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.

Tuesday, November 23, 2010


So, what are the charges against Tom Wilkinson that led Linda Wiegand to launch such a major campaign to remove the children--Ben who was four when the accusations were initially alleged, and also Jon, who was six--from his care?  Simply put, Tom Wilkinson is accused of having repeatedly had anal sex with Ben and of having raped Jon.  Furthermore, according to what I am reading in these reports, Tom Wilkinson was said to have had a history of being involved with others who are engaged in this kind of behavior. Below is a general overview of what went on in regard to Tom Wilkinson:

In 1989, when Jon was two, he pretended to have violent sexual intercourse with his teddy bear.  Around that time Linda Wiegand reported that both boys had and received medical treatment for constant serious bowel movement problems and often had a red ring around their anus.  Of course, whether that red ring was diaper rash or related to sexual intercourse with Tom Wilkinson, that would be questionable in my view.  In January 1993, Ben told his Vermont pre-school teacher that his father was having sex with him.  The children also attempted oral sex with the family dog, a St. Bernard called "Molly"

During an interview in Vermont with Police Detective Bruce Merriam and Social Worker James Adams Ben, stated that he was worried about his Dad "his penis on my penis, tongue in my butt and his penis my mouth."  Furthermore, Ben is reported to have said that Tom Wilkinson "pees in his mouth and forces him to drink it, making him sick to his stomach."

In February 1993, investigators in Vermont apparently discovered instructions for the ritual sacrifice of animals encrypted on one of Wilkinson's computer disks.  This is a particularly disturbing detail.

Later, in an interview conducted that Fall 1993 at the Harvard Affiliated McClean Hospital in Boston, MA, the hospital report stated that Jon spontaneously advised, "I know why we're here."  He continued on, "It's because my dad put his penis in our butts, and the last time he put it in Ben's mouth."  Jon drew a picture of Wilkinson threatening him not to talk by saying, "I'll kill you."

Ben reported, "Well, I have these problems.  My dad has these problems.  He wakes me up in the middle of the night and takes me outside."  Ben continued on to describe how his father took him into the backyard and slaughtered a kitten and told him that the same would happen to him if he talked about the abuse.  Ben continued on to accuse his Aunt Karen, Tom Wilkinson's sister, of also abusing him sexually.  Just around that time, someone killed Molly, the family dog.  She was poisoned with acid while outside and returned to the house to homorrhage to death all over the family dining room.

In October 1994, Linda Wiegand took her children to a doctor out west who specializes in treating victims of Satanic Ritual Abuse.  She stated  that she had spent a lot of time reviewing the boys' testimony and looking at the pictures they had drawn containing blood sacrifice, Tom Wilkinson praying to the devil, etc., and decided that there had to be a lot more going on.  Throughout the case there have been accusations that Tom Wilkinson was closely involved with Satan Worship and that he was a member of what is allegedly called the Anthroposophy Society, a pedophile organization.  One report I have read states that, at the time the Wiegand case was going on, Wilkinson's bank statements indicate that he made out regular checks to the Anthroposophy Society.  True?  Not true?  There is no way of knowing.

As late as 1996, Ben and Jon were still continuing to testify formally regarding the way in which Tom Wilkinson sexually abused them.  At that time, Jon testified that he was sodomized by Wilkinson fifteen times with a knife on the pillow and stated that he saw Wilksonson do the same to Ben.  Both children stated that they experienced extensive sexual abuse from Tom Wilkinson and that they were threatened with death if they spoke out about it. 

Dr. Stephen Balsam, the childrens' psychiatrist and Dr. Gordon Ahlers, the childrens' pediatrician never recanted their statements that the children were sexually abused, neither did any state agency, to my knowledge. 

No other person has stepped forward with evidence that Tom Wilkinson was sexually inappropriate with any other children.  How likely is it that Tom Wilkinson, if he were a true pedophile, would limit his activities to these two boys only?

Thoughts anyone?


  1. My question is how could there be so much sexual content in what these two boys were saying, yet there be nothing there. Something had to be going on. But what?

  2. LInda Wiegand was coaching her sons and SHE is the one who drew the pictures.

  3. How could that be proven? Was this brought up at trial in the testimony? You see that is the problem I had, the fact that I didn't see a situation where the court had sifted through the evidence carefully and made these kinds of definitive determinations.

  4. More than once in the Robson report Ben said "Mom said" or "Mom told me to say". That information is out there but due to HIPPA (aka privacy act) they may not be available. I certainly have read it myself and could get a copy of it need be. Jon said stuff that wasn't possible form his explanations.
    Some expert (I forget who now) said the drawings weren't drawn by a child.If you look at them it makes sense. Too defined for their ages!!!

  5. I happen to know Dr. Robson and I've read reports of his--not Linda's, by the way. He is a complete nincompoop. So, you can't convince me by bringing up that guy. How old is Robson now? 70? 80? HIPPA regulations do not protect the privacy of a custody evaluation in a court of law, only within medical settings such as a hospital. If the trial was done properly, the custody evaluation and the evaluator, Dr. Robson, should have provided a deposition explaining the custody report. Subsequently, Dr. Robson should have been in court providing testimony regarding his report in order to explain how he drew conclusions such as Jon said stuff that wasn't possible. If there was an expert on the drawings stating they couldn't have been done by a child, that expert should also have been deposed, his expertise validated, and he should have provided testimony on the stand. I somehow doubt that happened. And that is my problem all around. You cannot simply bully a litigant into silence by ruling improperly and denying him or her due process. The truth should emerge from the combination of the examination of the witnesses, the verification of the facts through the examination of evidence, etc., etc. To me, it appears that this kind of careful legal work did not get done. Thus, people like me who are thoughtful and tend to reflect on these matters are left wondering. Did justice get done? Citizens of this state should not be left like that. They deserve better.

  6. I see your point. I am by no means a legal expert so what you are saying makes complete sense. I don't know why it happened that way. Maybe with Linda changing lawyers and the new lawyers who were left to pick up the pieces missed it. I have no answer for that. I do know she had ALOT of lawyers involved some of which she duped for alot of money.
    As an example, the Casey Anthony case so many are outraged at. The prosecution could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt she killed her daughter. Based on law they made the appropiate decision.Did Casey Anthony kill her daughter? Good possibility but based on the lay of the law she was aquitted.

  7. Divorce lawyers in the state of CT are some of the worst in the legal profession and the court system is incapable of dealing with the problem of abuse. As a result, lawyers simply don't want to deal with it and they would drop out like flies. That says nothing about Linda. How do you know Linda had lawyers she duped. No one has provided credible evidence anywhere to prove that.

  8. I think many of us are outraged by the Casey Anthony situation, but that still isn't grounds to bypass our legal system, undercut its processes, and take the law into our own hands. The intention of legal procedure is to eliminate error to the best of our human ability. When we start drawing conclusions based upon intuition or attitudes such as "I just know she's guilty." and subvert legal processes in order to align outcomes to our feels about what it right, this is when chaos ensues and the innocent end up in jail, and we are forced to abandon any pretense of being civilized or ethical. If this is the kind of society you wish for, then by all means, continue to blame Linda for the the failure of the legal system to protect her rights as well as Tom's and the children. Because you know the suffering that has resulted from the miscarriage of justice that occurred in their lives years ago continues to bear its bitter fruits well into the present day, and will into the future. Make no mistake. And current litigants bear the damaging consequences as well as the heritage of that case continues to harm and destroy.

  9. And I'm sure you know well enough about the legal system...

  10. Robson, aside from being a nincompoop, regularly lies in his reporting. I know of more than a dozen cases where he directly, knowingly, and egregiously falsified statements in his report. No one should believe one thing that comes out of that quack. You know, the guy who was the counterpart to the bishops in the catholic church's revolving door program for pedophile priests?

    Oh, and if you want some judicial outrage, check out what the church is doing to it's victims in Missouri:

    I guess catholic priests' victims were all coached too? I mean, Robson said the padres were all fine to be around kids, because he was told they had only molested a few children. I mean, the church didn't mention just HOW many they had molested... How could he have known they were pedophiles?!

    He called the mother in the Liberti case a "French whore" during his testimony...

    Such is the quality of Robson's work.