PLEASE NOTE: This blog is a bigotry free zone open to all persons, regardless of age, race, religion, color, national origin, sex, political affiliations, marital status, physical or mental disability, age, or sexual orientation. Further, this blog is open to the broad variety of opinions out there and will not delete any comments based upon point of view. However, comments will be deleted if they are worded in an abusive manner and show disrespect for the intellectual process.
Saturday, November 20, 2010
LINDA WIEGAND CASE: PART III HE SAID
In an attempt to get at the truth, I've been pursuing the tactic of obtaining information from Linda Wiegand's supporters and then I have turned around and read information by those who opposed her. Right now I am going to discuss the worst that I can say about Linda Wiegand based upon what her enemies have to say about her. Again, keep in mind that I am neutral here. I'm just letting you know what is out there--like it or not.
According to Louis Kiefer and Harold Stevens, Tom Wilkinson's attorneys, Linda Wiegand actually sexually abused the children, not Tom Wilkinson. Apparently, they state, on January 27, 1993 not long after Wilkinson's arrest, the Vermont State Attorney's Office notified Mr. James Adams, the SRS caseworker who was assigned to investigate the case, that Wiegand's nephew (her sister's son) had complained to his father, Craig Martin, that Wiegand had sexually abused him. Adams responded by calling Mr. Martin on February 2, 1993 and requested an interview. Martin, however, wasn't willing to allow Mr. Adams to speak with his son and insisted that no abuse had taken place.
After talking to Craig Martin, Mr. James Adams contacted Dr. Stephen Balsam, the psychiatrist who had verified that Tom Wilkinson had sexually abused Benjamin and Jonathan Wiegand. Adams conveyed to Dr. Balsam the information that Craig Martin's son, Linda Wiegand's nephew, had stated Linda Wiegand sexually abused him. Adams asked Dr. Balsam whether there was any possibility that Linda Wiegand had coached her children to make false accusations against their father. Dr. Balsam confirmed that he didn't believe either story. Yet, as we know, Dr. Kenneth Robson had also indicated that he thought there was evidence that Linda Wiegand had coached her sons.
Then just as Mr. James Adams was investigating these allegations, to make the story even more complicated, Linda Wiegand's mother, Carol Morrisey, spoke to Dr. Balsam and told him that she believed that Linda Wiegand herself might be sexually abusing the two children. Apparently, when he was given this information, Dr. Balsam advised Ms. Morrisey not to speak to SRS about it.
There are also additional considerations that call into question Linda Wiegand's story regarding the sexual abuse of her children which are as folows: 1. Upon examination, there were no physical indications that the children had been abused. How is it possible that children could be abused with repeated anal penetration and yet there are no physical signs that it happened?; 2. Dr. Stephen Balsam concluding that the boys had been sexually abused after meeting them twice. This does not strike me as the kind of careful and detailed examination that would be required in order to obtain accurate results; 3. Dr. Balsam drew his conclusions without ever interviewing Tom Wilkinson himself; 4. The children made statements to the effect that their mother had told them to say what they said. Granted, these statements were, as stated, ambiguous at times and unclear, but they are, nonetheless, troubling.
Finally, some of the greatest accusations against Linda Wiegand come from members of the Patriot's Movement in the United States which originally fully supported her. One of these people, Clayton R. Douglas, describes Linda Wiegand as follows: "From the evidence we have reviewed, including much of the documentation provided by Linda, it is just as possible it was Linda who was the abusive parent! It was Linda who failed to discipline the children, who refused to attend court proceedings, who ignored court orders, who kidnapped the children from their home and it was Linda who has consistently lied about the situation and events, all the while continuing to raise money for herself, not the boys. There is a story here, but it is a story about a possessive, self-centered woman who cares little about her children's well-being and is willing to resort to lying, cheating, stealing and kidnapping to keep the chidlren she is unwilling to share with anyone else."
So, what do you think so far? Is this true, not true? Let us hear from you!