Sandusky attorneys request in camera review of psychologist's records

[francofan]

In a filing today, Sandusky's lawyers have requested an in camera review of psychologist - patient records where the alleged accusers claimed to have repressed memories of the abuse.

Testimony at trial by D.S., J.S., B.S.H, and Z.K. as well as after-discovered evidence from D.S. and Matt Sandusky demonstrate that the accusers in this matter were able to recall allegations of sexual abuse based on therapy and they have stated that they blocked out or repressed their memory of abuse.

Sandusky is his most recent petition made a request that the PCRA Court conduct an in camera review with Dr. Simpson of Mr. Gillum's therapy notes with Aaron Fisher as well as with any other relevant notes of other therapists engaged by the accusers to assist in recovering memories of abuse.

The accusers in this matter delayed reporting allegations of sexual abuse, underwent therapy, changed their allegations based on therapy, and stated that therapy enabled them to remember sexual abuse.

Pursuant to Commonwealth v. T.J.W. (114 A 38 1098 PA Super 2015), at the very least an in camera review by the PCRA Court of certain therapy records of DS's therapist and Michael Gillum is appropriate to determine if there is material that further supports the evidence already provided to Mr. Sandusky to contest the reliability (not credibility) of the memories of the accusers. Since the psychologist - patient privilege does not preclude such review, and Mr. Sandusky cannot otherwise discover this evidence, he has shown exceptional circumstances warranting the PCRA Court review requested.

Allegations based on discredited repressed memory therapy made up a significant part of the case against Sandusky. IMO, Judge Cleland should absolutely take the steps requested to determine if these allegation based on repressed memory are even remotely reliable. If he denies the requested review, I would expect a prompt appeal to Superior Court.

http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SANDUSKY BRIEF IN CAMERA REVIEW OF THERAPY NOTES.pdf

 

[Rip_E_2_Joe_PA]

It is a remarkable fact that many of the techniques used in restoring the memories of someone's experiences that have been repressed are also the same techniques that are used in brainwashing. Therein lies The Dilemma for the entire adversarial legal system. There have been cases although rare, where courts have reexamined the records of these memory restoring proceedings and where the courts have found them to be brainwashing rather than restoring actual human memories. I seriously doubt that this applies in this case but for the process these records should definitely be examined.

 

[francofan]

I don't doubt that it happened in this case and I think that Matt Sandusky is the prime example. I think that it also very likely happened in the case of AF and DS. An in camera review of the psychologists notes could shed some light for some of the accusations on whether the abuse actually happened or if it was a figment of the accuser's imagination.

 

[nits74]

In a filing today, Sandusky's lawyers have requested an in camera review of psychologist - patient records where the alleged accusers claimed to have repressed memories of the abuse.

Testimony at trial by D.S., J.S., B.S.H, and Z.K. as well as after-discovered evidence from D.S. and Matt Sandusky demonstrate that the accusers in this matter were able to recall allegations of sexual abuse based on therapy and they have stated that they blocked out or repressed their memory of abuse.

Sandusky is his most recent petition made a request that the PCRA Court conduct an in camera review with Dr. Simpson of Mr. Gillum's therapy notes with Aaron Fisher as well as with any other relevant notes of other therapists engaged by the accusers to assist in recovering memories of abuse.

The accusers in this matter delayed reporting allegations of sexual abuse, underwent therapy, changed their allegations based on therapy, and stated that therapy enabled them to remember sexual abuse.

Pursuant to Commonwealth v. T.J.W. (114 A 38 1098 PA Super 2015), at the very least an in camera review by the PCRA Court of certain therapy records of DS's therapist and Michael Gillum is appropriate to determine if there is material that further supports the evidence already provided to Mr. Sandusky to contest the reliability (not credibility) of the memories of the accusers. Since the psychologist - patient privilege does not preclude such review, and Mr. Sandusky cannot otherwise discover this evidence, he has shown exceptional circumstances warranting the PCRA Court review requested.

Allegations based on discredited repressed memory therapy made up a significant part of the case against Sandusky. IMO, Judge Cleland should absolutely take the steps requested to determine if these allegation based on repressed memory are even remotely reliable. If he denies the requested review, I would expect a prompt appeal to Superior Court.

http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SANDUSKY BRIEF IN CAMERA REVIEW OF THERAPY NOTES.pdf

Admittedly, I don't know much about this. But, it's very hard for me to believe that anyone can be convicted of any crime based on this sort of thing alone. Throw in a financial incentive in this case, and then talk about reasonable doubt. Geez.