[Note Family First is a registered charity with the Charities Commission. See www.familyfirst.org.nz and www.charities.govt.nz ]

Family First NZ says that a doctor convicted of possessing and distributing child sex abuse images should be named.

“Patients and parents should be informed so that they can make an informed choice as to whether they continue having him as their family doctor, even after his nine month suspension,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of
Family First NZ.

“The doctor in question admitted 25 charges of possessing objectionable material and one charge of distributing an objectionable publication. He not only had 290,000 images of young girls in explicit sexual poses but as well as that, the doctor was found to be distributing objectionable material further. This is not a one-off slip.”

“The rights of the doctor to name suppression and privacy should not be greater than the right of patients and especially parents to know the character of their doctor. That is the price the doctor must pay to match the gravity of
the abuse of children. Many parents would rightly be concerned at a doctor with those convictions examining their young son or daughter.”

“Parents should be given the right to make an informed decision,” says Mr McCoskrie.

AAP Friday, 21 December 2007

Posted: http://www.stuff.co.nz/4332725a12.html

In the mid 1990s, Peter Danaja noticed life was changing at Maningrida, an Aboriginal community east of Darwin.

Already the children had stopped listening to their parents. They were talking of sex, ribbing each other with dirty jokes, turning their backs on ceremony and culture.

Mr Danaja, a senior community leader at Maningrida, says this coincided with the introduction of pornographic and violent movies.

Graphic sex scenes were also making their way on to commercial television stations and the years to come brought hardcore porn on pay TV.

Perhaps no one realised the impact this would have on young Aboriginal males at Maningrida.

"Nowadays kids rebel against us," Mr Danaja said in a letter read to the NT Supreme Court in Darwin this week during sentencing submissions for one of the more disturbing cases of child abuse in recent years.

An 11-year-old boy was attacked by two adults and three teenagers on three separate occasions at the coastal Arnhem Land community, between May and August last year.

During the screening of a pornographic DVD, the child was anally penetrated by both Cleaveon Cooper, then 18, and a 16-year-old before being fondled by a 15-year-old.

The juveniles cannot be named because of their ages at the time of the attacks.

Later than evening, the boy performed oral sex on Isiah Pascoe, then 19, while Cooper rubbed his penis in the area of the child’s buttocks.

His 13-year-old friend – who had been laying on a mattress watching television – then attempted to penetrate the young boy.

On another occasion, possibly after police returned him to the community despite doctors finding he had gonorrhoea, the group went swimming at the Army Beach outside the town.

There he was sexually abused again by Cooper and the youngest offender.

In total the group pleaded guilty to eight sex offences, including sexual intercourse with a child under 16 and gross indecency.

A psychologist’s report tendered to the court during sentencing submissions found all five offenders had a narrowly formed view of the world and lived in a community where overcrowding was rampant, particularly in the wet season, and there was "very little for young people to do".

They live in a remote corner of the territory and sometimes hunt and fish. Other times they are bored, with no jobs, easy drugs and limited schooling. English is spoken as a third or even fourth language and teenagers have little understanding of European ways nor the tools to make sense of it.

"A feeling of helplessness and frustration in the community. . . is quite palpable," the report said.

Justice Trevor Riley sentenced four of the group to a total of 32 months in prison. While acknowledging the role of pornography and other environmental factors in the lives of the offenders, he said: "These matters do not excuse or justify what took place".

The sentences ranged from 15 months for one attacker, to a good behaviour bond for another, and one month in juvenile detention for the youngest offender, who was less than two years older than his victim at the time of the attacks.

"They are each young men, they have each had a very basic formal education, their schooling has been sporadic and of little impact upon them," Justice Riley said.

"English is for each of them effectively a foreign language, they have limited understanding of European ways, they have been brought up in a remote location. . . and the psychologist regards each as having cognitive skills below their chronological age."

Justice Riley also questioned how and why pornographic material was so readily available to the group.

"The viewing of such material must provide impressionable young people with a distorted view of the world and what is not acceptable conduct," he said.

"How that (the porn) came to be there has not been explained, what impact that had upon the youthful offenders is not known to me. What cannot be doubted is that the playing of such material for young people is quite unacceptable and should not have occurred."

The case is reminiscent of those outlined in the Little Children are Sacred report, which prompted the Howard government’s emergency intervention.

