Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:15, 16 August 2008

Prod

Contents of the page have momentarily been pasted from satanic ritual abuse, which is currently protected from editing. Please see Talk:Satanic ritual abuse#Spin-out news clippings for a discussion. A list of notable events, particularly a lengthy one, is more appropriate as a separate 'list of' article than keeping the same list in the main body. Contents are identical to the extant page, barring the paste of some old information. WLU (talk) 17:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Cynthia Owen case

Does anyone have access to sources that detail the result of the family appeal? I can find plenty of sources detailing they did indeed appeal and that the case was adjourned until July of 2007, but I have not been able to find the results of the appeal. Vassyana (talk) 14:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Last mention on 26 January 2008 in an article in the Sunday Tribune (Bracken, A. "News - Report advises state against holding public inquiry into murder of baby found in 1973", 6 Jane 2008, Sunday Tribune, p 4.) Summarised below. --Biaothanatoi (talk) 06:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The state has been advised not to launch a full public inquiry into the death of a murdered infant discovered in 1973 in south Dublin.

It is understood a public inquiry has been not been recommended because of the legal difficulties that would be brought about by the serious allegations made against certain people, and because of the amount of time that has elapsed since the infant's death.

A judicial review of coroner Dr Kieran Geraghty's findings, taken by Owen's father and three of her sisters, is currently before the High Court.

The four are challenging the coroner's findings that Owen is the mother of the infant.

added refs

I have added some refs to the article on Australia and Belgium. ResearchEditor (talk) 19:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

New info

New info for the Hosanna investigation ; trial is to start this month apparently. WLU (talk) 16:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The Netherlands

There has been some activity on the SRA in the Netherlands page. I have re-worked and merged the content to this page, in the Netherlands section. I don't believe there is any need for a separate page and have done my best to merge all the content that was relevant from the SRA in the N page. Discuss? WLU (talk) 17:46, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Since the rewriting of WLU had huge impact on the content of the page about satanic ritual abuse in the Netherlands (my whole contribution has been wiped out!), I want to make some remarks about his version.

WLU says that between 1984 and 1985 allegations of SRA appeared twice in the Netherlands - as part of discussions about dissociative identity disorder and in 1989 when allegations of SRA were made in Oude Pekela. This is wrong. The first time allegations about satanic ritual abuse were made was in 1990 and it was not in a discussion about the multiple personality disorder or in the debauchery scandal in Oude Pekela.

After Bennett G. Braun, Roberta G. Sachs and Richard P. Kluft held workshops in the Netherlands in 1984, the Dutch psychotherapists who attended these workshops knew something about multiple personality disorder and probably also about satanic ritual abuse (that is, when Braun c.s. informed those therapists about their experiences with cult survivors), but the Dutch therapists did not inform e.g. the media of their knowledge. Also in 1989 when newsmagazine Tijdsein broadcasted four times about satanic ritual abuse, the Dutch mpd therapists refused to comment. The first time they did that was in 1993 in two programs of newsmagazine Nova!

The debauchery scandal in Oude Pekela was not in 1989 but lasted from May 1987 till October 1988. During this period neither the investigating authorities nor the media ever mentioned satanic ritual abuse. Also Fred Jonker and Ietje Jonker-Bakker never did that in this period. They started their allegations after they had heard about the phenomenon satanic ritual abuse during a conference where they have met mpd therapists c.s. from the United States. The first time Jonker and Jonker-Bakker got public with these allegations was during a lecture in 1990 in Great Britain. This lecture resulted in their 1991 article in the International Journal on Child Abuse and Neglect.

Then the debauchery scandal in Oude Pekela itself. WLU says that between 1985 and 1988 the idea that SRA was occuring in the Netherlands was adopted and promoted by conservative christians. This is wrong, because the first time this group heard about satanic ritual abuse was in 1989 when Tijdsein brought that issue. Tijdsein is a newsmagazine from a relatively conservative broadcasting company, the Evangelische Omroep. Furthermore WLU says that a group of parents published allegations in a conservative magazine that their children had witnessed SRA and had been ritually abused. I have never heard about such a group of parents or about such an article. Which conservative magazine published that article? I would love to read it. It is true that some parents said that their children told them about satanic ritual abuse, but that was not in 1987-1988, but again in Tijdsein, to be specific in the second broadcast in June 1989... after the parents had seen the first broadcast in April 1989, where cult survivors from the United States and the United Kingdom told stories that were almost word by word duplicated by the parents of Oude Pekela in the second broadcast!

Finally, it is true that the State Secretary of Justice responded to the allegations of mpd therapist Suzette Boon c.s. in Nova by appointing a multidisciplinary workgroup to study SRA in the Netherlands, but it was not the State Secretary that produced a report. The report was produced by the Werkgroep Ritueel Misbruik, the State Secretary only appointed this independent scientific workgroup. By the way, the Werkgroup Ritueel Misbruik did not use the term dissociative identity disorder, but multiple personality disorder. Also Braun c.s. did not held workshops about the dissociative identity disorder in 1984, but about the multiple personality disorder.

Criminologist1963 (talk) 22:07, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Your contributions were not wiped out, they were merged. You are more than welcome to edit the page further. I did my best to maintain all the content as accurately as I could, but I am not perfect and do not have access to, and can't read, all the sources. It's not my version because I don't own the page.

The information was mostly taken from the text you placed on the original page. If the current information is incorrect, feel free to adjust it using reliable sources. Blaming other editors just makes the page more acrimonious.

Responding to specific points - the article was published in Tijdsein apparently, by the company Evangelische Omroep. I'll modify who produced the report. Dissociative identity disorder should remain as it is - though it was called MPD in the past, on wikipedia it is referred to as DID; functionally, they are considered the same condition. WLU (talk) 21:59, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Sarcasm aside, I have updated according to your suggestions. Please let me know if there are any other issues, or feel free to make the changes yourself. WLU (talk) 22:15, 16 August 2008 (UTC)