Has a B.C. Father Been Labelled a Sexual Predator Based on Fraudulent Expert Evidence?

GeorgiaLeeLang025In a groundbreaking decision last summer after a 147 day trial, Mr. Justice Paul Walker of the British Columbia Supreme Court found that B.C.’s child protection authorities had negligently permitted a father to sexually abuse his child while the youngster was in the custody of the Ministry. The Court found that the government’s failure to protect this child was “egregious, negligent, and a breach of duty” and government social workers showed a “reckless disregard to their obligation to protect children.”

The evidence before Mr. Justice Walker included expert evidence from Dr. Claire Reeves who had been an expert witness at the 90 day family law trial that preceded the action against the Ministry by several years. Dr. Reeves’ opinion played a significant role in the original finding that this father had sexually abused his children. The parties agreed that her expert opinion from the family law trial would be admitted in the Ministry trial.Throughout the lengthy proceedings, the father adamantly denied abusing his children.

After the family law trial Reasons were handed down, the father had 30 days to file an appeal of that decision, however, no appeal was filed. Yesterday the Court of Appeal allowed the father to appeal the original family trial decision, although three years had passed since the original ruling and the 30 day window has long passed.

Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett in the Court of Appeal remarked that “one would be hard pressed to envision an act as vile as sexually abusing one’s own children or a travesty of justice as great as being falsely accused and found guilty of such acts”. The father’s successful application was based on new evidence that appears to establish that Dr. Reeves’ evidence was fraudulent. The credentials she touted, including a Doctorate in Clinical Counselling, Masters of Science in Clinical Psychology, Bachelor of Science in Family Mediation, and a Bachelor of Arts in Journalism, are from so-called “diploma mills”.

Her assertion that she had testified as an expert on child sexual abuse on numerous occasions in a variety of courts also appears to be untruthful. The substance of her trial opinion was based on a theory of child abuse that has long been discredited, even by the expert who originally proffered the “child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome”.

Dr. Reeves has not responded to the allegations outlined by the Court of Appeal, however, a Google search, where one would expect to find many entries regarding her professional work, is sparse. She is the President and Founder of Mothers Against Sexual Abuse.

CBC News reports their online research indicates that Dr. Reeves says she was instrumental in bringing in chemical castration for child molesters in California. She also has unusual views on related topics. On her Facebook page she wrote:

” Why test on animals when we have prisons full of pedophiles”.

She also believes many people have had controlling microchips implanted in their brains — and have been given trigger words that could turn them into saboteurs.

“I believe people have been chipped, targeted individuals, and more of them than we can imagine,” said Reeves, calling it, “Mind control. Because it really is mind control.”

The father’s appeal will be of great interest to those who decry the failings of the family law administration of justice. No doubt the children’s mother will seek to legitimize her reliance on Dr. Reeves as an expert. The truth will, undoubtedly be revealed.

Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang

12 thoughts on “Has a B.C. Father Been Labelled a Sexual Predator Based on Fraudulent Expert Evidence?

    1. Karen It is hard to believe, however, father was unrepresented at trial. Perhaps wife’s counsel had a professional obligation to vet the expert he retained? A simple google search should have set off alarm bells….

      1. BG is lying about his not being represented legally. BG was represented by very good lawyers in 2009 and 2010.
        He let the lawyers go, once he realized he could just use the MCFD lawyers to argue his case for him, for free. Which they did do to the fullest extent, sparing no expense, even paying for BG’s expert witnesses and their testimony for BG .

        It is the poor mother JP who had no proper legal representation for the first year and a half, and has had to struggle terribly to pay lawyers with no money.

        BG is a con pedophile. That’s why he’s found guilty in Supreme Court of BC because it’s the truth BG molested 4 babies/children repeatedly over many years, proven in court with evidence and proof.

  1. The reason Dr. Claire Reeves was hired in the first place is because there was not a single psychologist with expertise in child sexual abuse in all of Canada that was willing to look at any of the materials, documents, evidence, and proof, and produce a forensic report for the court. In all of Canada.

    What is there in the Canadian Pychological Services sector that is preventing every single psychologist in Canada with expertise in child sexual abuse from performing this important work?

    JP’s kids were kidnapped from December 30 2009, to June 15, 2012 and during that time JP was completely blocked by the MCFD from being able to provide her children with a counsellor, or psychologist, or doctors.

    And there was not a single psychologist with education or experience with child sexual abuse in all of Canada that would look at the evidence and proof and provide a forensic report, especially without any permission by the MCFD for the children to be seen or spoken to. Why is this service being blocked in Canada?

    There are NO psychologists in Canada with expert training in child sexual abuse, and who were prepared to review evidence and proof of child sexual abuse and produce a forensic report for the court. None.

    This was exhausted.
    (JP had used the doctors psychologists directory from a doctors office as well as the online Psychological Associations directory of Canadian Psychologists, and had called every single psychologist with a mention of training in child sexual abuse or sexual abuse, and none were able or willing. JP finally found Dr. Claire Reeves. I guess we’re seeing why Dr. Claire Reeves is a one-in-a-million.

    This search for a Canadian accredited psychologist with education, experience, and expertise in child sexual abuse was done very thoroughly before Dr. Claire Reeves was hired.

    First off the focus is the evidence and proof that BG is guilty of baby rape and infant/child rape, heinous sexual rape of the 4 children, repeatedly, and over nearly 10 years (age of eldest son once returned to mother) Not all of these side shows BG keeps performing. (JP’s mental health, now Dr.Reeves mental health etc etc)
    But as for Reeves, instead of (better use of time /resources), or in addition to, any investigation of Reeves credentials,

    (which she was 100% honest about on her resume. (BG got the info he is attacking Dr. Reeves with from Dr. Reeves own resume.)(this actually was already done in the first trial))

    there should instead, or additionally, be an investigation into the government and the MCFD and the Canadian Psychological Association and the universities about whether a mother or father in Canada can find a child sexual abuse expert psychologist in Canada at all. Especially a child sexual abuse expert psychologist that can and will do an analysis of the evidence and proof of the child sexual abuse, and make a forensic report for the court… And especially when the kids are kidnapped and the kidnappers will not allow this professional, brought by the parent they are kidnapped from, or their counsel, to see or speak to the children.

    There are not ANY, and it must be intentionally so, and the ministry of children knows this.

    It is part of the governments control over which child sexual abuse can easier be covered up by the government and which they will prosecute.

    The Ministry of Children and its lawyers, BG and his lawyers are lying about everything. Every word of found-guilty baby-raping pedophile /situational molester BG and the MCFD is a lie.

      1. JP was never properly represented and/or unrepresented during that time from Oct 2009 – June 2011. JP only had competent counsel as of around June 2011.

  2. And what about the MCFD, we don’t see any mention in their full of lies “factum” of the Canadian Registered Psychologist, Paul Eirikson, who was chosen by found guilty of wrongful apprehension (abuse of public office for purpose of a criminal kidnapping), etc., social worker William Strickland, for BG, and paid for by the MCFD.

    BG and the MCFD are hypocrites, as their Psychologist, Paul Eirikson was found guilty of perjury (intentionally lying about a very serious matter) on the stand during the trial, and caught by a forensic document examiner, of tampering with documents and his own notes to perpetuate serious lies)

    BG also has a juvenile record (at age 16) of rape of a girl. Why don’t the government investigate that?

  3. CH either you are having a rant or you are too close to the case to be objective.

    BG may well be innocent. For one, he is innocent in the criminal context, but has been pillaried in the civil courts. That’s meaningfully innocent in my book, particularly given the low threshold for fact finding in civil trials.

    I disagree with Diva, I doubt that JP will try to have the testimony of Reeves stand. The question is whether it was given much weight, or would have changed the result. That question which the court of appeal will determine itself involves a weighing of the evidence – which the court of appeal must not do. However, if you read their rulings they often do it, but pretend that they don’t.

    Reeves’ evidence may be tossed out now but oi you read the ruling of judge walker he was hardly objective on the rest of the evidence. It’s obvious that he was writing up the case as trial proceeded given the short time from end of trial to the voluminous written judgement. He clearly didn’t reflect on all the evidence at the end of trial.

  4. The thing is we do not think Reeves was even tendered as an “expert”, to the degree that BG and mcfd are misleading. We know she was tendered as a “witness” and there was some regard; she heads MASA, and is a published author, and may have had expertise in some areas more than others.
    That’s likely why the judgement says her “opinion evidence”, and not her “expert evidence”. There’s this big question about this “CSAAS” and we don’t even think that was mentioned in her actual Report.. If it was referred to, the context is likely being misrepresented by BG and mcfd, and it may have come up on the witness stand only because if she was asked about it.

    We just don’t see what mind control and rfi chips or has to do with anything, because we’re very certain it wasn’t part of the trial.
    Reeves wasn’t saying, “BG could have a mind-controlling rfi microchip implanted in him and that when he hears a certain word, that’s what made him rape his babies.” , no, and not anything like that, it just simply wasn’t part of the trial at all.

    Also we looked a bit at her website or facebook, and it may be more accurate to say Reeves has/had a meme posted about pedophiles, but we don’t think she wrote that meme or is the writer of the meme as is suggested in this article.

    The rfj states that even if all of the sexual abuse were omitted from the trial BG would still not be given any access due to all the physical abuse of the children alone, etc., that he was also found guilty of, by evidence and proof. (BG also involved in date-rape drugging (ghb))

    The BG appeal is a fraud and a waste of time.

    Pretty positive there’s plenty of evidence “beyond that of a reasonable doubt” for the criminal trial, and BG will be found guilty there as well.

    Reeves or no Reeves, the evidence and proof are not going to go away. Maybe some of you don’t like to face the truth, which is squarely before you in two very thorough and well done judgements, but the truth is BG badly, forcibly, injuriously, nastily, sexually abused the four children repeatedly over a ten year time period, and he’s found guilty, because he’s guilty, and not because of the “balance of probabilities” standard.
    Try to think of the poor children who don’t want to give daddy anymore bj’s or get anally and vaginally penetrated and ripped till bleeding, every time BG decides or is steroid-raging. Think what if this was your own kids, would you be writing articles like this?

    JP and her children have the truth on their side. It’s been over six years to do a job, (BG finally being declared guilty) ..that should have been able to have been done in about 5 minutes back in 2009. A one week criminal trial would be sufficient to convict BG.

    BG and mcfd in their “factums” are thoroughly misrepresenting the other experts involved :

    CBC reported from the mcfd’s “factum” of lies : “in quotes”
    1. “• Pediatrician found no physical evidence of sexual abuse.”
    (..but mcfd and BG purposely leave out that she also said that this does not mean that sexual abuse did not occur)
    (and that the clinic and Dr. lack the ability, that many people believe they have, to detect physical evidence after the fact anyway. And that there is very strong medically documented proof of their lack of ability to detect physical evidence admitted in this trial)
    BG and mcfd are misrepresenting what this appointment was for.
    (Also this was at the BC Children’s Hospital “Child Protection” (mcfd’s own?) Medical Clinic, and Strickland did interfere negatively against the children. The clinic staff were blocked by Strickland from anyone there asking the children any questions about the sexual abuse.)

    2. “• Child psychologist found low probability that sexual abuse occurred.”
    (This psychologist, being manipulated by BG and mcfd at the time (mother did not see her) was told by mcfd Strickland that she could only “observe” the children, and she too was not permitted to ask the children any questions about the sexual abuse. She was told by mcfd Strickland to observe children only for “emotional harm” done by mother, and told not to do anything to do with the father and sexual abuse.
    Her Report actually says risk that sexual abuse did occur)

    3. “• Parental capacity expert concluded sexual abuse was unlikely.”
    (This psychologist was hand picked by mcfd sw Strickland, and was manipulated by mcfd, given false and selective information to begin with, and the same psychologist who committed perjury from the witness box.
    This psychologist was blocked by Strickland from questioning the children about sexual abuse and did not question the kids on sexual abuse, even the people who the mcfd had watching the children and were present when this psychologist made his token meeting with only the 2 older children, said that this (freaky looking) psychologist only spent less than 5 minutes with each of the 2 older children, and that the psychologist never saw them again.)
    (How is it that BG did poorly on 6/7 of his assessments yet this psychologist favors BG? While JP did well on 6/7 of his assessments, and the only one this psychologist discredited JP on was the one because she said something about the sound of a baby crying doesn’t frustrate her, and he found this too difficult to believe that there could be anyone who could stay calm and efficient during the sound of a baby’s crying). Wow.

    4.”• Child psychologist concluded sexual abuse was unlikely”
    (This is false. he concluded it was just as likely as not. Also mcfd had, in contempt of the courts order, attempted to persuade this psychologist as well, (proof) not to question the children on sexual abuse at all. Again mcfd supplying misinformation to him, leaving things out, adding false things.
    Also the children illegally spent the night with BG before these visits to this psychologist, and BG illegally took them to this psychologist himself. The child told the psychologist that she had been up all night and hadn’t been able to sleep and then immediately showed the psychologist a bracelet BG had given her the night before).
    (BG had never given the children anything before he had them kidnapped by mcfd. From birth 2002- to Dec 30, 2009, not even one stocking stuffer, not one birthday card, not one gift from BG …maybe people like BG don’t believe in birthdays or Christmas?)
    Also this psychologist said that the children had not been coached by mother, as BG had made up.

    5.” • Parental capacity expert recommended father get custody..”
    (…this is the same psychologist as above, (#3.) ..that was hired by corrupt sw William Strickland, and same psychologist that committed perjury on the stand)

    6.”•Child psychologist recommended father get custody.”
    (…this is the same psychologist as above, (#4.) ..No he didn’t. He said it was for the trier of act to decide, (based on ALL of the facts backed by solid proof and evidence, most of which was blocked by mcfd from psychologist seeing during assessments))

    7.”• Parental capacity expert said mother required mental health intervention.”
    (Again, hired by sw Strickland, (#3.) ..lied to by mcfd, basically told by mcfd what to write in his report, …perjury…)

    8. “• Child psychologist found mother required psychiatric assessment.”
    (False) (this is referring to psychologist (#4.) again.
    (..besides the mother did do a psychiatric assessment, and was found to be telling the truth by the psychiatrist, and by another psychologist, and another psychologist, and by the counsellor, and also by her doctor).

    Also Pilloried means “accused” . BG hasn’t been “accused” in the civil court. BG has been ~found guilty~ -based on evidence and proof- in the civil court. Rightfully so.

    1. CH you don’t know what you are talking about.

      You say “That’s likely why the judgement says her “opinion evidence”, and not her “expert evidence”. ”

      I’d like to point out that the only opinion evidence allowable in a trial is expert evidence.

      The remindsr of what you is frankly nonsense from that point on ….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s