The attached document is perhaps the best piece on the Ritual Abuse Panic and the abuses of CPS. In Loudoun, the agency is grossly incompetent. The article written in 1988 is relevant today in 1988. The article details the close connection between CPS and the therapists they use.  One interesting point, therapists face backlash if they disagree with CPS.

Another note, is that CPS workers act with reckless abandon completely disregarding rules and safeguards. The article comes in two parts. It provides incredible insight to CPS.

Memory and suggestibility , so many legal decisions and professional studies have taken place. However, none have filtered down to Loudoun Child Protective Services. If you take a look at their training material , it is apparent that the latest research i s not included.

To be clear, the typical Loudoun CPS worker more than likely will not understand it. On the other hand , the typical CPS psychologist, will choose to ignore the research.

This is an excellent video from Dr. Michael Yapko that describes the extremes within the  profession of psychology.  Glenney will search out for psychologists that will find abuse no matter what.

The questioning of children, is very technical and should be conducted by highly trained professionals. There are no highly trained professionals within Loudoun County Child Protective Services. The attached study documents how suggestive questioning can alter a child’s responses. ”This study demonstrates that suggestive interviews can dramatically alter children’s reports and recollections of a personal experience with an adult”

I cannot recommend this article enough, Frederick Crews perfectly describes science vs pseudoscience. Repressed memories was a fad in the 80’s and 90’s. It is still today as well, for certain types of therapists. The type of therapist that Sandra Glenney likes to use.

Once your child starts to visit a Glenney type of therapist, the therapist will not stop until a disclosure is obtained.  The repressed memories fad was a boon for Child Protective Services and still is. The problem is Loudoun CPS and Sandra Glenney is still using the literature from the 80’s.

If for one moment, you believe that someone of the low caliber of Sandra Glenney is aware of the latest research of any kind ,think again. She is more suited  to practice in a Courtroom in Salem in 1692 than a modern day Courtroom.  The attached document does an excellent job of stating the issues with memory, especially in small children.  This is research, Glenney doesn’t care about research, her type never well. She is a poorly trained attorney , who more than likely really needs her government job.

”Commenting on Dr. Ceci’s findings, Dr. Moscovitch said, ”Young children may be led into concocting memories so easily because their frontal lobes are immature. Until age 7 or 8, children respond to neurological tests like adults with frontal lobe damage.”

The article reflects research conducted in the 90’s. This type of research put an end to the Satanic Panic of the 80’s. Glenney simply cannot understand it.  The article expertly reports on how malleable memory is and how some very incompetent therapists can contaminate memories. You need to know this research if your are dealing with Glenney.

The attached document is a superb example of how to cross examine Sandra Glenney’s expert witness. Science , your attorney must be well-versed in Science and percentages.

This cross-examination deals with the Child Abuse Accommodation Syndrome.  Glenney and CPS will not use the term in Court, it has been bruised and battered throughout Courtrooms in the US. CPS and Glenney embrace the syndrome wholeheartedly. Take a read , this is exactly what Glenney’s expert witness will testify to.

THE APA has recommended guidelines for interviewing children. It also warns against the possible bias and conflicts of the psychologists involved in the evaluation.

The therapist who testifies for Loudoun County CPS will not follow any of the guidelines. Have your attorney, go through the list one by one with the therapist on the stand. Make them answer the questions and address the guidelines.

Therapists, like Dr Mary Lindahl, pose a dilemma for judges. Should their testimony be  allowed, is their testimony scientifically reliable or is it prejudicial? In the case of Dr. Mary Lindahl, specifically in the case of Monica Zveare, it wasn’t reliable and it was fraudulent.

The attached document is a must read for your attorney. It is comprehensive research on testimony that is allowed and not allowed in sexual abuse cases.  It also provides information on cases that were overturned due to the therapists testimony.

Sandra Glenney probably knows what is allowed and isn’t allowed. So she will take care not push the boundaries of what is allowed. Behind the scenes however . she will be working hand in hand with the therapist to ensure their testimony indicates abuse.

Your attorney should read this guide, he or she needs to be aware of the history of expert testimony , its very checkered history.