Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

If you have problems then perhaps one of the members might have a suggestion or tell you how they coped with a certain situation. Also we could post links for all children that are missing and need to be found. All aspects of child welfare discussed here, new and old cases. Children that have been let down by Social Services and the authorities.

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby diddy » Wed May 21, 2008 10:00 am

TiredOfTheBS wrote:Look at this idiot:

Dr. Bruce Woodling developed the anal wink test which he alleged was an indisputable diagnostic indicator that a child had been sodomised. In a clinical setting, he would spread a child's buttocks and touch the anus with a cotton swab. If the anus "winked", Woodling testified, this was "proof of sodomy". His testimony was prominent in the McMartin preschool child abuse case.

It has since been established that Woodling never made any effort to validate his test, and it has been utterly discredited.

Woodling's pseudoscientific testimony during the trial of Ray Buckey contributed to Buckey spending five years in prison without bail. Buckey was later released without conviction.


Does anyone else get the feeling that this guy just liked touching kids bums?

I mean what is wrong with these people??? That is abuse in itself.


OMG.
And people were so stupid they went with this?
I thought your bum automatically "winked" as a reflex! :oops:
The charade must go on.
User avatar
diddy
On Parole
 
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby TiredOfTheBS » Wed May 21, 2008 10:02 am

In late March, 1996, I went to court in another state to help a working-class family which had contacted me through this home page. A 2 1/2 year old girl had obvious nonspecific vulvovaginitis, with a mix of flora on gram stain which included some gram-negative diplococci, mostly extracellular. The child was just getting over chickenpox, which might have triggered the vulvovaginitis. The pediatrician, a self-styled expert on child sexual abuse, found an "apparent healed laceration" at the 2-3 o'clock position in the hymen, no further description. Cultures and DNA probes were negative for gonorrhea. Cultures of all family members, including the grandfather, a former chief flight mechanic on a Navy ship, were negative for gonorrhea. The child denied any sexual stuff during the medical exams. The child struggled and cried a lot during the child abuse exams and cultures. A smear of the "purulent" exudate showed no white cells, only a lot of epithelial cells. Afterwards, she talked about "monster(s)" and "doctor monsters", and said, "The monster(s) put a bone in my mouth and the hair choked me" (the cotton-tipped swabs, dummies) and said "the monster had a mask" (duh).

On the strength of this evidence, the Department of Human Services told the court, "The perpetrator has been identified" as the grandfather, the evidence being that he owned a Hallowe'en mask. They told him that if he admitted his crime and got counselling, the child would be restored to the mother. The entire family refused. I was the sole medical witness for the defense, which I took for free.

I poked around the medical library, confirmed and improved on what I already knew, and was able to testify that (1) 3% of girls had a little nick in the hymen at the 2-3 o'clock position, just naturally, and around 20-30% of three-year-old girls have such innocent nicks ("apparent healed lacerations", I thought), which are no more indicative of trauma than is a double-chin; (2) relying on a gram stain in this situation was totally unacceptable as a means of diagnosing gonorrhea, and the bugs were probably Neisseria sicca or one of it kin, common commensals, which tend to be extracellular while gonorrhea bacteria are usually mostly intracellular; (3) the CDC guidelines specifically direct physicians NOT to rely on a gram stain in this situation; (4) if this were gonorrhea, there would have been white cells in the exudate, and the abundance of epithelial cells suggested "resolving chickenpox" to me; (5) the negative culture and DNA probes satisfied me that this was almost certainly not gonorrhea; (6) there are published, empirical criteria for the physical examination of a girl suspected of having been sexually abused, and the "expert" had utterly failed to address or meet these; (7) often you never find the cause of vulvovaginitis in a child. (I should have had the statistic, which is 70%; I'm sorry I didn't.)

We won.


http://www.pathguy.com/abuse.htm

There are tons of cases like these.
The McCanns show their true colours - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVUnMtW9ciI
User avatar
TiredOfTheBS
First Time Offender
 
Posts: 670
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:40 pm

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby GoodForYou » Wed May 21, 2008 10:16 am

As we know, medical expert opinion in court has proven to be wrong before.
Once this was about a beautiful child lost by negligent parents. Now it is about the ugly face of the British establishment. The involvement of the government and the compliance of the UK media has nothing to do with allowing justice to take its course.
GoodForYou
Local Lag
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:28 pm

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby nicked » Wed May 21, 2008 10:24 am

GoodForYou wrote:As we know, medical expert opinion in court has proven to be wrong before.



With regard to this comment and the examples provided above, I happen to agree. I am not alleging that doctors are infallible, in fact I happen to treat doctors opinions, especially on all things paediatric, with a great deal of caution.
User avatar
nicked
First Time Offender
 
Posts: 557
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 11:48 pm
Location: Aigburth

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby jollyangelina » Wed May 21, 2008 10:35 am

god, i can hardly believe a mother would ever sexually abuse her own daughter. I hope its not any failing on the doctors part , or that maybe the mother is covering up for someone else. I remember about 20 years ago, my friends little sister who was 2 at the time,used to bleed , the little girl used to self-abuse with pencils and other objects(sorry to cause any distress) but it was true, and they took her to the doctor and after doing tests she was found to have cancer,in that area, but fully recovered. I hope in this case they have ruled out any other possible reason for injury.
User avatar
jollyangelina
Suspect
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:59 pm

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby Ealing » Wed May 21, 2008 10:40 am

Can I ask why this is in the "Justice for Madeleine" section?

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
Ealing
New In Town
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 4:07 pm

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby Ealing » Wed May 21, 2008 10:45 am

Ta.
Ealing
New In Town
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 4:07 pm

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby Miss Take » Wed May 21, 2008 10:54 am

Unfortunately, mothers are just as capable of abuse as men. True, the type of abuse differs, mothers tend to use more emotional and verbal abuse while fathers are more likely to use physical and sexual abuse. Though to assume that this is always the case is dangerous. Of course fathers are able to emotionally abuse, just as mothers are able to sexually abuse.

However, that being said, I have to agree that the report certainly reads that the conviction is somewhat shakey. I also concur that we don't have all the facts.

But this I do know: Sexual abuse (and especially a case involving such a young child and her mother) are highly emotive subjects and the reflex attitude of most of us (including a jury) is to hang every fluffing peadophile we can find. Simply the thought of the event itself makes the majority of us very non-subjective.

There is also the 'trust' in doctors. A jury often convicts on the basis of medical evidence, whether they understand it or not. They're doctors, they're to be trusted impeccably, they are infallible.

I'd like to know more about the case before I passed judgement, but the very fact remains that I cannot see a perpetrator of sexual abuse taking a child to the doctors due to injury caused by the abuse. It doesn't make sense.
"While it may be hugely entertaining and a bit of fun to think of cast lists, we are a million miles away from that sort of thing."

Image
User avatar
Miss Take
First Time Offender
 
Posts: 664
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:45 am

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby Tutti » Wed May 21, 2008 10:59 am

Oh GOD!!! :( :cry: :( :cry: :x
I Survived The Harold Shipman Clinic!
User avatar
Tutti
You're Nicked
 
Posts: 283
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:21 pm

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby bugalugs1970 » Wed May 21, 2008 12:35 pm

Thanks DS for op, sadly this is nothing new it just doesn't normally make the daily press.
I'm on the payroll........WHAT...you didn't know!!!!!!
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Savekids/
http://www.truthformadeleine.com
User avatar
bugalugs1970
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:24 pm
Location: Squirrel stalking in Breacon Beacons

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby Betty » Wed May 21, 2008 10:34 pm

Hang the lot of them.

The child murderers. It cannot go on any longer.

I am suspicious of this case though, the fact that she took the girl to the Drs...
Betty
New In Town
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:42 am

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby bugalugs1970 » Wed May 21, 2008 10:54 pm

Miss Take wrote:Unfortunately, mothers are just as capable of abuse as men. True, the type of abuse differs, mothers tend to use more emotional and verbal abuse while fathers are more likely to use physical and sexual abuse. Though to assume that this is always the case is dangerous. Of course fathers are able to emotionally abuse, just as mothers are able to sexually abuse.

However, that being said, I have to agree that the report certainly reads that the conviction is somewhat shakey. I also concur that we don't have all the facts.

But this I do know: Sexual abuse (and especially a case involving such a young child and her mother) are highly emotive subjects and the reflex attitude of most of us (including a jury) is to hang every fluffing peadophile we can find. Simply the thought of the event itself makes the majority of us very non-subjective.

There is also the 'trust' in doctors. A jury often convicts on the basis of medical evidence, whether they understand it or not. They're doctors, they're to be trusted impeccably, they are infallible.

I'd like to know more about the case before I passed judgement, but the very fact remains that I cannot see a perpetrator of sexual abuse taking a child to the doctors due to injury caused by the abuse. It doesn't make sense.



It happens a lot, many child abusers/neglectors are competant liars, take Victoria Climbie, she was taken to hospital by her Aunt for severe scalding/burns from her pouring a boiling kettle over her head and upper body. The Aunts excuse, Victoria had scabies and she thought by pouring boiling water over her it would reduce the itches. The professionals swallowed the explanation. SS did not press the Aunt as they are know so uptight and anal about questioning what may be a cultural difference...pathetic imo and very, very tragic.

Edited to add i just discovered that Khyra Ishaq's mother was the person who called for an ambulance early on Saturday morning, the little girl was dead on arrival at hospital. It is believed that she died from starvation, one of Khyra's siblings is criticial in hospital. Just shows that a neglecting/abusing parent will seek medical help.
I'm on the payroll........WHAT...you didn't know!!!!!!
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Savekids/
http://www.truthformadeleine.com
User avatar
bugalugs1970
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:24 pm
Location: Squirrel stalking in Breacon Beacons

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby diddy » Thu May 22, 2008 6:07 am

Yes, I suppose they will seek help eventually, otherwise, if the child dies, they have to hide the body.
But how old were these children?
Not at school?
And if they were in neighbours gardens, they weren't being hidden.
I guess that's how it all came to light.
Man's inhumanity to man.
Knows no bounds, that's for sure. :(
The charade must go on.
User avatar
diddy
On Parole
 
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby 2shy » Thu May 22, 2008 6:09 am

Wow, what a rude person YOU are!! I shall not stoop to your level to answer of course, have a nice day now wont you :)
nicked wrote:
2shy wrote:
TiredOfTheBS wrote:I don't like the sound of this case atall. Where is the evidence the mother did it? The child could have done something to herself. She actually took the child to the hospital herself. That doesn't sound like a safe conviction to me.


I tend to agree with you,why would she take the child to a GP if she was abusing her?The girl could have fallen on her bike seat and broken her hymen, or some other similar injury.

If this is indeed a wrong conviction, then what a tragic situation for this woman.This may well put others off taking their children to a GP with similar injuries or symptoms.




Mother was convicted by a jury who would have heard all the evidence for fecks sake. What a stupid thing to

say when you have NO access to evidence. The girl could have done it herself? She wouldnt have taken the

child to the docs if she had done it? Get real and dont be so offensive.
User avatar
2shy
New In Town
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:32 am

Re: Jesus Christ!!! Mum guilty of 2 year old daughter sex abuse

Postby 2shy » Thu May 22, 2008 6:12 am

Yes indeed, we have seen some horrendous cases in the past, where abuse has been cried, yet there has been none.Cleveland is just one example.
BrainFreeze wrote:Sorry, but I agree with Tired. Anyone remember the Cleveland (England) scandal that happened in the 1980's. Over a hundred children were removed from their homes because of sexual abuse - it got so bad that people did not want to take their children to the doctors or hospital when they were ill as the 'abuse' claims were so random. It's here on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_ ... se_scandal

What also about the numerous women who have been released from jail over the last few years due to dodgy convictions of shaking their babies??

I just can't believe that the woman would go to her GP, then to hospital knowing that she had hurt her baby herself....I may be wrong, but having not heard the evidence presented in this case I am not willing to jump up and down and villify this woman on press reports and hearsay.
User avatar
2shy
New In Town
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:32 am

PreviousNext

Return to Missing Children, Child Welfare and Parent to Parent

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests