## CKLN-FM Mind Control Series -- Part 12

# Jeanette Westbrook, MSW

# Presentation and Interview

Back to CKLN Series Table of Contents

## Contents

> Introduction
> Presentation
> Jeanette's Song
> Interview

## Introduction

Wayne Morris:

Good morning, and welcome to another International Connection. Today we are going to listen to a presentation given by Jeanette Westbrook, MSW entitled "Issues Regarding Prosecuting for Adult Survivors of Ritual Abuse". Jeanette is a social worker, and a ritual abuse survivor who brought legal charges against her father, alleging that he had brutally tortured her as a child and teenager. Her father was a Boy Scout leader, church Deacon, a master Mason, and Executive Director of the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessels Inspectors in the United States. In this position, he was responsible for overseeing inspections of all nuclear power plants in the USA. Jeanette's father attempted to plea bargain in pleading guilty to a misdemeanor of facilitating child sexual abuse and an award of $50,000 to Jeanette and she refused. Just as she was extraditing her father from Ohio back to Kentucky to face trial, he died suddenly.

In this presentation she describes the steps and many pitfalls in preparation to prosecuting a perpetrator of this abuse. You are listening to CKLN, the radio series on Mind Control on 88.1

Contents

## Presentation

Beth Vagra: Believe the Children Conference, Chicago (April 1997)

While Jeanette is getting her materials ready, I am just going to introduce her. I have known Jeanette Westbrook for several years now. She has been a friend, and a supporter of Believe the Children and I can assure you that Jeanette always has something interesting to talk about so this should be a very exhilirating and informational presentation. Jeanette is a social worker in Louisville, Kentucky and she has presented workshops on sexual abuse, ritual abuse and has taught classes for law enforcement officers. She is a regular guest instructor at Indiana State University where she does training with Professor Hal Pepinsky who is also speaking at the conference tomorrow. Today Jeanette is going to share information about how she pursued the criminal prosecution of one of her perpetrators, a process that took three years and I would add, a lot of courage and persistence. It is an honour to present Jeanette Westbrook.

Jeanette Westbrook:

Thank you Beth, and thank you for having me here. It's an honour and privilege to be speaking here at Believe the Children. Today I am going to talk about an issue that isn't talked about very often, because mainly it is discouraged and that is prosecuting a perpetrator.

There are a lot of reasons, pro and con, for considering going forward with a prosecution against a perpetrator. The perpetrator that I chose to prosecute was my father who I considered my Number 1 main perpetrator, although there were many, many more perpetrators but because he was my father, and had the ultimate responsibility for protecting, nurturing, loving me ... and did not do so ... I decided I would pursue him. But let me tell you, it never entered my mind, even after I started remembering more and more details, it never entered my mind to pursue prosecution until I was informed and realized that he had never stopped offending -- that there were other victims and he would continue to victimize, rape and torture, until the day that he died.

When I first started entering therapy in 1985, and this was a couple of years after I got married at the age of 28, the way I got my memories and flashbacks was simply sitting on the bed one day, and my husband put his hand on my knee. Right then and there I started switching and I literally tore up the room. I knew something was terribly wrong and I needed to figure out what was going on. In my mind, I always carried some memory of the incest, but not the whole full story. It was a process of remembering, not remembering, repression, denial, recanting, remembering. The process that Dr. Whitfield talked about earlier this morning ...

After I started therapy, I entered school, my major was social work and I had a previous history of advocacy within my community. I was a neighbourhood leader, before that I had gone to real estate school -- I was going to be a real estate person, but I couldn't lie well enough (laughter) and the interest rates were 17%, I sold four houses in one year. I decided I couldn't overlook the cracks in the basement and tell people I couldn't see them ... it sounded too much like my abuse. In entering the School of Social Work, I came to the conclusion how could I face victims every day, every week, year in and year out, and tell them, "report the crime, do something, empower yourself, go forward with your life" with me not having done the same. How could I tell other people to protect their children and prosecute, when I had not done so myself?

We are going to get to the criminal justice system here, and I wish I had entitled my workshop "The Criminal Justice Crapshoot" because my friends, that's exactly what it is. You have to know what you are up against, and this is what we are all up against.

So, you were incested ... big deal ... didn't do anything to you ... look at you. You look okay, you've got your college education, you look nice, you are well spoken, no problem ... get on with your life ... But it was a big deal to me, because I wasn't functioning. I began searching out topics, I began reading everything I could get my hands on. My therapist at the time (when I entered therapy in 1985) -- after Dr. Cornelia Wilbur, who was Sybil's psychiatrist, diagnosed me in Lexington, Kentucky. She referred me to Dr. Kanivtiz who said he wasn't taking any more multiple patients and he referred me on to another person who said he wasn't taking any more patients, but he referred me to a therapist who hadn't treated a ritual abuse survivor, had never treated anyone with MPD, now called DID (they DID it to us again ...). After spending years with this therapist who really didn't know what he was doing, but I will tell you one thing that he did do -- which was trigger a lot of memories in me because he was intoxicated during my therapy. I would go into therapy and the smell of the alcohol would cause switch-o-rama and I would come out not in very good shape to tell you the truth. During this whole process as I entered a support group (Parents United and the Adults Molested as Children program) -- I became stronger and decided, yes I wanted to pursue prosecution. I began looking for information. I finally came across another survivor from Colorado who was working with a former FBI agent and she imparted the information to me on how to pursue a prosecution. I guarantee you, had I not received this information from another survivor, I would not have known what to do, because like many folks out here, if you don't have an understanding on how to get through the crapshoot, you are not going to go anywhere.

But I do want to let you know about the dynamics that are unique to my case as to why I pursued ... one of which is I have no children. One of my worst fears was that if I had children, my abusers would get access to my children. That is main way abusers and cults control victims throughout their lives -- through their children. That is one unique thing -- I didn't have to worry about that. I also had a very supportive husband who was behind me all the way. My husband, Andrew, is one of 13 children and this is an example of the kind of support you need. One time when I was hospitalized because of massive flashbacks, my husband came into the hospital late at night and said "I am taking my wife out of here before you kill her." The psychiatrist insisted that my husband wait until he arrived at the hospital. We had the wonderful "exit interview". The psychiatrist said to my husband "how can you stand being married to a woman like this, all of these personalities?" To which my husband responds, the all-time best line, which is, "you don't know what the hell you are talking about ... I am one of 13 children and I am used to living with a lot of people." (lots of laughter) We left. We did not pay. That was $115 for the "exit interview" and we did not pay. This is the kind of support that is necessary: having a good solid support group, solid friends, good solid relationship.

My next step was to determine who, and what I mean by who is which police detective was going to get assigned to my case, and my friends, in order to pursue these cases, you must investigate the police officer who is going to investigate your case. I am sorry but the dichotomy of good cop vs. bad cop is real, and you must do a background check on your police officer. I found out by searching and asking questions, especially child protective workers, "who is the good cop, who is the bad cop?" The police detective whom I approached, who was going to get my case, had worked in child protective services for a number of years before he became a cop. I wasn't going to have to convince him that child abuse existed. He had been there and done that. He was now a police detective in the crimes against children unit in Louisville, Kentucky. I approached him myself. Before I approached my detective, before any of you approach a detective (and this is important: even if you cannot prosecute yourself, take this information and give it to any survivors you might come across who are in a position to prosecute) this is what you are going to need to gather for your case, or what I suggest you gather for your case. Because guess what folks? There is no police detective anywhere who has the time to investigate these cases the way they need to be investigated. Right from the start, my police detective knew what he was facing. He knew it was a ritual abuse case. But does Kentucky have a ritual abuse statute? No. Don't mention it. Why mention it? If there is no existing statute in your state, there is no way that charges can be brought in a ritual abuse case. Right away, I want to approach my police detective with "rape". There are different degrees of rape -- rape by force, which I had; penetration, which I had. This is first degree rape. So that's what we are going to file under.

Before finding a police detective, take in hand if you can, this kind of information: your medical records, your school records. I was able to go all the way back and find my elementary school records. Gee, guess what I found there? I failed the first grade, repeated first grade. Did the second grade, at the end of second grade they tested my IQ and it was only 80 points. Kind of an indicator. Church or religious records. Criminal records. Psychiatric records. Marriage records and divorce records. Don't apply these records just to yourself. Get these records pertaining to your perpetrator also. Not just yourself, but your perpetrator. Kind of interesting. When I looked up the divorce records (when my father divorced my mother) I had already told my police officer about being used in child pornography. In my child's mind I had just seen my father using a brownie camera -- you all remember the old brownie, little boxes? That's what I remember my father taking pictures of me with -- but I also remember the bright lights being used in the basement to photograph pornography, but I didn't want to deal with it and I didn't want to remember it. Lo and behold, in the divorce records, my father asked for all of the photographic equipment, along with multiple pieces of property, money, etc. I don't think he had his attorney ask for the brownie camera.

Psychiatric records. Folks, they are going to use it, might as well be upfront with the police detective. They will use it. That's both sides. And while we are talking about sides here, when you approach the police detective here, who is actually an arm of the district attorney, in some jurisdictions called the D.A., in some the State's Attorney, in my state called The Commonwealth Attorney. The State's Attorney or the Commonwealth Attorney is interested in you, the victim for one reason and one reason only. You are the witness for the prosecution. To that D.A. you are not really looked at as the victim. He is going to use you as a witness to prove his case which the state is bringing against the perpetrator. Also when you approach your police detective, there is some corroborative evidence you can obtain and by being able to do a lot of this -- I am talking about years down the pike in recovery -- if you are not comfortable talking to your relatives and confronting, you are probably not going to be able to get through the criminal justice system period. In getting through the criminal justice system, there are two systems in which you can go through. One is the civil court, and the other is the criminal court. The difference between the two ... For instance, in the state of Kentucky, the reason I was able to pursue a criminal case for rape against my father is that Kentucky is one of only 11 states where there is no statute of limitations on felony crimes. That means you murder somebody 20 years ago, and evidence is presented yesterday that substantiates you murdered someone 20 years ago, they will pursue the case or there is the capacity to pursue the case under that existing statute. In civil litigation, the process of pleading a case of damages and trying to sue your perpetrator is the civil proceeding, and the burden of proof is not as stringent as in the criminal court. The criminal court insists that you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Mr. X, Y or Z perpetrated X, Y, Z crimes against you.

One of the things in corroboration here - I want to point this out so you don't get yourself in trouble - in posting an ad for other survivors, make sure it is a blind ad where you do not identify yourself in any way. You have the responses sent to a post office box and you do whatever you can to make sure that can't be traced to you. For instance, have a friend who is supportive of you take out the post office box. Fitzpatrick, of Survivor Connections in the Father Porter case, did this to obtain corroboration from many of the other victims abused by Father Porter -- through the use of a blind ad.

This is what a police detective is interested in finding: who did it, what's their name, social security number, birthdate, relationship to you (friend, relative, stranger), what is it they did to you? In determining what, it would be very important for you to go ahead and research the existing statutes on how criminal statutes are interpreted in your state, in your jurisdiction, in your local government. What was it -- 1st degree rape, 2nd degree rape, child sexual abuse ... in my opinion you should always go for the top charge. If it's penetration with force, it is rape, very simple. When did they do it? Gee, was it January, February, was it 1963, was it 1964? Was it yesterday? In corroborating when, one of the things I had told my police detective was that at the age of 9 one of my clearest memories of being raped, on the sofa in the living room, with the TV on, while my siblings in the room while he was raping me, was the Rocky and Bullwinkle Show on TV. Everyone was focused on the Rocky and Bullwinkle Show. Lo and behold, not too far along after I told my police detective that, I come across a newspaper article talking about the Rocky and Bullwinkle Show and how it only aired for a very short number of years between 1964 and 1966 at the exact times I had related to my police detective that I was being raped on a regular basis. That is circumstantial corroboration.

Where did it happen? In the basement, in the bed, in the field? Where did it happen? They are going to want you to pinpoint it very, very carefully. As close as you can possibly get it. If you can, go back and take photographs yourself, even though you are an adult now, take photographs of it. Or better yet give your police detective a description of it and tell him to go and take a photograph to substantiate your memory of it. Take a witness with you any time you are trying to gather any corroborative information, take a witness so there is somebody else witnessing you getting the information, and how you are getting the information.

Why? Typicall and unknowingly, when victims approach the criminal justice system, they typically start out with "why?" The police want to know who, what, when, where, and lastly, why. The victim starts out with why, what was the motivation for their victimization. My father raped me because he was a member of a satanic cult. They are not interested in that per se. It is a factor, but it is last for them. They are interested in who, what, when and where because this is what is going to stand up in a court of law. These are the things that are going to provide evidence. Why is not the piece that is easy to gather ...

Here are some examples of some corroborative evidence while I was pursuing my case against my father. Be prepared to be harassed. Especially when you are dealing with cases involving ritual crimes, ritual abuse, satanic ritual abuse, other types of organized abuse, medical, mind control ... any of that ... be prepared to be harassed. Here is some harassment I received. This graffiti was painted on the building next to my home and these are my initials, maiden name initials. I took this to mean that I am being watched. It says here, "Life is short, but love is long" - the skull and crossbones is the sign for death, or poison. Needless to say I was rather terrified. Soon after this, we moved and three weeks after moving to a new residence, in the park down by my house, there was all kinds of graffiti carved into the benches which they literally had to use sanders to remove and the police did come by and take photographs of it. I had told my police detective where I had been taken for ritual abuse as a child, and lo and behold, the police had photographs of the site ... it still existed, and you would have to know exactly where the site existed, or you would never find it. The site was located in a gulley, with huge monstrous trees and carvings in the trees, and markers all along the paths. Well, guess what? Gee, I wonder why she was taken there as a child? Could it be that my father's mother lived on the street less than 1/2 mile away.

