PTSD is an argument that Glenney and her expert witness will use to convince the court that abuse has occurred. In other states, cities and counties the Courts value research but not so much in Loudoun.  There are judges who sit on the bench in Loudoun that will abandon their responsibility and adopt the opinion of the expert witness. Dr. Mary Lindahl, is quick to assign a diagnosis of PTSD but fails to testify to the truth in cases of false allegations.  In the Ballard case, the conviction was overturned due to the testimony of Dr. Richard Luscomb.

The defendant’s final issue for review is whether the trial court erred in admitting the expert testimony of Dr. Richard Luscomb. Dr. Luscomb’s testimony concerned symptoms of post-traumatic stress syndrome exhibited by victims of child sexual abuse and that the children he interviewed from the Georgian Hills Day Care Center exhibited these symptoms.¹ The defendant objects to the expert testimony on the grounds that there is no reliable scientific basis for the syndrome and that this jurisdiction does not recognize the syndrome as a reliable and generally accepted concept in the medical community to diagnose child sexual abuse. The issue is one of first impression for this Court. However, the Court of Criminal Appeals has consistently found such testimony inadmissible in sexual abuse trials and this Court has consistently denied permission to appeal in those cases. See, State v. Dickerson, 789 S.W.2d 566(Tenn. Cr.App. 1990); State v. Schimpf, 782 S.W.2d 186 (Tenn.Cr.App. 1989); State v. Myers, 764 S.W.2d 214 (Tenn.Cr.App. 1988).   Y

The PTSD argument is an old trick, discredit in many municipalities but not Loudoun. The fact the Lindahl withheld so much information for so many years discredits her as an witness.   The Judges in Loudoun may not be that savvy to the tricks and semantics of Glenney and Lindahl.