It found evidence of systemic child abuse fuelled by grog, pornography, poor education coupled with a breakdown in traditional values, cultural alienation and government neglect.

Child offenders, it said, were compelled to rape out of rage, confusion or despair. Their actions could also be traced back to a childhood sexualisation, where children as young as three were regularly exposed to graphic pornography.

The inquiry – which travelled 35,000km to 45 territory communities – made 97 recommendations, including a tightening of pornography laws.

"We found a lot of sexualised behaviour between children. Children acting out what they have either seen at home in overcrowded houses or through pornography being left around, magazines as well as DVDs as well as videos," said co-chair of the inquiry Pat Anderson.

"Everywhere we went, everyone complained. Both men and women complained about pornography."

Defence lawyers in the Maningrida case repeatedly pointed out their clients had a limited understanding of sex.

"When it came to matters of sex he was clueless, save that he watched porn. . . that was in essence his sex education," said Cooper’s lawyer Peter Elliott.

Peggy Dwyer, who represented the youngest defendant, said: "He also spoke to me about mimicking what he saw in a DVD but not knowing really what was involved in sexual activity."

Outside the court, Mr Danaja spoke about the need for education, mentors and outside help.

"A lot of the kids are now. . . are starting to drift away from their responsibility to the cultural values that we have," he said.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4332725a12.html

Theodore Robert ‘Ted’ Bundy (Nov 24, 1946 – Jan 24, 1989) raped and murdered scores of young women across the United States between 1974 and 1978. After more than a decade of vigorous denials, he eventually confessed to 29 murders, although the actual total of victims remains unknown. Typically, Bundy would rape his victims, and then murder them by bludgeoning, and sometimes by strangulation. He also engaged in necrophilia. He was convicted of killing 36 women and girls.

Bundy was executed in the electric chair at Florida State Prison in Starke Florida. He became a born-again Christian while he awaited execution on death row. He explains to Dr Dobson his deep sense of shame and remorse over his cimes and how, while in prison, he had found forgiveness for his sins through Jesus Christ and peace as he faced his “Valley of the Shadow of Death”. Bundy recognised that he deserved to die and that it was a just sentence. He eventually cooperated with law enforcement agencies and disclosed all the details he could recall about all the homicides he was involved in.

Dr James Dobson says that “circumstantial evidence is overwhelming” from numerous studies that there is a link between hardcore violent porn and violent sexual behaviour. For example, an FBI study he cites involving 36 serial convicted murderers, revealed that 81% of them (29 out of 36) had a long-term and predominate interest in violent hardcore pornography.

Part 1 of 6

Part 2 of 6

Part 3 of 6

Part 4 of 6

Part 5 of 6

Part 6 of 6

   

Dr. Reisman’s study supports the conclusion that Alfred Kinsey’s research was contrived, ideologically driven and misleading. Any judge, legislator or other public official who gives credence to that research is guilty of malpractice and dereliction of duty.” Charles E. Rice, Professor, Notre Dame Law School

“Dr. Reisman: You can be very proud that you are included in Who’s Who in America, the directory The New York Times just recently hailed as “…that venerable guide to American achievement…” Once again, we’d like to congratulate you on your accomplishments.”  Who’s Who in America

Alfred Charles Kinsey (1894 – 1956), was an American biologist and professor of entomology and zoology who in 1947 founded the Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction at Indiana University, now called the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction. Kinsey’s research on human sexuality profoundly influenced social and cultural values in the United States and many other countries which went through the sexual revolution starting in the 1960s.

He is best known for his two controversial, very popular and widely influential publications Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948, reprinted 1998) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953, reprinted 1998).

Kinsey maintained that most people do not all clearly fall into the categories of exclusive heterosexuality or exclusive homosexuality, but that most can be placed somewhere between, in a continuum of sexual orientations with homo- and heterosexuality at the extremes and bisexuality at the midpoint. His detractors, such as the Family Research Council, claim that Kinsey’s work is a force that seeks to legitimize homosexuality, which the organization opposes. They tend to regard a homosexual orientation as a voluntary choice rather than an involuntary condition.

As a result of the work done by Kinsey and others, the American Psychiatric Association, in 1973, removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses.

