awaiting more, but meanwhile discouraging their release/supporting the justification for their detainment. Don’t forget, a bunch of videotapes are being poured over. The police have no obligation to share the contents of any of that yet, and so if they find more evidence, they are holding their cards close until trial.
J: Buy it doesn’t prove they weren’t molested! That is going to, at the very least, hold up in court, because a) there are multiple witnesses, b) it was reported to the church leader and recorded and c) the guy collected incest porn!
—
No one can prove these women were never molested, but the defense doesn’t have to. It’s the job of the prosecution to prove that they were. And they won’t be able to do that just with testimony. If these stories of pregnancies and rapes at an early age are true, there should be medical evidence. Lack of it would discredit the claims. Lack of evidence of murders would tend to discredit all the claims, including molestation. And insofar as the complaints involve hypnosis (and I have no doubt they do, especially with the first and most vociferous complainant), such testimony will not be allowed in court.
According to news stories, the reporting to the church leader was of suspicions, not of facts, and in his investigation he questioned the children and they all said nothing happened, directly contradicting whatever they might be saying today. As for the porn, the defense will object that the introduction of such material would be prejudicial, and without other evidence they would most likely win. So there isn’t a case based on what I’ve seen in the media.
You seem to have some emotional stake in this, but when it comes to finding the truth, you have to put emotions aside and look at the evidence objectively. From what law enforcement has shared with us, and what has come out in documents, there isn’t a case, and their silence for the past week suggests that they are coming to that conclusion, if they haven’t already.
Soooo.
I spend a day or two dealing with matters in the real world and getting on with my life, then decide to drop in here and see what’s going on, and what do I find?
A long series of posts in which I’m accused — because I consider the Mohlers innocent until i see some solid indication of guilt — of being “pro-incest and pro-child abuse. I’m accused of conspiring with another poster I’ve never met and don’t know and for good measure, that OTHER poster is accused of being pro-incest and pro-child abuse as well. I’m denounced as “masquerading as a journalist” (I’d be interested in knowing where I did this. I’ve never claimed to be a journalist. I’m a freelance writer.) and “putting (myself) out as an expert” on witchhunts (which I have also not done.) Dark insinuations have been made about my presumed bias in favor of satanism, etc.
In short, we’ve all been provided with a working example of the witch hunt mentality.
Thanks guys.
I posted something to this effect more than 24 hours ago, but apparently it was “moderated” into the ether:
That’s right, Pamela, don’t go to the trouble to address any specific criticism, or clarify what you meant by suggesting that raping a girl is more forgivable if she is at least pubescent. Just keep repeating your generic witch hunt analogy instead. If you say it enough times, maybe someone will take it as fact, and you won’t have to defend anything you say.
J:
I’ve already gone to the trouble of addressing your points. You just keep repeating them without addressing mine. I don’t think you have much of a handle on how “discussion” works.
But I disagree, you have not. I’m talking specifically about your implying that it was more forgivable for someone to rape a pubescent girl you made at truecrimereports.com (you refused to comment on it, in fact), along with why you selectively omit important details here i.e. the clear incest themes of the porn, the corroborating evidence of the wife of one of the Mohlers reporting abuse several times to their bishop, etc. As you divert attention from the validity of eyewitness accounts to sexual abuse by over-emphasizing only the murder allegations, you focused on the fact that none of the pornography could be proved as depicting underage girls, which was not the only issue. We weren’t talking about the legality of owning “barely legal” type of porn, or even the legality of getting off on incest porn. We were talking about whether or not it is incriminating, and so far no one has offered any reasonable support of why it should not be seen as incriminating – big difference. I think some burden of proof falls on you to explain why you don’t see a correlation between owning multiple incest porn titles and being accused of incest.
I don’t see any question you asked of me which I haven’t answered, so please, point them out, by all means. I will answer every one.