Before I approached my police detective, I did the typical "pie in the sky" -- trying to get your perpetrator to respond to you. Be sure you make a copy of that letter. There is my copy of a letter, and I never got a response to that. No one can say to you, "hey, you've got to resolve this outside of court, give it a chance." I gave it a chance, there was no response, and this was at a point in 1988 where I was not far enough along in my healing -- certainly I could not pursue prosecution at this point because I was still wanting a response from this perpetrator, and it was clear that was not going to be forthcoming.

That's pretty much pie in the sky. If you have that type of feeling still, you are not ready to pursue a case through the court system, because you are going to have to be tough. It was some of my darkest days in pursuing a case through the criminal justice system. At every turn, you are met with a closed door. I had the D.A. say at one point, "We cannot prosecute your case because you are mentally ill. You have MPD, so you are mentally ill." Guess what folks? You are going to have to educate your police officer, educate the prosecutor. Somebody is going to have to educate the jurors, it can't be you, the victim, but somebody needs to. This is what you are going to be up against.

The D.A. tells me they can't pursue my case, I am "mentally ill". Well, gee, guess what? Nobody has ever adjudicated me "mentally ill". Make sure. Have they ever adjudicated so? The only person who can adjudicate you mentally ill, is the judge. It is a proceeding in the judicial system that has to occur - they can't just arbitrarily say "Gee, I have looked up in the American Psychological Association, or DSM IV, or III, or whatever, and they are mentally ill." Since I wasn't mentally ill, there was no need to obtain a forensic psychiatrist - if you were being adjudicated mentally ill, there would have to be a proceeding, and they may or may not use a forensic psychiatrist. They may use John Doe, psychologist. They could use XY&Z who was hired by the judicial system to do assessments to determine whether you are mentally ill or not. But it was very clear that I was not mentally ill, had never been adjudicated so, I was working, I was going to school, I could drive a car, have never been arrested for any kind of criminal activity. I had been in a psychiatric unit four times, never longer than a week at a time. The first time, age 19, suicide attempt. My parents had every intention of abandoning me in the hospital but two of my friends came and got me out of the hospital, and had me live with them. Go forward in my life, and after that hospitalization, I moved 13 times in a two year period in an effort to stay ahead of my perpetrator. Every time I moved, my perpetrator found me, reoffended.

About 1973 the perpetrator moved to Columbus, Ohio so I was not in regular contact. By this time I was finishing high school. As soon as I finished high school, I left home. That does not stop the perpetrator, because you leave home.

What are the pros and cons of pursuing prosecution?

The pros are self-empowerment, not carrying the secret around with you any longer. Saying, and I try to re-frame every time that I can - I don't say that I am a victim of child abuse - I say I am a 'crime victim'. I do not differentiate that it is x,y and z crime - I am a crime victim. Don't give someone the chance to define your reality. I also felt that by pursuing the prosecution, that I would protect other children. When I got the information that he was still offending, it gave me great pleasure (I have to use the word 'pleasure') to know that I would be instrumental in protecting a child like me who at one time no one was going to help. And when you are going back to get that collaborative information, you go back to your childhood friends. Lo and behold, I found out I had told lots of people. I told lots of childhood friends about what was going on, but 35 years ago in Kentucky there was no such thing as Child Protective Services. Who would you have reported it to? The police? Gee, you could knock the hell out of your wife, they didn't do anything about that. Do you think they were going to do anything about knocking the hell out of your child, or raping your child? Did they do anything about spousal rape? You could rape your wife all you wanted to. They wouldn't have done anything. Numerous people reported they remember seeing me covered from head to toe with bruises. Going back in that collaborative record, those school records, lo and behold, I had speech therapy in the fifth grade. Both me and my sister. We couldn't talk correctly. Stuttered, couldn't pronounce words correctly. Developmental skills - some of those were missing.

What are the cons in doing this?

Well the biggest con in my opinion is your loss of privacy. When you pursue either a criminal case or a civil case, be prepared because your life will change. You will never again have a private life. When you pursue anything through the criminal justice system, it is public record. That means anyone can go down and request that, any newspaper, any tv station, your uncle joe who is one of your perpetrators, who you have not yet filed charges against, a member of the x,y and z backlash group - anyone can then access these public records about you. What does this mean? Well, to tell you the truth, as far as that con goes about losing your privacy, I don't think it is so awfully bad, to the degree where I can say "you want to know anything about me? Go and look it up at the courthouse. You want to know who I am? Go on down. Pay your six dollars and get the record." Make them work for a change.

Expect to lose friends. Expect those family members who are not supportive of you to abandon you. Expect family members who were supportive of you before you filed charges to now abandon you. It is going to happen. I have had this one friend for twenty years, and this happened, and I thought this person was pretty supportive - she had asked me to come over to her house, and she was having some problems with a neighbour who was basically a very ill person and harassing her to some degree, and she started asking me what could be done about this, and I said, "well, here's what I know as a social worker - here's how the system works." My friend aske me what was wrong with her neighbour, and I said I didn't know. And she said, "well I thought you would know because of your mentall illness." I said, "well, I am not mentally ill." And she said, "I meant your 'condition'." I said, "I don't have a 'condition'. I am a crime victim. Try to use that to re-frame these negative views from people. Crime vi ctim. We don't say to the crime victim who is held up at gunpoint, kidnapped in a carjacking - we don't call them a carjacking victim who was traumatized, and is dissociative, and has to go into the psych unit, and now they are mentally ill. We don't do that to most crime victims. But when it comes to sexual crimes, we re-frame sexual crimes into the area of mental illness. Gee, if you were raped, and especially if you were raped by a first degree relative, you couldn't possibly be "normal". Well, guess what? We are normal. The people who are abnormal are the perpetrators. But because of society's fear of perpetrators, they project that view on to the victim, so that you become more feared than the perpetrator. Example: the prosecutor who was assigned to my case, was so frightened when I came to his office, that he had the door blocked open with some bricks. I don't know what he thought was going to happen. I think his view was, that as a multiple - my head was going to spin, and I was going to spew green vomit. And of course, I would kill.

Be prepared. If you are a victim approaching the justice system and they say we are going to assign you a victim's advocate - that advocate may or may not be an advocate. Typically victims' advocates are assigned, are paid through the District Attorney's Office. The victim's advocate for you is not going to bite the hand that feeds them. The prosecutor says, "hey, I don't think I want this case. Why don't you get lost?" The prosecutor often uses the victim's advocate as the go-fer, to keep the victim away from the prosecutor. So the prosecutor doesn't have to deal with the victim. What did I do to handle that? I strongly, strongly advise this - if at all possible, if you have access to resources, hire your own attorney. I was so fortunate and so lucky to have an attorney represent me pro bono. Her job was to watch-dog the system. Mindful, when any of you get your own attorney, this attorney can't represent you in the court. The only attorney who can do that is the prosecutor. But, prosecutors are attornies too, and they don't like other attornies watching exactly what they are doing. So that puts a lot of pressure on the proseuctor and the system, you'd better do this case right, you'd better follow all legal procedures, you'd better not screw my client. I strongly advise any victim going through the criminal justice system to do this.

Oh jeez. You know that old police detective wants to know everything, and guess what? There were lots of times when I didn't want to tell the detective anything, so I didn't tell him anything. But other parts of me sure did go down there and tell him a whole bunch of stuff. Here's one way that some parts tell. They draw pictures and they write it out. What happened, what can you remember? Well, gee, I don't remember a whole lot but maybe this person does. [Drawing] You are going to have to educate your police detective as to what traumatic memory is. A good book to start with is Charles Whitfield's book, what is traumatic memory? Educate, educate, educate. The guilt. The question that all victims want to know - why? You are never going to answer that. Don't expect your police detective to answer that. Don't expect the prosecutor to answer that. There is no answer. What did he do to you? [Drawing] There's an example of something he did, and it is kind of interesting - you can go years and not recognize correlations. Over the years my perpetrator sent messages to me. There are various ways of telling you to shut up. This is a Christmas card that my perpetrator sent to me after he had called me up on the telephone in 1978, told me to go to the airport, he had a ticket waiting for me. I flew to New York City, stayed at the Hotel Lexington where I was re-abused. He sent me this Christmas card. Here is a picture of me being chained and whipped - here is the card he sent me. It's a picture of Santa Claus in his longjohns holding a whip, I guess for Rudolf and the rest of the reindeer and it says, "when the holiday hustle and bustle has passed, hope all of your jolly old memories last" and he inserts, "New York memories will last."

Here's another card - Santa Claus is holding a book and hovering over the children. He says, "good boys and girls". These are all Norman Rockwell drawings. "May the wonder and magic of Christmas fill your heart with joy. Love Dad, Stockholm, Sweden, 1980." Here's one from France, "wish you were here" etc etc etc. These are some of the pieces that you take with you. If you can, if at all possible, start organizing a book - anything like this you come across, old cards, any pictures - that can establish a timeline. Put together a book if you can before you go forward, because a lot of people go "gee, I don't have to do too much work here, she's done it all for me, I don't have to run around and get all these records - they've got it." They are more likely to take your case, and do something with it. Still, even then, expect, especially in a ritual abuse case, expect adverse - let's just face it, there are a lot of people who just don't want you to go forward with your case. And you are going to have to be your own best advocate, and you are going to have to turn in t o an assertive, insistent, aggressive even , advocate for yourself. Nobody else will do this for you.

The local D.A. didn't want to do anything with my case - they were thinking I was just this mentally ill nut - but I educated them to that fact, that I am not a mentally ill nut - so I decided I would get the victim's advocate division from the Attorney General's Office. I am rattling cages. I am insisting that someone do something with my case. If I have called the D.A.'s office once, I have called them 50 times this month. Have I called my detective weekly? You betcha. If I haven't called, parts of me have called, somebody has called. My support group - they write a letter on my behalf. They insist that the D.A. go forward with my case. Start your own letter-writing campaign. Contact your representative. Well, gee they may be one of the enemy. They may be part of it. Well - you know, in this game, it is a crapshoot. You may not be able to trust any of them, but you may be able to trust some of them. It is a crapshoot, and you go for it, if this is what you want to do -- you keep on and you don't give up. It will be your darkest day in pursuing this case, but do not give up.

Here are some things that happened, but do you think the police detective looked at this and said, "Gee I am going to go tell the Prosecutor that this kind of stuff happens." Are you kidding? No way. They are going to discard you. Yes, you have been ritually abused, yes you have been tortured, yes some horrible things have happened. But go for what you can get them on. First degree rape is prosecutable. They are not interested in this type of criminal activity that took place. It's enough to say "he raped me on the sofa in 1964 with Rocky the Flying Squirrel flying higher in my mind."

I would like to free up some time now, to answer some questions. I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have. If you know someone who wants to pursue a case, I have cards. Feel free to call me. I will give you as much input as I can, but be mindful, no one is ever a substitute for your own attorney. For those persons out there who cannot afford an attorney, other survivors may be the only advocates that you have who can impart information to you. Believe me, no one else will. If the victims don't tell you to do this, no victim's advocate is going to tell you how to get through the criminal justice system, no police detective is going to tell you what to do. I had a police detective who was unusual. At one point he said, "look - they are fucking you - they are messing with you - so let's go on down to the warrant desk and file a warrant." Guess what folks. The D.A. is not the only person who can bring a case against a perpetrator. You, U.S. citizen, have the right under the U. S. constitution to go down and file a warrant yourself, with evidence in hand, you have the absolute right to file a warrant yourself. What that does is force a prosecutor to appoint someone to look at the case. To at least look at it. They can still pass it under the rug - it doesn't mean that they are going to do anything - but they have to look at it. So we file a warrant, the prosecutor looks at the case, he doesn't want to do anything with it. I am going all over the place making a lot of noise. "You are going to go forward with this case. I insist on it. And this is why I insist on it." Still nothing happens. I go to the Attorney General's victim advocacy program (most states have this program) - they send a contingent up to Louisville to say "what's going on with this case? You don't want to prosecute it? We are going to take jurisdiction over the case." There ensues a war between the Attorney General and the local prosecutors for jurisdiction of the case. Still nothing happens with the case. So I pull out - this is a real crapshoot - I call and basically tell the Commonwealth's Attorney, the local D.A., "if you don't forward my case to the Attorney General's office, I have five newspaper reporters lined up ready to go." Could this be interpreted as blackmail? I don't know. No one ever charged me with blackmail, mainly because it was the truth. Always have your media ace ready to play. That means be talking behind the scenes to someone who believes in your case, someone in the media, someone who is willing to advocate for you i n a public way . You have to be prepared for this. Your case may end up on the five o'clock news.

Artifacts? Here's an artifact. I've had that since I was a teenager. How do you know? My sister is willing to testify to that. Who questions my sister? My police detective. How long has she had this thing? She tells him. My sister, a witness. She allows herself to be wired for sound and that means the police detective does a wiretap with my sister confronting my father, the perpetrator with abuse. This is done for a couple of reasons. You might think, well it's done to gather evidence for your case. Not necessarily so, because that may or may not be admissible. It could be done for a number of reaons. The detective is not quite sure about your case. May want to get some information for his own reasons. The police detective may be harassed by his superiors, who are saying, "why are you pursuing this case?" So he has done this wiretap to get the information to show his superiors that he's on target.

In the way of educating - I have put together books like this of newspaper clippings that I have gathered since 1986. Does this stuff happen by prominent people? Don't believe what I say - here's what the paper says. Here's the evidence. Let it explain it for you. I am not the only one this has happened to. There are many, many cases. It's just that very few cases get to the criminal justice system because statute of limitations in that state do not allow a person to pursue a criminal case. So they go to the civil court. You may not be able to get through that way either. Some states have passed delayed discovery rulings - an example of this is, a victim goes to therapy and starts remembering their abuse - they have some details and they are sure of what happened, who, what, when, where, how and why - the delayed statute starts running from the day you remember your abuse. In some states - it varies in years - in some states you've got three years from the day you first remember. Not three yea rs after the date you become empowered, but three years after you remember your abuse. Can you get in enough therapy, can you get empowered enough, can you gather enough support to make it under that statute of limitations in order to pursue a civil case? It's pretty tough, it's pretty tough to do that.

Wayne Morris:

We have been listening to a presentation by Jeanette Westbrook on prosecuting perpetrators of abuse, and this broadcast is not to be taken as encouragement to pursue legal cases such as these involving recovered memories of abuse, as these are extremely difficult to go through, but it is interesting to hear what is needed to prepare if one was to take this forward. Jeanette's trial didn't actually go through as her father suddenly died just before being extradited to face charges. Stay tuned next week, as we will continue with Part 2 of this presentation, and an interview with Jeanette Westbrook, on the International Connection CKLN 88.1 FM.

Wayne Morris:

Good morning. You have tuned into the International Connection. We are continuing with our radio series on mind control. Today we are listening to Part 2 of a presentation given by Jeanette Westbrook MSW entitled: Issues Regarding Prosecuting for Adult Survivors of Ritual Abuse. Jeanette brought legal charges against her father, alleging that he had severely abused her as a child and teenager, through ritualistic torture and sexual abuse. Her father, a prominent person in society, had the job of overseeing inspections for all nuclear power plants in the USA. And now, Jeanette Westbrook.

Jeanette Westbrook:

The charges have to be brought in the jurisdiction in which the crimes occurred. So, the victim lives in one state, the perpetrator lives in another, but the crimes were committed in Kentucky. That means you have to file charges in the state of Kentucky. The prosecutor in the state of Kentucky will have to initiate proceedings to bring that perpetrator back to the state of Kentucky. It complicates cases, because a lot of prosecutors don't want to go through that whole procedure of extraditing a criminal back to another state ... it really complicates it, but it can be done.

In my case, the attorney general filed extradition papers for my perpetrator to be brought from Columbus, Ohio back to the state of Kentucky where most of the criminal acts occurred, to stand trial in a criminal court of law. The extradition papers were signed in late May -- by June 22 the perpetrator was dead.

My father had been speaking to the Parliament in Hungary. At the time of his death, he was Executive Director of the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors -- which means he controlled the inspections of all the nuclear power plants in the United States. That was one of my biggest and deepest fears -- your perpetrator tells you that all these horrible things are going to happen if you "tell" -- "I will kill your family" blah blah blah. In my mind, one of my biggest fears was that I "tell", and my perpetrator sabotages a nuclear power plant, and millions die. I really felt that. My perpetrator did die, and no one had any intention of telling me that he was dead. There was a concerted effort for me not to have that information. I wanted to go to the funeral, but I was threatened: "if you come to the funeral, we will bodily remove you." I was told this by the heir to my perpetrator's estate, and for legal reasons, I do not want to say the name.

Gee - it's a little bit unusual. The perpetrator suddenly dies at home, at 3am, no autopsy is done, a private physician comes to his home, signs off the death certificate, and that is the end of that. Very unusual. Somebody who has pending felony charges, and is being extradited for those charges. There should have been an autopsy done by a coroner, but there wasn't. And once the body is in the ground, folks, the body is very, very difficult to exhume and see if this perpetrator was poisoned, if there was foul play, anything out of the ordinary. It is not going to happen after the fact.

How did I know that the perpetrator was actually dead, since I didn't see the body? That was problematic because parts of me didn't want to believe that he was deceased. I was able to get hold of his last remaining first degree relative, his sister, my aunt, who reveals to me, now that he is dead, that she was raped by two of the same family members that had raped me. And she assured me that it was his body. I don't know. I may never know. But I am pretty sure he is a dead man. What happened to him? Do you think he was murdered before we brought him back to Kentucky to stand trial? I don't know. Who would want him dead? Would cult members want him dead? Do you think the government might want him dead? How would it look? This person was controlling these inspections for the nuclear power plants -- and he was a sadistic pedophile -- not to mention all the other things he was into. When you are looking at the background of your perpetrator -- my perpetrator was a Boy Scout leader, a church deacon , a Grand Master Mason. Gee - what's that got to do with it? I don't know. Don't try to define that. Don't say to your detective, "my father was a Boy Scout leader -- so therefore, this equals that." Let the detective draw his own conclusions to that. You can substantiate that your perpetrator had access to other child victims because he is a Boy Scout leader, because he is a church deacon ...

After my father was dead, the organization he worked for wrote: "Mr. Blank was loved by family, by National Board staff, by business associates. He even had a legion of pint-sized admirers, the neighbourhood kids. It was common to see a bunch of them gathered in Mr. Blank's yard. He always found time for the children, and he always enquired after their well being. Such was his concern, and it was genuine. Representing the Executive leadership of the National Board, Mr. Blank cast an image of impressive proportions. He met with world leaders. He rubbed an elbow or two with the politically powerful. He occasioned with the Captains of Industry. Elegantly attired, he slipped neatly into whatever role he was expected to play."

Why pursue? What is the number one attack that the perpetrator uses against the victim? It is silencing the victim. In "Trauma and Recovery" by Judith Lewis Herman -- I think this is a fantastic summary -- "... in order to escape accountability for his crimes, the perpetrator does everything in his power to promote forgetting. Secrecy and silence are the perpetrator's first line of defence. If secrecy fails, the perpetrator attacks the credibility of his victim. If he cannot silence her absolutely, he tries to make sure that no one listens. To this end, he marshals an impressive array of arguments from the most blatant denial to the most sophisticated and eloquent rationalization. After every atrocity, one can expect to hear the same predictable apologies. 'It never happened' - 'the victim lies' - 'the victim exaggerates' - 'the victim brought it upon herself' - and in any case, it is time to forget the past and move on. The more powerful the perpetrator, the greater is his perogative to name and define realilty, and the more completely his arguments will prevail."

I recommend "Trauma and Recovery" by Judith Lewis Herman highly. I also recommend, this is a classic, "Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape" by Susan Brownmiller. It is very important for you to understand the dynamics of rape, and how our society looks at rape and abuse. This isn't bad either. "Against Therapy" -- this is how our psychiatric system looks at abuse -- it is that old "wandering uterus" thing -- [hysteria].

[Answer to audience Question]: Well, I think it is kind of interesting. I did bring with me, and you are welcome to look at this thing, I decided that after his death, the Masonic Brotherhood went out and some rites at his funeral -- gee, I couldn't go. But they were there. I called the Masonic Lodge that he had been a member of for forty years because I wanted some documentation for myself, and sure enough, I called and told them I was the dutiful daughter, and I was so sorry (sic) -- I got back the documentation that Mr. Blank of blank address, was a member of Jeffersontown Lodge #774, in blank, Kentucky, date of birth, blah blah blah. He entered his first degree in the Masonic Lodge in 1965, made second degree in February, 1966, and made the Master Mason in March, 1966 -- all within one year. How is that possible? I don't know. Is there a correlation. In this case, for this particular Lodge, I believe there is some collaborative evidence there and that is, that there were two other cases that had been prosecuted and convicted -- two other perpetrators from the same Masonic Lodge to which my perpetrator had been a member of for thirty plus years. Is there a correlation there? Do birds of a feather flock together?

Whether it's a Masonic Lodge, whether it is a church, whether it is - you name it. Are they all this way? I don't know. I am not going to interpret that for my detective. Let him draw that conclusion. Why is that all these perpetrators are coming out of this certain place? Whatever organization it is. Should they look at that? Yeah, I think so. Especially since I went out and took pictures of it, and it is right above the daycare centre. Might there be a problem? I don't know. Can I say something about that to police? I certainly can. Gee -- did you know that X,Y and Z case which was published in the newspaper, and convicted -- did you know these two convicted perpetrators belonged to this organization and guess what? My perpretrator belonged to this organization also. Are they going to do something with this in a court of law? Nah. Or is that going to lead your detective to say, "yeah, there's something here." Probably. Are they going to talk about that in a public forum? No. They are not. They are going to deal with what is in the statutes.

That's why every survivor who is able to get through the criminal justice system -- you are a star. You are a ray of hope. You are forming a path. You are gathering information and empowerment to give to another survivor, because nobody else has given that to you. You will gather that information. You will pass it on. You will show -- people will learn from what you have done.

[Question & Comment from Audience: In Thunder Bay, Ontario there were approximately 170 men in the perpetrators' treatment program at the Lakehead Psychiatric Hospital last year -- and yet in the same year, there were perhaps only two published convictions for sexual abuse of children in the region. My math isn't very good, so I don't know what percentage that represents ... but there is something very, very wrong. Comment from Audience: It works out to approximately 99.99% don't get convicted.]

It's called, "It's Stacked Against the Victim" and the perpetrators pretty much roam free. They do what they want. They rape, they maim, they torture, they kill, and they get away with it -- until someone is empowered enough to stop one perpetrator -- which means you have stopped, or you have prevented potentially 30 victims in the future. That's what you have done when you have the capacity -- and no one should ever -- if you have survivors who aren't able to prosecute for whatever reason -- whether it's statute of limitations, whatever -- never, ever apply pressure or infer there is something wrong with that person because they did not pursue a course of legal action. That's just not fair, and can be a re-victimization of that victim to say that "you are less than ... because you did not pursue the case." It's just grossly unfair because there aren't too many who are able to do it, and as I said in the beginning, one of the reasons I could do it, is because I don't have children. It would have been much, much different if I had children behind me ... and I was in the position of keeping them safe and protected. I never believed I would be able to protect my own child -- I always felt the perpetrator could get access to my child. But I can tell you at this point, there are four siblings -- I have two older brothers, myself, and a sister who is a year younger than I -- none of us have any children. That is statistically very rare for a whole sibling group to have no children. So it has stopped -- it has stopped with our generation. It has stopped with yours. It is a horrible price to pay.

I left something out that is very important -- when you move in a criminal case or a civil case -- one of the first things you should do is have your attorney freeze the perpetrator's damn assets -- don't give him a chance to hide those assets, because he will make an attempt to do that. That's one thing a lot of attorneys don't know. Immediately, file, freeze those assets, so you have something to get access to -- hey, you have won half a million dollar suit against your perpetrator, and he's hidden all the assets, and he has filed bankruptcy. There goes your dream of having your therapy paid for. Was I cut out of the will? Yeah, there was an attempt to have me cut out, and I pursued it myself, without an attorney. My access to my measly $12,000 inheritance. $12,000 was a lot to me though -- I paid off some medical bills -- he could have got out of this earlier on, because when I filed the warrant to invite him into court -- guess what the perpetrator tried to do? There is another thing you have to learn -- there is this thing called the Judge's Chambers -- it's sort of back here somewhere. There are things that happen there, and it's called "a done deal". There are deals that go down back there that you don't have access to. And that's one important reason I have my own attorney -- you want her back there finding out what the done deal is. When the perpetrator comes into District Court after I filed the first degree rape charges there is the old plea bargain - they want to make a deal. His attorney says, "gee, he is willing to plead guilty to a midsdemeanour of facilitating child sexual abuse -- believe it or not, that just gave a lot more umph to my police detective, because it verified everything I had been talking about multiple perpetrators. If you are "facilitating child sexual abuse" guess what, there are more than two people involved -- the victim, the perpetrator, and the one facilitating. He is willing to plead guilty that he was facilitating child sexual abuse -- "Hey, I didn't do it, but I sort of facilitated it ..." in lieu of pursuing the further criminal action against him. My attorney is back there, and she says, "We won't pursue if you will give her $50,000 -- or his attorney throws out that figure -- and they come back to me. "Will you be willing to accept a misdemeanour plea bargan of facilitating child sexual abuse and $50,000?" Nah. I wasn't willing to do it. That wasn't going to buy me. God forbid for me to be the judge of that -- if it was easier on you, and you could get $50,000 and this was enough for you, take it and go. If you can actually get access to that $50,000, and that's questionable. They may say that as a done deal, but after the fact, "gee, I am bankrupt." So you have to be careful about accepting plea bargains and money. You want to see the dollar on the table ahead of time.

I was not willing to accept that misdemeanour plea bargain, because I knew that Kentucky had passed the sex offender registry -- now everybody has the sex offenders registry thanks to Megan's Law. At the time, 1992, I wanted to make sure that he got a Felony Conviction, because only felony convictions go on the convicted perpetrators list. So in order to stop my perpetrator, I knew I had to have that felony conviction, that way it would go out to all of these jurisdictions and warn everyone that he is a sex offender and it would further open the door for his other victims to file criminal charges.

[Question from audience: Does that apply to all the states, or will it just apply to each state individually?] I am not sure how they are going to do that. What I understand at this point is that police jurisdictions are going to have access to the information -- that is being challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union. Does anybody know more information concerning that? As far as I know, it's still up in the air. [Question re: mother] My mother is a co-offender. My mother was 16 years old when she had her first child, there were four of us in a row. My mother was an only child. As I found out much later, and this is doing your homework, the person I was told was my mother's mother, was in fact not my mother's mother. From what I have been able to find out, my mother's father was a doctor, and supposedly my mother was a child of some woman he had an affair with. I don't know who my mother's mother is ... I have never met any of her relatives. I don't know anything about her family. The person I was told was my grandmother, she is still alive, she is 96 years old. I asked her about my mother's heritage, about that, and she just gave me the answer, "let that rest ... let's not talk about it." So it was a clear message to me she is not going to reveal. I will probably never get that information unfortunately. I do a lot of minimizing concerning my mother's abuse -- she is clearly a co-offender. What I mean by that is she knowingly participated in that. She actually used her medications on me for my venereal infections, so she knew about that ... but to tell you the truth, 35 years ago, if she had gone and said, "oh my husband is raping my daughter" do you think anybody would have done anything about it? No. Nobody would have done anything about it. They would have likely sent her over to the mental hospital, shocked the shit out of her, and that would take care of that, give her some drugs and blame it on a wandering uterus. I am not exaggerating one bit there. That actually is what happened a lot of times.

[Question from audience: What about your own siblings, their own denial or their own reality of what happened?] My sister is totally supportive. She gave a deposition to the police concerning her own victimization and witnessing what she knew about my victimization. She was not ritually abused, she is not multiple, but she has typical amnesia and dissociative symptoms as many trauma survivors have. My oldest brother pretty much took over ... I want to refrain from answering that. My two older brothers are not supportive, they are in denial, although my oldest brother admitted to me that my father took a 2x4 and beat him up with it in the basement for getting a bad grade on his report card. Now, I could have told anybody, I was not there and I did not see that. We are talking about traumatic forgetting, what Dr. Whitfield was talking about this morning. My sister says, "oh yes you were, you were standing right beside me." The perpetrator had called all of us to the basement -- my mother, sister, two brothers -- our oldest brother getting the punishment. We were all there to witness this incident. My oldest brother admits that to me, on the telephone, and he admits that took place. But like a lot of victims, he minimized that. He sided with the perpetrator. I don't know what it holds for them.

Wayne Morris:

We have been listening to a presentation by Jeanette Westbrook about prosecuting perpetrators about ritual and sexual abuse. In addition to Jeanette's abilities as a social worker, she is also a singer and musician, and we are going to bring you a song entitled "Holocaust" recorded by Jeanette, that she dedicates to all survivors of cult ritual abuse, mind control and child abuse. Right after that, we will bring you an interview I conducted with Jeanette Westbrook.

Contents

## Jeanette's Song

> A lifetime of living is like a lifetime of dying
> When the moon is full there is darkness all around
> Hands go up with their lies they will be bound
> And the souls of men they are nowhere to be found
> In a Holocaust, it happens on your street,
> Holocaust, the victims you will meet
> Of the Holocaust ... can't you count the cost?
> There's a price to be paid, you will pay it one day.
> A lifetime of trying to not hear the crying
> Of the children who only want to live
> The blood of life is all they have to give
> And their sacrifice will not give them what they need
> It will not squelch their hunger and their greed
> For a Holocaust
> It happens on your street,
> Holocaust, The victims you will meet,
> Of a Holocaust. Can't you count the cost?
> There's a price to pay, you will pay it one day.

> -- Every year there are 50,000 children who disappear.

> A lifetime of giving hope to the living,
> That history will not be your destiny
> And all the world will hear the words you say
> Tomorrow, forever a day.
> Holocaust
> You will pay it one day Holocaust ...

Contents

## Interview

Wayne Morris:

I will start off by asking you how was the process initially when you started remembering your abuse, and how much time had passed since the abuse ended?

Jeanette Westbrook:

Well, my last hands-on abuse by my main perpetrator, my father, occurred when I was 24 years old ... so, ongoing from early childhood all the way til I was 24. The process of remembering is the old off-again, on-again process of remembering, but only remembering certain incidents, or only having flashes like viewing a far-away video that sometimes became clear, and sometimes was fog-covered. I really started getting a lot of my memories and flashbacks at age 28 when I met and married my husband.

Wayne Morris:

Were there certain things that triggered flashbacks for you or ... how did they come?

Jeanette Westbrook:

I have an idea about how that happens. I think, for me, that when I married my husband I was then in a routine day-to-day relationship with someone, with an ongoing sexual relationship. What prompted me to enter therapy was shortly after I got married, I was sitting on the bed in our bedroom, and he simply placed his hand on my leg, on my knee and I had a flashback, and I started breaking things. I was full of rage. It was almost like I blacked out when I did this, or what I know now to be a "switch". After this, I thought, "oh my god ... what is going on? I have to do something." Little did I know that there were parts of me that throughout the years had gone to other therapists trying to get help without my knowledge.

Wayne Morris:

You had gone to therapy for other things that were happening in your life before the age of 28?

Jeanette Westbrook:

Yes, but I did not know that "they" were going to a therapist and talking about incest. They actually approached therapists and most of the time, from what I now understand, most therapists at the time in the early 1980's and even in the 70's weren't dealing with issues of incest, period.

Wayne Morris:

When did you suspect that you had Dissociative Identity Disorder?

Jeanette Westbrook:

After I started having flashbacks, I started getting the memory as a child of being ostracized and isolated in school because I had failed the first grade, repeated the first grade. At the end of my second grade, they tested my IQ, and it was only 80 points at the time, which was a reflection, I believe, of the overwhelming trauma that I was experiencing. In the seventh grade I was walking down the school hall, and I was sad, lonely, feeling that I had no friends, and one of my parts, Jenny, said to me, "I will show you how to make friends ... I will do it for you." So this part, Jenny, an alter, or however you want to frame that, was so outgoing and talented and could sing, could do so many things I felt at the time I could not do ... she was winning friends all over the school, so we had a social life. This part of me lived many years of my life for me, or had most of the time, lived a lot of my life for me so I wouldn't be lonely, or ostracized. So I would have a social life so I could gai n some social skills ...

Wayne Morris:

Can you talk about what age you think your abuse by your father started, and what kind of things happened?

Jeanette Westbrook:

There were various types of abuse ... as a young child, I didn't have enough food to eat. That was a result of plain old neglect. It was not because there wasn't enough money to provide food, it was because of neglect. One vivid memory that I had, which I have drawn pictures of, and reported to my police detective in the course of prosecuting my father ... I was hung upside down with ropes from rafters in the garage beside our house. I still have the scars on my ankles from this. I was threatened with a welding rod. I was penetrated with an object, hanging upside down. Other types of abuse would be simply just being in bed, taken from my home, raped ... it could be any time, any time of the night. It could be with people I knew or did not know.

Wayne Morris:

When you say ritual abuse, what do you mean by that?

Jeanette Westbrook:

Ritual abuse is severe physical, spiritual, mental abuse at the hands of multiple perpetrators. I mean abuse that is taken in the context of not only a spiritual or religious belief, but abuse that is very hard to define as to "why?" -- which victims ultimately ask. Why? It is abuse that is torturous, involves torture, threats of torture, threats to your person, to your very being, threats to humanity, threats to persons that you hold dear, threats to your pets ...

Wayne Morris:

And through these threats, did you feel that you couldn't escape the situation, you couldn't just run away from it?

Jeanette Westbrook:

Yes. I felt that way, and to explain how my childhood was ... we were over-controlled when we were very young, and as we became teenagers, there was no control. We were running the streets. We were everywhere. Promiscuous, drug-using. The house was loaded with drugs. There was no need to go out in the street to find drugs. It was right there. It was a proverbial drugstore.

Wayne Morris:

Was it your father who was bringing drugs in?

Jeanette Westbrook:

My father assisted someone in my family with what I consider drug dealing, but in my opinion it was not that person who was responsible, but ultimately my father was responsible for this.

Wayne Morris:

What was the relationship to your father of some of these other perpetrators?

Jeanette Westbrook:

Some were known to him through his fraternal organization, some were known to him through his religious organization but I definitely feel he didn't belong to the religious organization -- it was simply a way to procure more victims. I was not his only victim. I was not his only victim in our family. He had multiple victims outside of our family. When I revealed to one of my father's relatives, his only remaining direct relative, she said she had been raped by two of the same family members who had raped me as a child. I was able to document at least three generations. The police also had photographs and access to the site where I was taken as a child in the context of ritual abuse. The evidence existed. Not only did my detective investigate, and believe me, I had other police officers who supported me, accompanied me to approach the District Attorney.

Wayne Morris:

Did you feel that specifically the Masonic context had anything to do with the rituals themselves, were there Masonic elements to the ritual abuse?

Jeanette Westbrook:

I don't necessarily feel that there was. I feel that birds of a feather flock together. I feel that his cohorts in his fraternal organization, in terms of joining in the abuse of me, was because they were all pedophiles -- simply pedophiles -- regardless of whether they were practicing satanists, regardless of whether they were a member of a fraternal organization, regardless of whether they were a boy scout leader, regardless of whether they were a community figure, regardless of whether they worked for state government, regardless of whether they worked for federal government. What is indicative to me, that underlies all this, is the fact that the persons who commit crimes against children of the most hideous nature -- crimes that are sadistically violent -- I think that he and others attempted not only to sadistically me, but to split my mind into as many pieces, to split my personality. My sister remembered my father calling me by other names. She wondered why was she being called by these other names. He definitely knew of my alter personalities.

Wayne Morris:

This sounds a lot like the deliberate creation of multiple personalities with the government mind control experiments. Did you feel that your father had knowledge of these kinds of techniques, or that he just picked up that you did have multiple personalities, and he just continued to use that against you?

Jeanette Westbrook:

I have not completed all of my research concerning his military career and any connections there. From what I know now, I would find it very remote that he would have known this on his own (the capacity to induce this). However, I do believe that organizations, whether we want to call them satanists, or whether we want to call them organized pedophile clubs, whether we want to call them mind control, are very much aware of multiple personality defence systems. They definitely know about it, and they seek to create it as a way to keep their abuse of the victim hidden. They use this in a manner that protects their identity, so that I and all parts of me being abused, horrible, sadistic abuse -- could get up in the morning, and function, and go to school, and come home, and live with these perpetrators.

Wayne Morris:

Did your father just outright threaten you if you told anybody?

Jeanette Westbrook:

Absolutely yes. He threatened me, not only verbally, but he threatened me with a welding rod. A welding rod is an item that is hot enough to melt metal.

Wayne Morris:

Did you specifically choose to leave out the ritualistic aspects of the abuse in the court, or did you somehow want to work that in?

Jeanette Westbrook:

I definitely left that out. Because there were no statutes against ritual abuse, it was clear that the courts would not proceed under a statute that did not exist. First degree rape, whether in the context of ritual or organized abuse, rape is rape is rape. That's a crime used in force. That's a felony crime. Used by your first degree relative, it is incest.

Wayne Morris:

If you did introduce testimony regarding the ritual abuse aspects, how do you think that would have been received by the court?

Jeanette Westbrook:

I think it would have been very difficult, if not impossible; however, the players behind the scenes, that is the District Attorney, the police officers involved in my case, my own personal attorney, and persons in the Kentucky Attorney General's office -- everyone knew it was a ritual abuse case. People were very much sure of the case because of the vast amount of collaborative evidence that I had, and supporting testimony from other victims.

Wayne Morris:

While you were gathering evidence for your case, did you feel you were hampered or sabotaged in any way by your perpetrators?

Jeanette Westbrook:

Not only do I feel that I was sabotaged, I feel that the entire criminal justice system not only erected barriers in front of me to the criminal justice system, but in essence stuck their foot out and tripped me several times -- each time I got up and moved over those barriers and used every advocacy organization that I could contact. I had letters of support from other victims who were behind me in my call to go through the criminal justice system to bring the perpetrator to justice. I did not seek a criminal recourse against my perpetrator until I got the knowledge that my perpetrator not only had raped me, but had raped other victims. I could not stand for myself, but I found the courage to stand up for others. In the system, absolutely there was sabotage, not only within the system, my father was very much connected with the system that existed in the jurisdiction in which I brought charges. As a matter of fact, the D.A. refused to bring charges, even in the face of massive evidence. Even in the face of my police detective tape recording my perpetrator over the telephone, getting this information on tape. Even in the face of taped admissions -- refusing to go forward with the case to the point where I involved the Attorney General's office, the victims' advocacy division, and they sent a contingent to the local D.A. insisting that my case be released, or insisting that they prosecute my case. The D.A. still refused to prosecute the case, and then the Attorney General's office interceded and moved to take jurisdiction of the case, and then moved to extradite my perpetrator (who was then living in another state) back to the state of Kentucky to stand trial on felony first degree rape.

Wayne Morris:

So at that point upon the extradition, the trial was ready to go forward then?

Jeanette Westbrook:

Yes it was.

Wayne Morris:

Can you talk about what happened at this point ...

Jeanette Westbrook:

The Attorney General's office went forward with the process of drawing up the extradition papers, ready to extradite him. My perpetrator happened to be out of the United States meeting with presidents and dignitaries of foreign countries. Upon his return to the United States, he came home on a Thursday night, Friday night he fixed steak dinners on a barbeque. By Sundy he was dead. He died at home. The reason given was that supposedly he died of a heart attack at age 64. It was signed off by a private physician. There was no autopsy done which is very unusual given the person was being charged with felony indictments, and being extradited back to another state, which is fairly rare.

Wayne Morris:

Did your father have a history of heart problems before that?

Jeanette Westbrook:

From what I understand he was fairly healthy, although there had been other deaths in his family of heart attacks and I might add, deaths by other family members who were perpetrators.

Wayne Morris:

When your father was visiting the foreign countries, this was with the business of the nucelar power stations ... his work ...

Jeanette Westbrook:

Yes, it was connected with the nuclear industry ... that is, what he was doing in those countries was formulating programs for these countries that had formerly been under communist rule who depended heavily on nuclear power for industry, for heating their homes, etc. and he was there helping them develop new nuclear power systems from what I understand -- especially from the aspect of nuclear safety in which the communist regimes were sorely lacking in safety precautions in domestic applications.

Wayne Morris:

... not only in the communist countries ...

You have been listening to Jeanette Westbrook MSW, a social worker, singer, and survivor of ritual and sexual abuse by her father and others. As we have heard, her father was the Director for the organization responsible for inspecting all nuclear power plants in the USA. He was a Grand Master Mason, Boy Scout leader, and church deacon. Jeanette's legal case against her father, if it had gone forward, would have created a scandal. Just before having to face charges in court, Jeanette's father died. This has been show number 22 in the ongoing series on mind control. Tune in next week for an interview with Dr. Stephen Kent about cult ritual abuse. You have been listening to CKLN 88.1.

Contents

CKLN Series Table of Contents

Home Archives News Resources Victims
Conferences Search Web Ring Contact
Our Disclaimer Fair Use
© 1995-2003 Heart, MTC Online Forums, and Survivors. Nothing can be copied with out permission