Judith A. Reisman (b. Judith Ann Gelernter, 1935, Newark, New Jersey) is best known for her criticism of the work of Alfred Kinsey. She argues that that many of Kinsey’s sexual viewpoints are not appropriate in the context of modern sex education. Reisman alleges that Kinsey and his staff gathered Kinsey’s data from pedophiles and sex offenders to produce some of the data in the Kinsey Reports. She draws attention to the fact that Tables 30-34 of Sexual Behavior in the Human Male report observations of orgasms in more than three-hundred children between the ages of five months and fourteen years. The Kinsey Institute maintains that Kinsey never had any sexual interaction with children, nor did he employ others to do so, and that he always interviewed children in the presence of their parents [no citation provided by source: Wikipedia].

Judith Reisman was born to a second-generation Jewish-American family in 1935 in Newark…. She gained an M.A. in 1976 and a PhD in 1980, both in Communications, at the Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. Reisman has also been based at Haifa University in Israel.

She has authored and co-authored a number of books and scholarly articles including: The U.S. Department of Justice, Juvenile Justice study, Images of Children, Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler (1989), Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences (1998, 2000), Soft Porn Plays Hardball (1991), Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People (Reisman et al, 1990) and Kinsey’s Attic: The Shocking Story of How One Man’s Sexual Pathology Changed the World (Hardback).

Dr. Reisman is listed in numerous Who’s Who biographies such as: Who’s Who in Science & Engineering, International Who’s Who in Sexology, International Who’s Who in Education, Who’s Who of American Women and The World’s Who’s Who of Women. Her scholarly findings have had international legislative and scientific import in the United States, Israel, South Africa, Canada and Australia, while The German Medical Tribune and the British medical journal, The Lancet demanded that the Kinsey Institute be investigated, saying:

The Kinsey reports (one in 1948 on males and the companion five years later) claimed that sexual activity began much earlier in life…. and displayed less horror of age differences and same-sex relationships than anyone at the time imagined. It was as if, to follow Mr. Porter again, “Anything goes”. In Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, Dr. Judith A. Reisman and her colleagues demolish the foundations of the two reports … Kinsey et al … questioned an unrepresentative proportion of prison inmates and sex offenders in a survey of “normal” sexual behavior. Presumably some at least of those offenders were also the sources of information on stimulation to orgasm in young children that can only have come from pedophiles–or so it must be hoped. Kinsey…. has left his former co-workers some explaining to do. The Lancet, (Vol. 337: March 2, 1991, p. 547).

Reisman has guest lectured at numerous educational establishments, including Princeton, Georgetown, Tel Aviv University and the Rutherford Institute, as well as to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the United States Air Force Academy in Colorado.

Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Kinsey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_A._Reisman

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/about_dr_reisman.html#cv

For more about Dr. Reisman see her website:

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/about_dr_reisman.html

Brief CV: http://www.drjudithreisman.com/about_dr_reisman.html#cv

Academic Positions held by Dr Reisman.

Adjunct faculty, George Mason University, 1990

Research Full Professor, The American University, 1983-85

Asst./Assoc. Prof. (Martze) University of Haifa, Israel, 1981-83

Special Note:

In 2003 The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction Inc, based at Indiana University and founded in 1947, issued a very limited response to Dr Reisman’s serious allegations against Dr Alfred Kinsey:

See: http://www.indiana.edu/~kinsey/about/contro-03.html

If you doubt Reisman’s allegations, check out the facts in Kinsey’s own work Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) p. 180. If you do not have access to a copy see www.drjudithreisman.org

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2006/09/pornographys_li.html

Would you try to put out a fire with gasoline?

No? Then you might disagree with an MSNBC online article, "Porn: Good for America !" by Glenn Reynolds, a University of Tennessee law professor. Reynolds suggests that pornography reduces rape!

As proof, Reynolds quotes a U.S. Department of Justice [DOJ] claim that in 2004 rape of "people" over age 12 radically decreased with an "85 percent decline in the per-capita rape rate since 1979" (DOJ’s National Crime Victimization Survey of "thousands of respondents 12 and older").

But the FBI also estimates that "34 percent of female sex assault victims" are "under age 12" (National Incident-Based Reporting System, July 2000).

Since the DOJ data excludes rape of children under age 12, child rape may be up 85 percent, for all we know.

Although the FBI and local police departments are now swamped with teachers, police, professors, doctors, legislators, clergy, federal and state bureaucrats, dentists, judges, etc., arrested for child pornography and for abusing children under age 12, the Department of Justice excludes those small victims from its "rape" rates. Why?

