Author Topic: R. Hinton and S. Scheff, all lovey dovey  (Read 5886 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
R. Hinton and S. Scheff, all lovey dovey
« Reply #15 on: February 08, 2007, 06:34:20 PM »
Why wouldn't Sue Scheff tell Layne Brown where Randal Hinton was?

Why?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
R. Hinton and S. Scheff, all lovey dovey
« Reply #16 on: April 25, 2007, 01:56:08 PM »
Quote from: ""BuzzKill""
You know, for a long time, I had an uncomfortable notion that maybe Sue was protecting Hinton. From what, you might ask? Well, possibly, from the consequences of the abuse he inflicted upon Layne. Why would I think so, you might ask? Well, its difficult to explain. But it was as if Sue held an undercurrent of hostility toward Layne. It was not overt in any way. But there was always an effort on her part to exclude him. For example - back when there were efforts to contact parents and kids about the CA law suit - she was opposed to telling Layne anything about it. She insisted his statue of limitation had run and that telling him about it would only frustrate him. (wrong) She expressed other concerns having to do with his fragile mental health. (wouldn't getting some measure of justice Help, not Hurt?) I decided to ignore her concerns, and told him about it.  

There were other occasions, involving journalist, where Sue seemed hostile to bringing Layne in on it. Again, nothing strongly overt - but just a discouragement from doing so - a "concern" it might not be beneficial.

It always nagged at me - Why was she hostile to the idea of letting this young man be part of an attempt to achieve some measure of justice?  I knew she had at one time worked with Hinton. I didn't know it had been during the time she was operating PURE. But I did wonder, if she were helping him keep his ass covered.  

For awhile Layne was trying to find out where Hinton was. I think he was hoping there could be charges brought for his crimes, if he could be found.  I noticed that reporters sometimes quoted anon sources, who had worked from the Program, and who appeared to be Hinton  -  and wondered how the reporters were finding him. One reporter did confirm to me he had interviewed Hinton, but he would not tell me where he was. I now suspect that when it suited her - Sue provided the reporters with his whereabouts and contact info. But if she had it, she never offered this info to Layne.

Shifty sort of fence she sits on, isn't it?


Interesting.  So Layne was betrayed by the very people he considered his friends and tried to help?

How absolutely pathetic that anyone would think they have the right to withhold information from Layne and even discourage him from joining a lawsuit.

Shame on you all!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
R. Hinton and S. Scheff, all lovey dovey
« Reply #17 on: April 25, 2007, 06:31:39 PM »
Posted by Constent Gardener
http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?t=19872


"Teen Help is a marketing group that has provided many Specialty Schools with thousands of students who are in need of help. We are a service that educates and helps parents with their students transition from home to the facility. Our doors have been open for eleven years to assist any parent in need of our help.

P.U.R.E. has been and is a valuable asset to Teen Help. Its experts are very successful with the Parent Referral Program, and have educated many parents in the referral process. P.U.R.E. has presented our Specialty Schools as an alternative for many parents, Therapists, Doctors, Guidance Counselors, District Attorneys, School Districts, and Probation Officers.

Parents Universal Referral Experts have had first hand experience with Carolina Springs Academy. They has toured the facility, met the staff, and know the ins and outs of the program. Their first hand experience has eased the minds of many parents in the admissions process."

Sincerely,


Randall Hinton
Teen Help Admissions

http://web.archive.org/web/200103120118 ... ences.html
_________________
Bear with me that I may speak, and after I have spoken, mock on.
Job 21;3
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
R. Hinton and S. Scheff, all lovey dovey
« Reply #18 on: April 26, 2007, 02:16:41 PM »
Then there are people--parents, plantiffs, even attorneys-- who seem to believe that the proper label for Sue Scheff and PURE is "parent referrer?"

  :roll:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
R. Hinton and S. Scheff, all lovey dovey
« Reply #19 on: April 26, 2007, 03:14:47 PM »
Actually, the distinction some are apparently trying to make, is moot.

What difference does it make what they call themselves?  The concept was to recruit CHILDREN for placement not parents.

No difference at all between the referral entities when you get right down to it, IMO.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
R. Hinton and S. Scheff, all lovey dovey
« Reply #20 on: April 26, 2007, 03:18:50 PM »
Something else this case has the potential to bring to light about this murky issue is the fact that parents who did recruit, for WWASPS, were paid in the form of a discount on their tuition costs.

Do parents have to claim this as income on their tax forms?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »