Texas daycare groomed kids for sex parties

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Postby Pierre d'Achoppement » Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:12 am

I don't deny that child pornography exists. It exists on a very large scale.

However I think that in this particular case small town hysteria about swingers perceived as sexual deviants might be an explanation. If they switch partners to satisfy their lust they probably crave our children as well etc.

Children's confessions can be very problematic, to me it's an open questions for whose needs they were performing and in what way.

The movies that were allegedly shot in that particular place would be undeniable proof:

The movies would be filmed in one area of the club and people would watch the movies in another area.


I just wondered if they had surfaced. Why does this cause angry reactions?

Imagine yourself in a position where a child confesses something untrue about you, maybe that will help clarify my point.
User avatar
Pierre d'Achoppement
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 7:26 pm
Blog: View Blog (1)

Postby lightningBugout » Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:18 am

Pierre, your argument stinks. I genuinely mean no offense. But very, very young kids have come forth to talk about being given fucking vicodin and made to perform sex acts. And the perps here have scarcely claimed false allegations. How in the world is it relevant, in this case only, to say "Children's confessions can be very problematic?
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Pierre d'Achoppement » Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:33 am

I haven't read in this topic that the accussed persons have confessed, where do you read they scarcely claim false allegations? Confessions are always problematic without supporting evidence. Do very, very young kids know what vicodin is?
User avatar
Pierre d'Achoppement
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 7:26 pm
Blog: View Blog (1)

Postby lightningBugout » Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:47 am

PIerre, come on man. The jury in the first case took -5- minutes to deliberate. As for the kids, no I am afraid they referred to the Vicodin as "silly pills." Shall we throw that out of court for speaking in a way that is egregiously scientifically unsound?
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby blanc » Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:50 am

children are generally more reliable witnesses than adults.
blanc
 
Posts: 1946
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:00 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Pierre d'Achoppement » Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:18 am

Children who aren't guided by adults with an agenda may be more reliable witnesses than adults. Anyway, as I understand it two people were and a third person stands to be sentenced to life imprisonment with only questionable witnessreports as proof. Looks like a legally sanctioned witchhunt to me.
User avatar
Pierre d'Achoppement
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 7:26 pm
Blog: View Blog (1)

false charges

Postby hava1 » Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:27 am

Pierre, you might be right. there's not enough info from the internet to know what the facts are. I think this is a hypothetical discussion based on the publications and on the assumption that this is true. There are always false convictions, including, in sex abuse cases. Probably not more than the average false charges/convictions. Still, the criminal activity in this field is rather protected and normally immune to investigation and prosecution. Sex offenses are a dynamic field, because the general mores is changing, law are changing etc. The criminal system has its failure rates, but I am not sure its the main issue. Correct me i am wrong. The issue with child sex offending is enforcement. Few cases even reach the stage of criminal trial. Therefore, each case becomes such a huge "issue", it becomes almost a religious "proof' to the differing camps, eg the FMSF. If there were many trials, as should be, the importance of each result would decrease and with less tension the legal system might be able to work better.
hava1
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:07 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby blanc » Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:57 am

blanc
 
Posts: 1946
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:00 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Pierre d'Achoppement » Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:02 am

Sure Hava1, there's not enough information from the internet to know what the facts are. That's why it's so amazing to me to see the reactions here. Have you ever seen so much trust in a jury verdict on this board? But bring up children and a lot of people lose their critical judgement, which in my opinion is an often overlooked sort of possible mind control in cases like these.
User avatar
Pierre d'Achoppement
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 7:26 pm
Blog: View Blog (1)

PIERRE

Postby hava1 » Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:11 am

yes, i agree. usually the system "builds up" public frustration over an issue, and then the nail the wrong guy (frame), knowing they can count on the sway. That's a given. But i am not particularly interested in whether this case is verifiable or not.

Always funny to see habitual heretics suspend disbelief when convenient. BUt the awakening happens regardless, when the story unfolds. BUt these are the little fake joys of people who see the dark side, we have our false victories, keeps it going...:))

Its happening now big time (rather happened) with the favorite issue, Israel. Suddenly, the CIA became a reliable, life affirming and democracy loving org, because they screwed their "little rat" (Israel) with some iran reports. That's how it goes and the big guys know how to use that childish little need for "approval" from the establishment (courts, laws, CIA's what not).

But to the topic. There's no reason to believe the allegations are made up, so far. kids testimony, in order to be bungled had to be seriously staged and rehearsed by experts. No evidence to involvement of big shots from the "lets mess up their minds" department. Straightforward, so it seems.
hava1
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:07 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby slomo » Tue Jun 24, 2008 10:33 am

I don't discount the possibility of SRA in general, but this particular incident just reeks of hysteria.
User avatar
slomo
 
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby sunny » Tue Jun 24, 2008 11:19 am

slomo wrote:I don't discount the possibility of SRA in general, but this particular incident just reeks of hysteria.


I'm not seeing any SRA in this so far, but it's obvious (to me, at least) this was a for-profit organized child porn operation at it's core. Whether the "viewers" attending the "parties" knew this is another question.
Choose love
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)

Postby Stephen Morgan » Tue Jun 24, 2008 12:48 pm

Teacher jailed for rape of girl

It doesn't say it there, oddly, but the radio report mentioned that he had taken "indecent pictures" of his pupils and that he was close friends with the parents of the victim.
Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that all was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dream with open eyes, and make it possible. -- Lawrence of Arabia
User avatar
Stephen Morgan
 
Posts: 3736
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:37 am
Location: England
Blog: View Blog (9)

Postby lightningBugout » Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:51 pm

Pierre d'Achoppement wrote:Sure Hava1, there's not enough information from the internet to know what the facts are. That's why it's so amazing to me to see the reactions here. Have you ever seen so much trust in a jury verdict on this board? But bring up children and a lot of people lose their critical judgement, which in my opinion is an often overlooked sort of possible mind control in cases like these.


Fanatical concern for children that over-rides critical judgment is a form of mind-control? May as I ask who the puppet-masters of this mind control are? Who is controlling my mind on this? Which is a judgment that is heavily weighted by years of research into these cases and a lot of research into the rhetorical strategy of the FMSF and their specific talking points, which, whether or not you mean to, you have hit on several of them. Those talking points were so carefully developed, are used so consistently, and used in a wide variety of CSA cases including many in which they literally do not apply at all, that they are about as meaningful as GWB's "We're freedom lovers." The more one learns about the FMSF campaign and its history, board, and backers, the more one appears to be "suspending disbelief when convenient."

You've suggested all these points:
1. How would it feel to be accused of something you didn't do?
2. Childrens' testimony is commonly guided by adults with an agenda
3. We can't know all the facts, but the jury, who made a decision as the people who were presented with "all the facts" are a group to be skeptical of.
4. This "reeks" of hysteria
5. This is a "legally-sanctioned" witchhunt

All FMSF talking points that you've, apparently, accepted as common sense. But number 3, the conclusion I've drawn from what you wrote is the one that most disturbs me. Because you've ended up implying, to my thinking, that juries are not to be trusted. Cuz they're commoners, right?

All of which reminds me of an angry response I read last week to a very balanced article about DID in a Houston weekly. The respondent, who google reports is a very wealthy doctor and ADL pundit from a particularly snotty, exclusive town in MD wrote a screed about the whole MPD "hoax" and the con artists who claim to be survivors, etc, etc. But the kicker - he spent several sentences saying that these victims were simply losers from "trailer parks" who "never got to hang out with the cool kids" in high school. That their reports of cult abuse were a rich fantasy life that simply compensated for, well apparently being poor and being losers.

His comment is first:

http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-04-17/news/do-you-have-multiple-personalities-disorder/4#Comments
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Lurquacious » Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:24 pm

Pierre d'Achoppement wrote:Could this not be town hysteria about a swingers club: people get worried about morals, use children as leverage to demonize people with a different attitude to sex. My guess: no actual children were involved. Is there any actual proof (movies, pictures, bruises)?


So you didn’t bother to read the coverage of the trials, then. Jeff and Annie posted links to the Tyler Morning Telegraph, which has covered the case extensively. Typing “Mineola Swingers” into the newspaper’s searchbar will bring up more articles covering the case, which are my sources for the following facts:

When taken into foster care, the children showed clear signs of disturbance and highly sexualized behavior. The boy indicated to an adult that he had a secret to share but was silenced by the oldest girl, who insisted that he’d make things worse if he told.

The story emerged only several months later, after the children had passed through three foster families because their behavior was so disturbed that no one could handle them (one placement ended after the girl performed a pole dance at ballet class). Their fourth foster mother took the girl along with her to view the by-then-vacant club premises when she was considering buying it for a day care center. They looked at the property from the outside, and the girl then told the woman of what had gone on there and described the inside of the premises in great detail.

The girl later drew a diagram of the inside of the premises during a police interview and described the adults who worked there and their various job duties (door security, ticket seller, etc.).

The girl described how some of the defendants burned the children’s costumes and the tapes of their performances in a trash pile behind one of their homes. Police found the trash pile where she said it would be; it contained ashes, fragments of videotapes, and remains of children’s clothing.

The children described attending “kindergarten” in defendants’ homes and gave details of classes that consisted of a classic pedophile “grooming” process: first learning to touch dolls’ genitals, then their own, then each other’s, and so on. Erotic dance lessons were also on the curriculum.

An older child, now in her mid-teens, came forward and independently corroborated the foster children’s stories. She described being raped at the age of eleven by one of the defendants and confirmed in court that these children were some of the ones she’d been forced to have sex with in club performances.

The defendants haven’t offered much in the way of a defense against the charges. The best they’ve come up with so far is that a Tyler Morning Telegraph reporter on the case has in the past dated one of the Smith County assistant district attorneys prosecuting the case. So far the judge has rebuffed defense attorney attempts to suppress the paper’s coverage.

No wonder the jury took only minutes to reach verdicts in the first two trials.

AhabsOtherLeg wrote:Am I reading this wrong, as usual? Why would anyone leave their kids at daycare in a building if they believed it was also playing host to swingers' parties?


The premises had been operated as a day-care center previously by the owner, who put the building up for sale when her husband died, and in the meantime rented it in early 2004 to one Russ Adams, who hasn’t been charged. He told her he would be running it as a community center for families with Down syndrome children. After the rumors of swingers nights hit the local paper, the landlady revoked the lease in mid-2004. The victims were the children of people involved in the swingers club.

Only one of the defendants was from Mineola. Those charged in the case are Jamie Pittman, 36, Shauntel Loraine Mayo, 29, Patrick Stephen Kelly, 41, and Dennis Boyd Pittman, 45, all from Tyler; Shelia Darlene Sones, 48, from Mineola; and Jimmy Dale Sones, 33, from Brownsboro. Tyler, population over 100,000, is twenty-five miles from Mineola—just down the road in Texas terms.

A seventh defendant, Rebecca Lynn Pittman, 32, was extradited in May from Wenatchee, Washington, in the case of the rape of the fifteen-year-old (she allegedly held the child down while her husband, defendant Dennis Boyd Pittman, carried out the rape).

Other children were involved but haven’t been identified. The foster children described a total of eight performers, but police have identified only the three siblings, who at the time the investigation began were a seven-year-old girl, a six-year-old boy, and a five-year-old girl, the siblings' aunt, who was six, and the fifteen-year-old girl, who isn’t mentioned at all in some of the reports. Attempts to protect the children’s identities seem to be causing some vagueness in the reporting.

The wife of John Cantrell, the foster father arrested on an allegations of sexual abuse in 1991, believes the charges are in retaliation for the couple’s work in helping to build the case against the swingers club. Given that the charges were laid in Solano County, California, whereas there is little evidence so far that the Mineola Swingers Club was anything other than a local East Texas group, it remains to be seen how valid her claim is.

On the other hand, Dennis Pittman was captured in Sevierville, Tennessee, and his wife in Washington state, so there may be connections outside Texas. And today the Cantrell charge has won defendant Patrick Kelly a postponement, his attorney claiming that if Cantrell is indicted, it would eliminate him as a credible witness in the state’s case against Kelly, although it was his wife, not Cantrell himself, who testified in the first two trials. Kelly’s trial resumes on June 30.

One fact arguing for a local and relatively unsophisticated operation, despite the elaborate planning and grooming, is that they used videotape instead of recording digitally and made money from ticket sales without, apparently, exploiting the far greater income stream to be had from the Internet.

And then again, there’s this (from the trial of Jamie Pittman):

The girl described a night at "Booger Red's" [defendant Patrick Kelly] house when she was 4 or 5 when she said he choked a lady until she collapsed, while her kids were present, then he pulled her body off somewhere and she never saw her again.


It’s possible the other children haven’t been found because they and their mother are dead.
Lurquacious
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 4:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 166 guests