PART 2 - 1.7 MIL AWARDED TO KELLERS BY D.A. RUBBERSTAMPED EXONERATION; MEDIA PUSHES "WITCH-HUNT" NARRATIVE, SRA/TRAFFICKING/PEDOGATE DENIAL



VieBleu







Part 1 of this article examines how a propaganda narrative is artfully manufactured and sold, overturning the truth and spinning gold from offal. It details the gross malfeasance of the media in reporting on the Fran and Dan Keller child sexual assault case and trial - especially that of reporter Jordan Smith who acted as advocate and champion of the Kellers in the media for years without rebuttal. Smith went so far as to pull in a high level team of defense lawyers in 2010 who worked for free for years to get the Kellers freed and then exonerated with the wave of a pen from a newly elected and installed Texas D.A. This paved the way for the Kellers to retire this year as millionaires at taxpayer expense.

Along the way Part 1 examines many eye-popping elements of the Keller case that are now being swept under the rug including:

1) Fran's confession to aggravated child sexual assault and Fran's brother's conviction for similar crimes

2) The confession of a local Deputy who implicated several adults in "beer and sex" parties at Fran's Day Care involving sex with children

3) The Kellers' attempt to flee the country in disguise before arrest

4) Media omissions regarding how Fran's Day Care was run, including being frequently locked to visitors and not open to parents, and many disturbing reports of children returned in the wrong underwear and clothing

5) Reporter Jordan Smith's withholding of 1/3 of the police report from the public, despite accusing the police of wanting to keep it secret. She crowed about fighting to get the report and obtaining full and unredacted access for herself

6) Major misrepresentations and falsehoods about the police report, the police investigation, and the children's testimony before and during trial, which were picked up by online and network media outlets and echoed uncritically as "truth"

7) The Kellers painted as struggling victims for public sympathy, despite being granted millions of dollars and having received free legal representation and de facto media public relations for years

8) The fact that the Kellers never actually faced a "witch hunt" of SRA charges - they were charged only with 1 count of aggravated child sexual assault. It was the Kellers' own defense team that cynically introduced accusations of satanic abuse into the trial.

Part 2 deals with major aspects of the case outside of the media circus - the D.A. that freed the couple and the expert testimony that was whittled away by defense lawyers to overturn the conviction in Texas' most famous Satanic Panic case. Finally, we take a look at what impact The Keller Effect will have and the larger agenda.

Note - I have sometimes used initials to refer to a source. For example (CW) refers to the Cartwright article from Texas Monthly, linked at the bottom of the article in "Sources".

KELLER CONVICTION/RELEASE TIMELINE - (CW, AC 09, INT)

1992 - Kellers convicted by jury, sentenced to 48 years each.

1993 - Fran divorces Dan in jail on promises of marriage from "a jailhouse lawyer".

1994 - 07 Fran switches her religion from Baptist to "Native America" which gets her into "a less brutal prison unit". She marries a Denver man she meets online who hires a Houston lawyer for her.

2007 - Fran makes a written confession to parole board "confessing the guilt she had always denied" (CW) - that she was guilty of the sexual assault of a child in her care.

2010 - Jordan Smith convinces high powered Texas defense attorney Keith Hampton to take on the Keller case pro bono.

2013 - Jan - Key witness for prosecution Dr. Mouw, who lives and works in Texas, signs an affidavit recanting his expert trial testimony. This recantation is accepted uncritically as a filed document, without retrial or cross examination.

Nov - Fran Keller freed on bond in an appeal to Texas' highest court after 21 years in prison

Dec - Dan Keller released. First attempt at exoneration: 9 judge jury declines motion to find Dan and Fran Keller "actually innocent", saying their decision was based on the findings of the trial judge “and this court’s independent review of the record.” Fran moves in with her daughter, later moves into a rented house with Dan. (No word about what ever happened to her jailhouse husband.)

2015 - May Second attempt at exoneration: The state’s highest criminal court again declines to find Dan and Fran Keller "actually innocent".

2015- June - Third attempt at exoneration: In another appeal, the court again refuses to reconsider last month’s ruling on the Keller's innocence. Clearly in the eyes of 9 experienced Texas judges, the Kellers are not "actually innocent".

