Rascals case in brief
In the beginning, in 1989, more than 90 children at the Little Rascals Day Care Center in Edenton, North Carolina, accused a total of 20 adults with 429 instances of sexual abuse over a three-year period. It may have all begun with one parent’s complaint about punishment given her child.
Among the alleged perpetrators: the sheriff and mayor. But prosecutors would charge only Robin Byrum, Darlene Harris, Elizabeth “Betsy” Kelly, Robert “Bob” Kelly, Willard Scott Privott, Shelley Stone and Dawn Wilson – the Edenton 7.
Along with sodomy and beatings, allegations included a baby killed with a handgun, a child being hung upside down from a tree and being set on fire and countless other fantastic incidents involving spaceships, hot air balloons, pirate ships and trained sharks.
By the time prosecutors dropped the last charges in 1997, Little Rascals had become North Carolina’s longest and most costly criminal trial. Prosecutors kept defendants jailed in hopes at least one would turn against their supposed co-conspirators. Remarkably, none did. Another shameful record: Five defendants had to wait longer to face their accusers in court than anyone else in North Carolina history.
Between 1991 and 1997, Ofra Bikel produced three extraordinary episodes on the Little Rascals case for the PBS series “Frontline.” Although “Innocence Lost” did not deter prosecutors, it exposed their tactics and fostered nationwide skepticism and dismay.
With each passing year, the absurdity of the Little Rascals charges has become more obvious. But no admission of error has ever come from prosecutors, police, interviewers or parents. This site is devoted to the issues raised by this case.
On Facebook
Little Rascals Day Care Case
This Facebook page is an offshoot of littlerascalsdaycarecase.org, which addresses the wrongful prosecution of the Edenton Seven and other such victims.
Meanwhile in Edenton....
This content isn't available right now
When this happens, it's usually because the owner only shared it with a small group of people, changed who can see it or it's been deleted.0 CommentsComment on Facebook
Allies for our cause!
This content isn't available right now
When this happens, it's usually because the owner only shared it with a small group of people, changed who can see it or it's been deleted.0 CommentsComment on Facebook
The courts have a long history of capriciously pulling the rug out from under Junior's appeals, but maybe this time....
This content isn't available right now
When this happens, it's usually because the owner only shared it with a small group of people, changed who can see it or it's been deleted.0 CommentsComment on Facebook
Click for earlier Facebook posts archived on this site
Click to go to
Today’s random selection from the Little Rascals Day Care archives….
When did Little Rascals myth become lie?
Nov. 23, 2012
“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth – persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.”
– John F. Kennedy
Viewed most generously, Little Rascals therapists and prosecutors fell for and promulgated the myth. But when they obstinately refused to consider ever-growing evidence to the contrary, they ended up defending the lie.
Forensic evaluator or therapist? A distinction not made
March 23, 2012
“A given professional must undertake either a forensic examination or therapy, not both, with any given child.
“The roles of forensic evaluator and ongoing therapist are different. The forensic evaluator must not become an advocate for the child, a role often difficult to avoid when one is an ongoing therapist.
“For this reason the American Psychological Association’s Guidelines for Psychological Evaluations in Child Protection Matters (1999) holds, ‘Psychologists generally do not conduct psychological evaluations in child protection matters in which they serve in a therapeutic role for the child or the immediate family or have had other involvement that may compromise
their objectivity.’ ”
– From “A Behavior Analytic Look at Contemporary Issues in the Assessment of Child
Sexual Abuse” by W. Joseph Wyatt in The Behavior Analyst Today (March 22, 2007)
By serving enthusiastically as agents of the prosecution, Betty Robertson, Judy Abbott, Susan Childers and Michele Zimmerman not only ignored that crucial ethical distinction, but also fostered psychological havoc where there had been none.
Some journals getting better at correcting mistakes
March 9, 2017
“As a result of complaints, [scientific] journals have been posting notices of problems with Dr. [Carlo] Croce’s papers at a quickening pace. From just a handful of notices before 2013 – known as corrections, retractions and editors’ notices – the number has ballooned to at least 20, with at least three more on the way, according to journal editors….”
– From “Years of Ethics Charges, but Star Cancer Researcher Gets a Pass” by James Glanz and Agustin Armendariz in the New York Times (March 8)
Yet another example of professional journals responding with new vigor to faulty articles.
By contrast, no retraction has ever appeared in those journals that lent credence to testimony by the prosecution’s expert witnesses during the day-care panic. Or perhaps some author or editor still wants to defend the likes of “Stress Responses of Children to Sexual Abuse and Ritualistic Abuse in Day Care Centers” and “Satanic Ritual Abuse: A Cause of Multiple Personality Disorder”?
Retirement looms for Rubenstein, who detected scam
Feb. 26, 2016
“What a waste it would be to force Bucks County (Pa.) Judge Alan Rubenstein from the bench. At 70, he remains sharp and vibrant, a jurist of impeccable credentials with vast institutional knowledge of Bucks County, not to mention historic accomplishments.
“As district attorney, Rubenstein tried more cases than any prosecutor in county history. And he was the only county DA to be elected four times, a measure of how well he did the job and how much voters trusted and appreciated him. Indeed, they rewarded him with a seat on the county bench, a post Rubenstein continues to relish and is in no hurry to relinquish.
“Yet, Rubenstein and every judge across the state faces mandatory retirement at age 70… unless voters extend the mandatory retirement age (to 75)….”
– From “Sound judgment: Too soon to retire,” editorial in the Bucks County Courier Times (Feb. 23) cached here
“No tribute to Judge Alan Rubenstein is complete without mentioning his wise and courageous decision not to pursue charges in the Breezy Point Day School case in 1990…. Countless other prosecutors across the nation fell hard for the ‘satanic ritual abuse’ moral panic, but Judge Rubenstein kept his head, investigated thoroughly and protected Bucks County from the nightmare that befell towns such as Manhattan Beach, Calif., and Edenton, N.C.”
— From my letter to the editor of the Courier Times (Feb. 26)
Unless Pennsylvania voters approve that referendum on the April 26 ballot, Rubenstein’s valuable service will be limited to fill-in duty.
Some septuagenarian judges, of course, should stay retired.