Do DOJ, FBI harbor pedophiles?

You have to wonder: Are there pedophiles and other sexual predators in the governmental woodpiles?

When I worked for DOJ’s Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in the 1980s, someone high up killed the order to collect crime-scene pornography as evidence in prosecutions. No Democrat or Republican administration has yet mandated such on-site pornography collections. Whom is DOJ protecting?

Reynolds, writes less like an objective scholar than a pornography defender:

Since 1970 … porn has exploded. … But rape has gone down 85 percent. So much for the notion that pornography causes rape. … [I]t would be hard to explain how rape rates could have declined so dramatically while porn expanded so explosively.

He opines that pornography possibly prevents rape (the old discredited "safe-outlet" theory).

The DOJ’s preposterous "85 percent" decrease in rape ignores the obvious. The U.S. FBI Index of Crime reported a 418 percent increase in "forcible rape" from 1960 to 1999. That fear means we now keep our doors, windows and cars locked. Women seldom walk alone at night. Parents rarely let children go anywhere unaccompanied. Many states let people carry guns for self-defense. Rape Crisis Centers do not report rapes to police. More women perform as sexually required. A conflicting DOJ 2002 report says "almost 25 percent of college women have been victims of rape or attempted rape since the age of 14."

Why don’t the feds call child-rape ‘rape’?
In 1950, 18 states authorized the death penalty for rape; most others could impose a life sentence. Following Alfred Kinsey’s "scientific" advice in 1948, many states redefined "rape" so the crime could be plea-bargained down to a misdemeanor like "sexual misconduct."

Missouri redefined rape to mean 11 different crimes for 11 different sentences, magically lowering "rape" rates. Like all states that have trivialized rape, Missouri relied on the Kinsey-based 1955 American Law Institute Model Penal Code.

"Rape" was eliminated from New Jersey ‘s laws and replaced with a variety of terms during a 1978 penal law revision.

For example, Dr. Linda Jeffrey notes that the charge to which child-molesting teacher Pamela Diehl-Moore pleaded guilty was reduced to a second-tier crime, "sexual assault" – i.e., sexual contact with a victim under 13, or penetration where the "actor" uses physical force or coercion, but the victim doesn’t suffer severe personal injury, or the victim is 16 or 17, with aggravating circumstances, or the victim is 13 to 15 and the "actor" is at least four years older. (Whew!)

Sex criminals copy what porn depicts
DOJ experts should read reports such as "Sex-Related Homicide and Death Investigation" (2003). Former Lt. Comdr. Vernon Geberth says today’s "sex-related cases … are more frequent, vicious and despicable" than anything he experienced in decades as a homicide cop.

In "Journey Into Darkness" (1997), the FBI’s premier serial-rape profiler, John Douglas wrote, "[Serial-rape murders are commonly found] with a large pornography collection, either store-bought or homemade. … our [FBI] research does show that certain types of sadomasochistic and bondage-oriented material can fuel the fantasies of those already leaning in that direction."

In "The Evil That Men Do" (1998), FBI serial-rape-murderer-mutilator profiler Roy Hazelwood quotes one sex killer who tied his victims in "a variety of positions" based on pictures he saw in sex magazines.

"Thrill Killers, a Study of America ‘s Most Vicious Murders," by Charles Linedecker, reports that 81 percent of these killers rated pornography as their primary sexual interest. Dr. W.L. Marshall, in "Criminal Neglect, Why Sex Offenders Go Free" (1990), says based on the evidence, pornography "feeds and legitimizes their deviant sexual tendencies."

In one study of rapists, Gene Abel of the New York Psychiatric Institute cited, "One-third reported that they had used pornography immediately prior to at least one of their crimes." In 1984, the U.S. Attorney General’s Task Force on Family Violence reported, "Testimony indicates that an alarming number of rape and sexual assault offenders report that they were acting out behavior they had viewed in pornographic materials."

More pornography equals more rape of children and women. We need to ask whether Big Government is now selling out to Big Pornography as it did to Big Tobacco for half a century

Source

Article by Dr Judith A. Reisman

September 12, 2006

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2006/09/pornographys_li.html

About Dr. Judith A. Reisman

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/about_dr_reisman.html

Brief CV

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/about_dr_reisman.html#cv