2016 - April Kellers gofundme opened with an appeal to residents of Austin and Travis County to send them money because citizens "share responsibility for the unjust prosecution pursued in their names".

2017 - June Newly ensconced Travis County District Attorney Margaret Moore announces a judge granted her motion to dismiss charges against Dan and Fran Keller in one of Austin’s most infamous court cases. Moore said in part, “Given the current state of the law on actual innocence and the evidence remaining in this case, I believe this to be a just outcome.” (KVUE news and Austin-American Statesman) The Kellers can now never be retried.

TRIAL, RELEASE AND "ACTUAL INNOCENCE"

After a six day trial, a Texas jury had delivered a unanimous guilty verdict in the Fran's Day Care case. One reluctant juror said later it was the testimony of Deputy Doug Perry that had decided it for him. Perry declared his innocence on the stand, but under cross-examination his retracted confession was introduced, in which he admitted to assaulting children along with Dan and Fran and other law enforcement friends at "sex and beer parties" at the Kellers home where Fran's day care operation was run. A polygraph expert had testified that Perry was lying when he said he didn’t know "what went on" at Fran’s Day Care. (CW)

Fran proclaimed her innocence at the trial as well. “On the witness stand, I told them that the little girl [Christina] was a liar and a manipulator, and the prosecutor jumped me and said, ‘Don’t you think it’s an uneven match, a forty-year-old woman taking on an emotionally disturbed child?’ Let me tell you something. I was as scared as that child. It was my life and my husband’s life they were ruining. We have lost everything we ever owned or cared about because of that little girl.” (CW)

Sadly, there were other children showing signs of abuse who were not represented by the prosecution in the Keller trial - the one conviction of 48 years of jail time was supposed to cover their interests too. Many were so young they could not speak in complete sentences. Only three children out of over 40 actually testified, but the Kellers faced only 1 charge of aggravated child sexual assault, relying on the physical evidence as provided by Dr. Mouw's emergency room eye witness testimony on the state of Christina's genitals.

Fran and Dan had already hurriedly sold off their home when the police first told them they'd been accused. Fran disguised herself with a bleached blonde hairdo, and they took off for Las Vegas trying to leave the country and evade arrest. They had not been out of police custody since they had been apprehended, brought back in handcuffs, tried and now sentenced to 48 years in prison on the one charge. (CW)

Flashing forward 25 years, in 2017 we find the Kellers have risen from this lowly point to wealth and freedom. Not just freedom, but a full exoneration and much public sympathy and acclaim. The couple are now media favourites and soon-to-be-millionaires. Their gofundme page has a gracious message of hope that "the residents of Austin and Travis County — who share responsibility for the unjust prosecution pursued in their names – will donate generously, to make some small amends to the Kellers." Fran and Dan will also graciously accept money "from people everywhere who wish to partly undo a grave injustice."

Since 2008, reporter Jordan Smith never heeded what the jury believed or what the jury of appeals judges thought in three separate hearings. 100% convinced that the Kellers were innocent, she used her journalism training and her position at the Austin Chronicle like a pulpit to convince the public that she was right in a half dozen articles over several years. In her view, the Kellers were hapless victims of a Satanic Panic fueled by a bad-seed 3 year old girl and a host of adults in the grip of madness, back when nobody knew any better. Children reported awful things about Fran's Day Care because, basically, their parents, therapists and the police talked them into it.

However, an earlier reporter looked at the case and found there were some involved who did not think the devil made the Kellers do it - "Assistant District Attorney Bryan Case conceded that Fran and Dan may have faked the ritual part to conceal and confuse their true intentions, but he believes that the children were abused. His belief is supported in part by the children’s bizarre “acting out” behavior in the summer and fall of 1991. Although the Chaviers girl and the Staelin boy had previously demonstrated behavioral problems, the problems appeared to have greatly intensified after the children started at Fran’s Day Care." (CW) Even the investigating police officer (Wade) that was initially overwhelmed and sceptical of the Satanic reports "believed that some abuse had taken place." (AC 09), and from the same '09 article, "...Vijay Staelin, now 21, declined to be interviewed, except to briefly reiterate that Fran and Danny Keller had abused him."

THE NEW D.A.s BOSS MOVE

Despite all this, today everything is looks rosy for the Kellers. Newly minted Texas District Attorney Margaret Moore restaffed the Travis County "Conviction Integrity Unit" this year, and soon declared she personally believed the Kellers to be "actually innocent", paving the way for the couple to retire comfortably on $1.7 million of taxpayers money - the Kellers earned about $80,000 a year for every year they served in jail, and graduated from prison with no legal debts.

Conviction Integrity Units (CIUs) are a phenomenon that began in Texas around a decade ago and have become established in several states. They began mainly to as a way to formally review convictions where new methods and advanced technology could be applied, such as DNA matching. They are especially useful in cases where someone was picked out of a line up, was poor and could not mount much of a defense. The CIU in Moore's district started up in 2007, though it was referred to in recent articles as "nascent" because Moore made major changes upon taking office in what was called "a shakeup."

The established norm for CIUs is to scrutinize cases very carefully, especially in cases requesting exoneration, which require a higher standard of review according to this guideline. (see pg. 48-9)

So did D.A. Moore get elected on a platform of using the CIU to overturn previous convictions? Turns out no. Quite wisely, Moore did not run on a platform of exonerating old pedophilia assault cases and helping newly freed convicts to millions from the county Treasury - as that might not have been a big hit with voters. Instead, on the ballot Moore promised to restore funds for something called a "Public Integrity Unit" which would go after politicians doing bad things.

So why did D.A. Moore decide to make her first high profile action one that helped out the already freed Kellers, in the process overturning three previous decisions of the Texas high criminal courts? Was it a no-brainer, in her mind? A slam dunk? She states that she reviewed trial transcripts and appeals transcripts, the latter of which were entirely arguments for the defense. In a report on "Establishing Conviction Integrity Programs" I found this - "Motions claiming actual innocence, newly discovered evidence that bears on innocence, or other “red flags will be forwarded to a trial division supervisor in the bureau that handled the case and will be reviewed with particular scrutiny." (Pg 46)

Did Moore use particular scrutiny in the Keller decision? I believe Moore did not file her motion after "particular scrutiny" but instead based her belief in the Keller's innocence on the prevailing false idea that SRA cannot be real. This idea has been propagated by the media, especially in Texas, as detailed throughout Part 1 of this article. If Moore had other connections who encouraged her to make exonerating the Kellers her first act in office, I am not aware of them, but it would be worth a look and I encourage readers of this article to do so.

How did Moore make this momentus decision? It was reported by the Daily Mail that Moore did not consider the prosecution's case when issuing an exoneration: (scroll to video at bottom of article and use the following timestamps)

2:27 Keith Hampton (the Keller's pro bono defense attorney for 6 years) says - "There's really no bitterness from Dan. There still is from Fran, Fran is going to have a tougher time getting over this."

Keith Hampton (the Keller's pro bono defense attorney for 6 years) says - "There's really no bitterness from Dan. There still is from Fran, Fran is going to have a tougher time getting over this." 2:42 - Reporter, Daily Mail, says "In making her decision the District Attorney told me she didn't analyse the reasoning of the prosecutors , or how the jury believed such outlandish accusations." and

- Reporter, Daily Mail, says "In making her decision , or how the jury believed such outlandish accusations." and "despite the fact that "the mother of the victim still believes that her daughter was abused..." 3:34

Her decision seems to be based not on solid DNA evidence like most CIU decisions, but solely on the recantation of the prosecution's key witness Dr. Mouw more than a decade after he testified. This recantation allowed D.A. Moore to say -

1. No credible evidence exists today that inculpates the defendants.

2. I believe them to be actually innocent under the law.

Pay attention to the lawyer speak involved - "credible evidence" means that in effect Moore has single-handedly thrown out all the trial testimony of the children, parents, therapists, law enforcement, and the confession of Deputy Perry as "not credible" based on her opinion. Her personal decision in this case also means the Kellers will never be retried.

So once a conviction occurs, IF there is enough will power, free lawyering, and public good will, the defense may begin filing appeals that can go on for years and years, chipping away at evidence as witnesses grow cold, law enforcement officials retire, and key witnesses presumably can grow weary of the intrusion into their lives. The defense now has a well defined target - call into question X and presto, years later the jury got it all wrong.

Could there be any agenda at work here?





THE DOCTOR RECANTED - NOT COMPLETELY, JUST ENOUGH

Is it even possible that the recantation of Dr. Michael Mouw - the key to the Kellers' freedom and a major vindication of the witch-hunt narrative - was a miscarriage of justice? It is important to note that this reversal - well over a decade after the trial - was a simple court filing of a statement that was accepted without scepticism. As part of an appeals process there was no serious cross examination by anyone defending the interests of the girl whose hymen he had examined.

Led by Smith's reporting, the media all repeat the same story - Mouw says he was inexperienced, he didn't know what he was looking at, and the new normal now is that little girls are born with torn and lacerated hymens. Slate puts it this way - "At the time he examined her, he said during a hearing about the Kellers’ appeal in August, he was an inexperienced emergency-room doctor who had little direct experience with or training to handle pediatric sexual abuse cases; subsequent research showed Christy’s “lacerations” were simply a natural formation of her genitalia."

Ironically, even though the Keller trial was supposed to embody the very height of the so-called "Panic!", you would not know it by looking at the case introduced by the state. The Keller prosecution relied mostly on the sober physical evidence of Dr. Mouw's testimony - too heavily in fact. Whether it is the truth or not, it is the defense team's job to throw doubt on the testimony of key witnesses. Getting the good doctor to doubt his own opinion would lead to a big pay off in appeals - without that one piece of physical evidence, the jury's verdict could be overturned with an amenable judge or D.A.

We know that Smith contacted and interviewed Dr. Mouw during the years of her advocacy of the Keller's innocence starting in 2008. Swimming against the tide of the media's witch-hunt narrative starting with the earlier Cartwright article in Texas Monthly might have felt like a foolish prospect. Publicity regarding his testimony might have proven professionally embarrassing as well, even a possible detriment to employment or advancement in some circles. Years had passed and it must have been clear to the doctor that he had become involved in a case that certain parties were never going to let go of. Was there any way for the good doctor to save face and go with the flow? Jordan Smith is known to have persuaded Hampton to become the Keller's pro bono attorney. Did she also persuade Dr. Mouw to her cause?

I believe the answer is yes, there is good cause to believe that the doctor bowed to certain soft pressures to save face, recant, and be left alone.

Here are 2 good reasons to cast a critical eye on the motives behind Dr. Mouw's recantation, plus some further thoughts.

1. Dr. Mouw's inexperience has been exaggerated by himself and by the press, as a way to excuse his recantation. In fact Dr. Mouw had a good basis to know sexual abuse on a child's genitals when he saw it. Mouw was neither an entirely green doctor, nor was he unfamiliar with child sexual abuse cases. Christina was not his first, second or even 10th case. "In five years of medical practice, Mouw had evaluated approximately 30 children who were suspected victims of sexual abuse"

2. Dr. Mouw did not, in reality, fully recant. There were TWO forms of damage on Christina's hymen, lacerations and a tear at the back (aside from a third indicator also noted - redness of the minor labia.) Mouw only recanted ONE of these:

"The emergency room doctor found what he believed were TWO physical indications of sexual abuse: “what appeared to be lacerations of the hymen” and “a tear of the posterior fourchette,” a fold of skin on the vagina...when contacted by a newspaper in 2009, the doctor described a revelation that supposedly happened “years after” the trial. We don’t know what year. But according to Dr. Mouw, while attending a professional training seminar, he saw a slide about normal variations in hymens and realized that what he thought had been lacerations in the Keller case were probably innocuous. In 2013, Dr. Mouw filed an affidavit to this effect. Notably, the affidavit does not withdraw his finding of a vaginal tear, which had been the more certain of his original findings…"

That statement and the following ones are by Ross E. Cheit of Brown University who has a Ph.D and law degree from the University of California Berkeley and specializes in questions of ethics, criminal justice, children and public policy. Cheit is possibly the only expert that has looked at Mouw's recantation critically and weighed in on it. (He is addressing Satanic Panic advocate Cathy Young in this quote. You can read more about Young's junk science at Cheit's website, linked here.)

"Recantation” did not negate all of the medical evidence of abuse in the case. As anyone who bothered to read his affidavit can see, Dr. Mouw still admits that the original girl in this case had a tear in her vagina. Cathy Young has dismissed this evidence with the wild assertion that vaginal tears are normal in non-abused children, but virtually all research of “normal” genitals contradicts this claim. The Keller case began with a genital injury that Dr. Mouw does not deny. His “recantation” of the other finding strains credulity. It relies on the claim that Dr. Mouw had a clear recollection of this genital exam many years after he testified that he had absolutely no recollection of the exam.

There is no scientific basis for the claim that genital lacerations occur frequently in non-abused children. Quite the contrary. According to a recent article in Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology: Hepenstall-Heger et al. reported lacerations in prepubertal girls in both penile and digital penetration, but none were found in girls experiencing saddle injuries. Myhre et al. found no lacerations in non-abused 5- and 6-year-old girls. (Price, p. 134).

Ms. Young’s position demonstrates the lengths to which proponents of the witch-hunt narrative will go to deny even the most widely accepted evidence of sexual abuse. Lacerations in children’s genitals are rare, not frequent, and controlled studies conclude that they are not found in non-abused children. Lacerations are “wounds made by tearing” (Heger, Emans, and Muram, p. https://blogs.brown.edu/rcheit/2015/06/03/more-misinformation-about-the-keller-case/)

Further, the defense's argument at trial that Christina in effect raped herself is not probable or likely. It is reported only by Cartwright that during the trial another physician testified it would be "highly unusual" for a child to torture their own genitals by inserting marbles, toys, and crayons as the defense argued, but under cross examination Mouw was forced to admit that if anything is possible, she "could have." (CW)

Finally, Dr. Mouw sounds defeated and even spooked, in my opinion. When Jordan Smith published her interview with Dr. Mouw, he speaks like a medical professional who has been talked out of believing what he saw with his own eyes. "Although Mouw said that he saw something that night that was not "normal to me," he might have been wrong. "This is my long way of saying that I wouldn't touch that [case] with a 10-foot pole now."

No doubt Dr. Mouw was saying then what other experts and professionals are also thinking - these cases are nothing but grief for expert witnesses, and now the widely publicised overturning of the Keller conviction has made testifying on behalf of the prosecution even more unappealing. I call this "The Keller Effect", and it will no doubt have a chilling impact on expert testimony in cases of child sexual abuse in Texas and all over the country. Thanks to these highly celebrated defense lawyers, testifying on behalf of child victims is, more than ever, a truly thankless task and a possible minefield as well.

"ANOTHER MORAL PANIC IS INEVITABLE" - KELLER DEFENSE LAWYER

After getting the Kellers sprung, Keith Hampton received one of two "Lawyer of the Year" awards from the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association (TCDLA). Highly coincidentally Mike Ware, the other lawyer honored that year, had just freed multiple women also convicted of sexually abusing a young girl, which he crowed to the press as a "heroic calling". Both lawyers offered their considerable services over several years for free to all these lucky child sexual assault defendants.

It is interesting that in a state known for a high level of wrongful convictions in death penalty cases, not one but two lawyers were given highest honors in the same year for freeing defendants who faced lesser sentences. Being accused in a "witch-hunt" is worse, apparently, than facing murder charges and being put to death. It is also far more likely to happen to elites, upper class professionals and community leaders such as professors, priests, police, politicians and possibly lawyers.

The TCDLA certainly must reserve it's highest honors for lawyers who inspire awe in the defense community, "heroically" doing the most impossible task. The question is, is it more difficult to free the wrongly convicted, or to free the rightfully convicted?

In 2015, Keller attorney Keith Hampton tried to get the court to enter an opinion reconsidering the Kellers’ guilt, because, as he stated "he knows that another moral panic is inevitable, and when it happens, he wants an opinion on record for legal reference." This is certainly one reason Hampton worked for free for the Kellers for over six years. As they say in Texas, "it never rains, but it pours." Having a sure-fire defense in place for a volley of pizzagate/pedogate type trials would make Hampton the go-to lawyer for the establishment types that are often implicated in child sex assault, porn and trafficking rings. Of course the Keller Effect is a boon to lawyers everywhere who must defend against such charges.

Heroic as he is, Hampton did not have to work alone on this project. The Innocence Project in Texas was also determined to push the Keller Satanic Panic exoneration through. Project general counsel Jeff Blackburn worked for free with Hampton on the Keller case, and stated how determined their group was to see them absolved, "...we have to get through a procedural minefield to get back into court. But we are determined to do so, no matter how much money, time, or energy it takes."

It is a bit strange that Hampton is so convinced there is going to be a new Satanic Panic - perhaps he reads about pedogate on Voat? Otherwise his confidence doesn't make a lot of sense. Prosecutors actually stay completely away from SRA charges these days, no doubt in great part due to the media's push of the witch-hunt theme - what prosecutor wants to sound like he is part of a Salem witch trial?

Unfortunately, the fact that SRA is never prosecuted in courts anymore is often used to "prove" that SRA does not exist and "NEVER HAPPENED" - just like the idea that there are "no victims" even though victims speak out consistently and even frequently, especially recently after pizzagate and pedogate revelations.





END GAME - THE KELLER EFFECT

Certainly this new well oiled machinery of SRA and child sex assault denial is fostering an atmosphere which will make it even more difficult for survivors and their support system to get anyone to listen to them, let alone believe them. It is hard enough already for prosecutors, let alone victims, to prove cases of child sexual assault. I call this new revival of child trafficking and SRA denial The Keller Effect.

Conviction Integrity Units were primarily developed to exonerate clearly wronged defendants who could prove their DNA did not match evidence connected to the crime. A team of case reviewers is usually involved and cases of exoneration require a high level of scrutiny. A lone, newly elected D.A. reading over transcripts weighted in favor of the appeals process, then filing a motion to exonerate defendants in a highly controversial case is in my view a rubberstamp operation, glossed over with the CIU "seal of approval". This action and the resulting echo media malfeasance it stoked brings to mind a phrase from Orwell - "“He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”

Will overturning prosecutions of child sex rings through CIUs become the new norm, based on the Keller case?

The Keller case provides a sort of blueprint -

1. Partner with media to create an atmosphere of denial and mockery around SRA abuse and child sex abuse in general; those who accuse are starting a "witch-hunt"

2. Introduce SRA accusations as a defense manuever to discredit the sexual assault charges

3. Attack child, parent, police and therapist testimony as unreliable

4. Discredit expert witness testimony regarding the signs of physical abuse

5. Work the appeals process for years on end if necessary to whittle down the prosecution's case, gain release and exoneration. With enough time, D.A.'s and judges are replaced and new opinions may be reached on very old cases.

Expert testimony of medical professionals is likely to be the worst casualty of the Keller Effect. Dr. Mouw saw a 3 year old with a lacerated and torn hymen and a reddened labia, but his opinion of what he saw cannot "prove" anything at all if called into question enough times over a long enough period of time - even with defendants who have confessed, run from the law and have many dubious aspects to their case. Even if you are an expert witness and you believe the child has been abused based on what you see, The Keller Effect casts a shadow on your expertise.

So if you find that a little boy or girl has been raped, perhaps your child, what expert can they see that can provide physical evidence that will stand? Possibly a doctor who has already examined their genitalia and is familiar with it's particular formation? Must babies now have their genitals scanned as a precautionary measure? And even then, would your doctor be willing to reach any conclusions, or be willing to testify?

It seems that a perp literally must be caught in the actual act of rape. Even then there are probably great defense team arguments against the validity of eye witness testimony.

The prosecution in the Keller trial had felt pretty confident about it going in - they had physical evidence, and the police investigators were convinced abuse had happened. They got their conviction and considered it a job well done. It is unlikely they thought that their case would be picked over and unraveled over two decades.

