Damned if you do, damned if you don't

It seems things were too quiet for Mr. Peet.  He has decided to come after Ms. Linsday for posting on our blog.    

Tarpaulin Sky Press
In an interesting turn of events, "Mrs. X" has attached herself to the Creative Frontiers Schools (CFS) case and become one of its most vocal accusers. In addition to helping with an otherwise anonymous blog, "Doubting CFS," Mrs. X spends her time blogging as "Miss Izzy" at websleuths.com, where she discusses child rape, molestation, and pornography. Since Mrs. X / Miss Izzy joined websleuths in July 2009, the mother of fourteen has made over 9,500 posts on that website alone--i.e., more than 12 posts each and every day, on average, for over two years. Mrs. X's most notable prior endeavor was a horrific child-rape case that she waged against a 14-year-old neighbor, Ryan Smith, after she failed to lodge the same allegations against two unrelated women in years previous. For more information on this tragedy, see the Statement of Facts on the Ryan D. Smith case at the National Center for Reason and Justice , where Ryan's case is one of only a handful selected for sponsorship by the organization who, like the Innocence Project, carefully screens its cases and supports only those in which clear evidence of innocence exists. [links removed] Accused at thirteen years old, Ryan D. Smith of Ashland, OR, would serve ten years for child sex-abuse crimes that never occurred.

Apparently making a guest post talking about your own personal tragedy makes you a "vocal accuser".  Funny enough, I don't see any posts here that are vocally accusing Mr. Adams of any of the allegations.  I love that he takes the time to point out that she is a "mother of fourteen" but then follows by pointing out the number of posts she has made on websleuths.  Ms. Linsday's children are all grown.  Ms. Linsday is suffering from a debilitating illness that leaves her bedridden.  Prior to her illness, Ms. Linsday was an active child advocate.  Since she is subjected to spending most of her time in bed, is it really that scandalous that she has made 12 posts a day over the last 2 years on a website dedicated to raising awareness and finding truths, whatever they may be?

The comments following his facebook page post show the lack of information that the CFS supporters are going on.

Tarpaulin Sky Press aka Christian Peet Links back to Websleuths as "the original "Doubting CFS".  While I am flattered, I hardly think the comparison is valid.  He goes on to link to the NCRJ, which is...well extreme is a nice word.

SJ says:

thanks Christian, people shouldn't say things if they won't put their name on it, that's just not right.

Then CW says

Totally agree with [name removed].

What SJ and CW fail to realize is that Ms. Linsday wrote her post here with her full name, her full story AND the reason why she is referred to as Mrs. X.

CFS supporters, why do you continue to let this man feed your frenzy?  Why do you allow him to lead you to bash people?  I don't get it.

He goes on, because that wasn't enough:

[Name Removed] & [Name Removed]: It's a mindset. "Mrs. X" refused to let her children testify at poor Ryan Smith's appeal--and was cited for contempt of court as a result. Mrs. X (and others like her) feel that people should be able to make false and malicious allegations anonymously, even when those allegations are felonies, and that the accused should not have the right to face their accusers even at trial, even though the sixth amendment guarantees that the accused must be "informed of the nature and cause of the accusation" as well as "confronted with the witnesses."

Yes, poor Ryan Smith.  Not the group of poor children who ALREADY testified publicly years prior.  Yes, how terrible of their mother to want to protect them from that.  No where has she ever said she wishes the allegations to only come from anonymous accusers.  She has used her name.  Her children used THEIR names at the trial.  Yes, she was cited for contempt, but it was not forcing her children to sit in front of their rapist AGAIN and relive their nightmare.

ED then says,

It is just evil to me. Stand up for who YOU are and WHAT you stand for. Do not spread evil. Spread the trueth. I can not even read those blogs most of the time because I can just feel the negatively and what I call just plain evil that I get. They suck your strength and likfe right out of you. Thank you Christian and others who have the strength to dive into these deep abyss of evil and fight for the trueth and what is right.

What?  Really?  Evil?  ED, please enlighten me on how Ms. Linsday has NOT stood up for herself.  What part of protecting your children is "evil"?

PSP adds her two cents.

Indeed Christian, [name removed] and [name removed]! People who post anonymously and hide behind pseudo secret names don't want people to find out who they really are because they have deep dark secrets themselves or are mentally ill and therefore can not and should not be taken seriously. 

Yet again, Ms. Linsday has posted here WITH HER NAME.  If it makes you feel better to think everyone one who questions the craziness that you spew out is mentally ill...then I guess you do what you have to do to get through the day.  I think it speaks more for you than it does for me or anyone who has ever posted or commented on this blog.

Peet adds in:  

[name removed]: Of course one of the many ironies is that the National Center for Reason and Justice, as well as myself, refer to "Mrs. X," as such, in an effort to spare her fourteen children, who have already suffered enough.

Oh Peet, did you forget the lawsuit that was lobbied against the NCRJ that REQUIRED them to removed the family's names?  It wasn't some offer of generosity on the part of you or the NCRJ.  Before that, all the children's names were publicly listed.  It was because their parents were trying to protect them.  Mr. and Mrs. Linsday were the reason the names were removed.  To pretend like they have been left out intentionally as some act of kindness is an outright lie.

In all seriousness, what can attempting to discredit this woman do to help Mr. Adams?  She hasn't spoken out publicly against him.  She isn't accusing him of anything.  She has only come on to Doubting CFS to share her own story and to share how Christian Peet has negatively affected her life.  Please CFS supporters.  This is Mr. Peet bringing you all in to his personal vendettas against families of victims that he feels "wrongly accused" convicted criminals.  Don't buy into it.  I KNOW you are all smarter than that.

Right before I published this post, I received an email from Ms. Linsday and I wanted to allow her the opportunity to "defend" herself against the claims of Christian Peet.

I'd like to set the record straight. Mr. Peet does not have the full facts of our trial and he surely has no knowledge of what went on in our home. No member of our family ever testified at any appeal. Witnesses were not called. It was all handled by attorneys for the State and the defense. We and all our thousands of pages of personal records were subpoenaed by the attorneys for Ryan's Post Conviction Relief (PCR) trial, however. This is a trial where a convicted person can civilly sue (at the state's expense) their attorneys for poor representation. I realize that it seems extremely shocking but in many states (Oregon was included--but no more), the convicted person could call their victims to testify FOR their defense and can subpoena all personal documents generated after a conviction. This is what we railed against. We had done everything that the DA, the police and the Children's Advocacy Center asked of us in 1998-99. Our children testified. Ryan was readily convicted of 12 counts. Those counts have never changed. He failed at the appeal and that was affirmed by the Oregon State Supreme Court.

Nine years after the sexual abuse and rapes, our children (who were then all young adults) were subpoenaed to testify at the PCR. I decided, for the very first time in my life, to say "no" to a judge, with the knowledge of the Attorney General's office. I offered to be jailed in contempt of court as I felt that we'd worked too hard on healing and had come too far to go back to square one. Our children were going out into the world and we didn't have the luxury of more time to help them heal. The judge told me that she was only following Oregon law by allowing the subpoenas. That's the moment we knew that the law needed to be changed. At that time, we hired a private attorney and another attorney worked pro bono. A Writ of Mandamus was handed down by the Supreme Court barring Ryan's attorneys from using any of the personal records but they had already received them. As a sidenote, we have yet to receive those boxes of private records back, even though we formally requested them. These were our family's financial, medical, therapy and school records and personal diaries and jotted notes--up to the date of the PCR trial--nine years after the convictions. My husband and I spent weeks with the Attorney General's office making certain that everything was turned over to the judge. Nothing was held back.

As far as one of our children making allegations against two previous foster parents, that happened long before the charges against Ryan Smith, in fact before the child came to us and in a different state. Those disclosures were made to therapists when the child was hospitalized and to two separate state caseworkers. They were also shared with my husband and me and an older sibling much later. I've been told that they were not the only allegations against those foster parents. The two foster parents were flown in by Ryan's defense team to testify that our son had a history of lying. I guess the judge chose to believe our son instead of those witnesses. Those allegations had nothing to do with me nor does some of the out of context testimony on the NCRJ site. The questions I faced about physically punishing my child were discovered to have been directed at a prior foster mother. Please, get your facts straight. I was never accused nor charged with harming any child. Please note that there were NO charges brought against any of our children concerning sexual abuse of a sibling. The children were questioned on the stand as to who abused them and they were clear. It was not a sibling. It was Ryan Smith.

When we stated that we would not provide the children for deposition for the PCR, the judge chose not to jail me on contempt charges but instead imposed a stiff daily fine on us for every day we failed to produce our children for deposition. We negotiated a safe location and were assured, in writing, that Ryan Smith would not be present. Imagine our shock when the first child entered the room and Ryan was sitting in the room, laughing. There was some talk about setting a potted plant in front of him so his rape victims could not see his face but my husband made the wise choice to immediately leave with our children. Another negotiation took place and we agreed to have our children deposed at the Children's Advocacy Center in Medford, OR a few days before Christmas and the same week as a grandchild's birth. We insisted that a child therapist be present and that either me or my husband could sit in the room to support the children. We were not allowed to speak. Ryan was present by speaker phone and was held at the Jackson County Jail during the depositions. Several months went by and we were subpoenaed again to the actual Post Conviction Relief trial where we had to personally encounter Ryan. It was not a pleasant task for the children who had been victimized by this man. He was now full grown and it unnerved his victims greatly that he stared at them and laughed with his guards and attorneys. The trial lasted two days. Within two months we learned that the PCR had failed. Ryan went on to petition Governor Kulongoski for clemency. That request was denied. He served out the maximum time, ten years, and was released on his 25th birthday in June 2009. We went on to help change the laws concerning victims rights and PCR trials. At that time, the NCRJ site had our children's full names and our address publicly displayed. That is why when we testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee concerning the law change that the children agreed with the Attorney General that their names could be used. One of our sons even got up and spoke.

I fail to see why Ryan Smith's trial and my personal life and daily activities are of such interest to Mr. Peet or to the supporters of the Creative Frontiers School. As for Websleuths, I have one primary goal. I wish to start a thread (using my screen name, Missizzy) on every pedophile in the helping professions who is arrested, charged, and convicted of child molestation or the collection, trading or manufacture of child pornography so victims will have some information to research. I want to shine a light on this all too common crime....a crime which robs a child of their innocence and trust and their family of stability and security. Is there something sinister or unsavory about my goal? Does this goal make Mr. Peet uncomfortable in some way? I carefully manage my threads and cycle through about 200 open cases each week with updates. I am especially careful to note if someone is found innocent, charges are dropped or if there has been a recantation. False allegations are cruel and reputations must be rebuilt. I try my best to get the word out on cases such as this. If Mr. Adams is found innocent or if charges are dropped, you can be certain that I will post that to Websleuths. I find it ironic that I didn't even start the Websleuths thread on the CFS closure. Some other poster did and as far as I know, one can post under one name only. I chose Websleuths, specifically, as it has a high level of moderation and no name calling is allowed. It does not surprise me in the least that I've posted 12 daily posts on average over the last two years. To be clear, hundreds of my posts are on two threads--those of Dr. Earl Bradley, a pediatrician who raped and filmed the rapes of 105 of his young patients and that of the Mohler men of Missouri, accused of multi-generational incest involving a family of ministers and the young children. I, however, have no television, no visitors, no outings. I live in total isolation. My children are grown. I am no longer able to take on speaking engagements or lobbying positions so this is it for me. Believe me, if I didn't have fragile health, I'd be out speaking on this issue and many others dear to my heart. When I am not posting on Websleuths, I am reading, researching, writing journal articles or caring for my pets. Is it really necessary for me to provide a daily schedule so that Mr. Peet and the CFS supporters can debate the valuable use of my time? I am 56 years old and believe myself to be a decent and caring person. It makes me happy to be able to assist a victim in finding some closure when they've been hurt by a pedophile. I do this for one reason only. My children were hurt and I've been privy to their path to healing. For some reason, I get more private messages from men than I do women, asking for help and information. Maybe that's because I have so many sons who are survivors.

Concerning the DoubtingCFS blog, you will note that I clearly signed my name to my guest post. It is correct that I have fourteen children but you'll note that my children never differentiate as to who was a victim and who was not. They are also adults who read my post before I posted it. I have NEVER used any of their names on WS but each knows that I post about child molestation and child pornography. Is there anything else that you'd like to know about me? I could share details of my illness, my political views, the breeds of my rescue pets, my favorite type of wine. How is this pertinent to the case at hand? Mr. Peet has my personal email address if he'd like to ask me more personal questions. He has the names of the detectives and DA who handled our case. If he has important information for them, I urge him to contact them. Has anyone asked themselves just what Mr. Peet plans to do about our children's abuse allegations from 1998 and Ryan Smith's conviction of 1999? I hardly think these issues have any bearing on the charges against Robert Adams.

I have never spoken a single accusatory or cruel word about Ryan Smith or his family. I've tried to never even think them. When I write about him or his crimes, I assume that he and his family might read my words. I try my best to be factual, fair and measured and to only write about our experiences from our viewpoint. I have a great deal of interest in what causes pedophilia and child sexual abuse and what societal changes might assist us in fighting it. I also have a great deal of empathy and pity for the Ryan as I suspect that he has suffered some terrible trauma of his own. I am a dedicated pacifist and I absolutely refuse to be mean spirited or to try to bring pain into anyone's life. Even in the midst of an emotionally charged school shut-down and trial, I fail to see how unkind words or outright lies serve any purpose. To wit, from a CFS FB post by Mr. Peet today:

>> Even if it was partly their testimony that put an innocent kid in prison (and cover up the actual abuse they were suffering in their own home), they certainly had no idea what they were doing.


What makes Mr. Peet think that he knows some "elusive truth"? How can he possibly say that Ryan Smith is innocent when the judicial system of the State of Oregon, and even our governor, says otherwise? How cruel to accuse our family of sexually abusing our own children. How cruel to say that our children "had no idea what they were doing". The judge surely didn't agree with that theory. He personally questioned each child to certify them fit to testify. Trust me, when you go through a sexual abuse investigation, your family keeps no secrets.

Please stop for a moment and ponder these questions. If your children clearly disclosed sexual abuse to the police, their doctor and to you and your spouse and succinctly named their abuser, would you stand by them over the years and refuse to bend under the pressure of hate? Is hatred and disbelief, even in the face of full convictions, really the way we want to treat children who honestly and humbly make these life-changing disclosures? The life of a victim is not one to envy. It's a long road to survivorship.

I'm left wondering, is Mr. Peet somehow connected to Ryan Smith? Is Ryan Smith or Christian Peet somehow connected to Creative Frontiers School or the Adams family?

So CFS supporters, would anyone still like to accuse Ms. Linsday of having ulterior motives?  Of not caring for her children?  Of being "evil" or "mentally ill"?  Would anyone like to comment on the use of her time?  You know, I'm pretty sure being alone, on bedrest has to be pretty boring.  12 posts a day?  To someone who has to live in isolation in a bed due to her debilitating illness....do you all REALLY want to criticize how she spends her time?

So which is it?  You want people to give you their real names, or you want to criticize those who do?