Blood washes away, disturbed graves are explained away, dubious houses freshened with a coat of whitewash and quickly sold. (PR, AC '09) Children's testimony isn't trusted, and parents, therapists, doctors and even investigating officers can all be smeared. Time marches on and aging, anonymous neighbors and "friends of the court" are willing to talk to an ace reporter many years later, saying they saw nothing or don't remember anything, and that is reported in the press and accepted as relevant to the case and truthful. The media runs its own trial on the entire topic of ritual abuse, and finds it guilty of being mere click bait and a form of shameful bullying that only hurts good people. And now, unpaid crusading attorney Keith Hampton has armed every defense lawyer in the land with a precedent against any claims of SRA taken to court in the inevitable "upcoming moral panic" he predicts, as the entire Texas defense establishment rises to it's feet in applause.

Jordan Smith and the rest of the media, The Innocence Project, the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers, the False Memory Syndrome psychiatrists and incidentally the Kellers have all finally won. The public, especially anyone who deals with children, are aware that reporting incidents of child sexual abuse is full of obstacles and pitfalls, while reporting ritual abuse is sheer folly, will not be prosecuted and may ruin your reputation, your employment and possibly your life.

Yet even Cartwright admits in his intense and well researched early article on the Kellers that, "Thousands of women—most of them in their twenties, thirties, and forties—have come forward in the past ten years with accusations that they were sexually abused as children."

The Keller Effect means one main thing for all of us - simply arresting child abusers is not going to be the end game by a long shot. The citizens of Texas and the whole country must participate in the task of scrutinizing and speaking out on how child sexual assault cases are treated after the arrests have been made, the jury has spoken, and the defense appeals begin. Also, The media's seeming bias towards convicted assaulters over survivors must be held up to harsh scrutiny and even scorn where appropriate. If more people don't start criticizing how these cases are retried in the media for the defense, we may really be lost.

Everyone says it, and I have to repeat it - don't be silent. Both Satanic Ritual Abuse and child sexual assault thrives under our silence. Silence is, in effect, a form of complicity.

And if any out there want to take a lap in the Keller case marathon, the next step is to look at and report on connections such as campaign donations, charitable donations, business ties, social ties and professional ties between the many actors in the Keller story, including but certainly not limited to reporters, the D.A.'s political contributors and new staff, the Keller's high profile pro bono legal team as well as the board, members and associates of The Innocence Project and the TCDLA as a start.

VOAT IRREGULARITIES POSTING THIS STORY PREVIOUSLY

My original posts regarding the Keller case disappeared once they fell off the front page of the HOT section. Those original "missing" posts are - https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1957669 and this one https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1957669

You couldn't find those posts unless you knew to look for them - I searched well into the back roads where every post was many months old. I found this unusual as it had never happened in over 45 submissions to Voat over 6 months. I thought I'd note the phenomenon here again as other users have also reported similar activity.

We know that the CEO of Reddit actually went in and changed comments from the backend - so anything on any tier above the mods is possible folks. At any rate if this is happening, it backfired in my case and only served to make me quite a bit more interested in delving deeper into this whole ugly topic.

Where the hand of propaganda is heaviest, the pressure of an agenda is most easily detected.





THE SOURCES

PR Police Report - https://www.austinchronicle.com/media/content/759211/apdkellerreport.pdf

AC 09 https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2009-03-27/759086/

AC https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2009-03-27/believing-the-children/

AC 13 https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2013-12-06/freedom-for-the-kellers/

BR1 https://blogs.brown.edu/rcheit/2015/06/03/more-misinformation-about-the-keller-case/

BR 2 https://blogs.brown.edu/rcheit/2017/06/12/special-issue-on-the-witch-hunt-narrative/

CW http://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/the-innocent-and-the-damned/

DN https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/06/22/texas-couple-victimized-satanic-panic-finally-exonerated-now-new-witches-hunt

DM http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4622098/Texas-prosecutor-finds-ex-day-care-owners-innocent-abuse.html (scroll to video at bottom of article.)

G https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/05/texas-couple-kellers-released-prison-satanic-abuse

INT https://theintercept.com/2017/06/20/texas-couple-exonerated-25-years-after-being-convicted-of-lurid-crimes-that-never-happened/

RA https://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/articles/frans-day-care/







