Updates Re: Murder Trial of Chuck Long II

[Anonymous]

Hutty is typical of the kind of people Long "hired" to be counselors at the camp. He was a loser who wanted to get out of Philly for the summer and go to a camp with his kids. No application was ever filled out, no references ever checked. His kids got to go to the camp for free if he worked there. His kids were (I think...) 6 and 8. I think the most offensive comment I heard at the trial (and I heard a lot) was when Hutty was asked if he remembered the room number of the hotel. He reply was "No, and it's weird 'cuz I should. I played the room number on the lottery every week for a long time thinking it might bring me luck". Total scum.

Now the next phase of this case will be when the 3 counselors who went abused campers on the Wednesday of camp (when Long wasn't present) go to trial. What they did was horrendous, and I really believe Long ordered that, too.

[Deborah]

***He reply was "No, and it's weird 'cuz I should. I played the room number on the lottery every week for a long time thinking it might bring me luck". Total scum.

What association might he have made with the motel room number where he killed a kid and it bringing him luck? Sadistic Scum. Was he proud of what he did? Did he show any remorse at anytime during the trial?

Here's some interesting reading from Prison Legal News. Scroll down to page 6
http://prisonlegalnews.org/Issues/09pln02.pdf

One young anon sergeant claimed that the kids were kicked, stomped, whipped, deprived of sleep, and 'FORCED TO EAT MUD AS PUNISHMENT' for minor rule infractions. A fellow inmate said, "younger campers were often made to ingest dirt that turned to mud after the sergeants poured water into their mouth."

***So, was this covered in the trial? Was Tony eating dirt because he was delirious or was he actually made to eat dirt as a form of punishment? It is oh so easy to imagine the later and that he resisted allowing them to pour water into his mouth, hence their comment that Tony 'refused' to drink water or wash out his mouth. After ingesting dirt on his own accord, of course!!  :roll:  :roll:

It was also alledged that the boys were asked that day if they wanted to go home. Tony and others said yes. They were in the DOT line for being 'quitters'.
Sounds like more of the standard program MO- bait and punish. It doesn't get much more sadistic than that.

Also states that Hutty would be sentenced to probation, but not until after all the others were prosecuted.

[Anonymous]

On Wednesday at camp Long left to take a camper to a court appearance. While he was gone three DI's beat the hell out of the kids (except Long's kids, of course!), and forced them to drink mud. They would make them take a mouth full of dirt and then force them to drink warm/hot water. Hopefully, those three will get what they deserve for this abuse when they go to trial next month. Tony was eating dirt because he was delirious. He thought it was water. He had been force to do PT in the morning, and was already thirsty when he was put in the DOR line. Those kids sat there for as long as they did because Long told them he was calling their parents, WHICH HE NEVER DID.
I had the pleasure of seeing Carmelina Long on the news tonight say ONE MORE TIME "that child committed suicide". She should be put in jail for perjury and contempt of court.
Once more highlight....we were told one of the female staff members had tested positive for meth while at the camp, and had remained at the camp. In closing, Ms. Garcia said that the staff member had been sent home "because she had no business being with children". At that moment we all look over at the staff member (who had been identified earlier), and what is she doing in the courtroom?? Sitting there with Long's youngest daughter in her lap.

[EricasMom]

Here's this morning's report. Expanded from yesterday's.  Note that it's threatening another camper with a knife that gets Long mandatory prison time--not killing Tony.  Sentencing is near the end of February.  

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... ong04.html

Thanks again anon for giving us insight into the trial.

[Anonymous]

Ditto Deb!

Hutty got lucky .... just like in the Ian August case.

Guess we should be grateful Long threatened to gut another young camper "like a fish" if that's what it took to shut this "camp" (s.i.c.) down so that no other child need fear being assaulted or even killed while participating in one of his programs?  

Sheesh.

Barbe

[Antigen]

On 2005-01-03 14:47:00, Anonymous wrote:

"I was one of the jurors on this case. I am choosing to post this as an anonymous post because I really haven't decided whether or not to talk to the press. I came home today with mixed feelings, and did a search to see what there was out there that I didn't know. I came across this forum, and felt compelled to add a post. While MANY of us would have been happier with a 2nd degree murder conviction, I am just happy we were able to not be a hung jury on this count! Having a mistrial declared on counts 2-9 was horrible! But it only takes one person.... I am glad this is over with, and I hope our verdicts do something to help prevent more of this abuse! The prosecution did a tremendous job. A lot of the articles that are linked from AZCentral don't give an accurate account of what happened in the courtroom."

Dear madam or sir, I just can't tell you how welcome you are. I'm so grateful to you and the other jurors for paying attention and believing the evidence. I think you can rest assured that you've already helped a lot of people just by validating their experience and that your hard work in the jury room will help put an end to this madness. I don't know that I'll ever be able to give you concrete evidence of it, but I believe it's so.

I hope you do decide to talk to the press, but I wouldn't ask it of you, ya' know.

Thank you so much!

Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop off like autumn leaves. When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.  -- My First Summer in the Sierra , 1911, page 110.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0395353513/' target='_new'> John Muir

[juror15]

[Deborah]

We all know Lon's policy about posting negative press about programs, "Better to get it 'right' than first". In other words, I will wait for the piece that has the best possible spin before posting the 'Breaking News'.
Look which one he posted for this case:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nationa ... d184698933

[Anonymous]

WHOA there juror...You mean you were a juror, you're posting on this boot camp hate site?  I mean, you are just coming here or you've been damning boot camps for a while and just happened to be on a jury that convicted this guy?  Something smells very fishy...maybe Mr. Long's attorney can find out who you are and bring it to the judge's attention before he goes to jail??  Hmmm..  I live in the Phoenix area.  I think I will do just that, just in case you had a hidden motive for serving.  I'm not saying he isn't guilty, it just seems weird that a juror would post here, and post what you've posted.  Watch out!   :eek:

[juror15]

After the trial ended I did a Google on "Charles Long murder trial". This is the first result that comes up. (try it, it's true) I read what people had to say. I listened to three months of evidence about a boot camp, so yes, I now have a pretty strong opinion. I have a fairly educated opinion regarding THIS boot camp. I've never posted anywhere else on the site, because I know nothing regarding the other topics. I knew nothing about the case going into the trial.I wanted to read what else was out there about the case because there was a lot of mention of previous press during the trial.
No misconduct here....the trial is over, I can do whatever I want. my vote was based on the evidence we heard at trail, period. As the judge told us when we left "you are now free to go and talk to whomever you want about this case".

[Anonymous]

The Juror said: Maybe it will help bring attention to the fact that people need to think before handing over control of their kids to unqualified strangers."


Did the judge also say you were free to air your opinions on a hate forum? From what you said above, I absolutely do not believe that you didn't do some surfing during the trial and that spilled over into your decision or was discussed amongst the other jurors. Isn't there something about "influencing" the jury?  Parents do think about handing over control to unqualified strangers....does that include friends?

Unfortunately Mr. Long WAS qualified.

[Antigen]

Now there's a stretch!

Of course, you don't know squat about Charles Long II's little torture camp; even less than you would know about other gulags w/ which you seem to be somewhat tenuously affiliated. And now, in the wake of a little boy's brutal murder,  a jury has been seated to hear all of the evidence in this case and has decided to convict the guy for what he's done.

But, in the warped landscape of your scary little mind, this person too must be some kind of evil conspirator out to get you?

Phoenix, just how hard do you have to work to keep on believing as you do? And, maybe more importantly, why? What have you done to make it so imperative for you to identify w/ and to protect people who torture children to death?

And, btw, why are you still anon? Most people who decide to hang around these forums for damned near a year will pick some kind of name just to be able to distinguish themselves from other anon posters. But not you. You just keep on dropping impotent bombs anonymously. How come? What are you so afraid of?

In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn?t speak up because I wasn?t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn?t speak up because I wasn?t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn?t speak up because I wasn?t a trade unionist. Then they came for Catholics, and I didn?t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."
--Protestant minister Martin Neimoller

[Anonymous]

On 2005-01-07 21:51:00, Anonymous wrote:

"WHOA there juror...You mean you were a juror, you're posting on this boot camp hate site?  I mean, you are just coming here or you've been damning boot camps for a while and just happened to be on a jury that convicted this guy?  Something smells very fishy...maybe Mr. Long's attorney can find out who you are and bring it to the judge's attention before he goes to jail??  Hmmm..  I live in the Phoenix area.  I think I will do just that, just in case you had a hidden motive for serving.  I'm not saying he isn't guilty, it just seems weird that a juror would post here, and post what you've posted.  Watch out!   :eek: "

Hello?  Google exists, you moron.

There's a simple as hell way to find out the answer to your question---the judge subpoena's Ginger's logs and sorts by ip address, looks at the juror's ip range and looks at the dates.

If the juror's first post is when she said it was, then she's being truthful and you're full of shit.

Yes, there is such a thing as juror misconduct, but for you to simply assume it because she is saying something you don't want to hear is ridiculous.

I suspect the juror is telling the truth, since how she found Fornits is very similar to how I found it.

I had a friend of a bunch of my friends in a small social community get sent to a Program.  I didn't know whether to be upset or not---didn't know whether the place was Hogwarts minus the magic (regular old boarding school with a couple of therapists thrown in) or was the kiddie edition of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.

I started searching Google, I found Fornits (among other places) and came here to ask my questions and talk about the subject.

One of the reasons I picked Fornits is *because* Ginger freely allows program advocates to say what they have to say in favor of the programs as well as freely allowing criticisms.

The only reasons for Fornits to be slanted towards criticism of the programs is 1) that there's really some fire in amongst all the smoke and/or 2) the pro-program sites tend to severely censor criticism.

This juror wouldn't be the first juror to have *formed* an opinion about a subject in the course of a trial.

Maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong.  In any case, there is no hazard to the juror if you *do* call Long's attorney, since a simple search of log information will clear or condemn the juror straight away with no risk of being wrong.

Since I haven't seen the juror on Fornits before and I've been reading it regularly for quite some time, I strongly suspect you're wrong.  The juror is just who she seems and claims to be---someone who formed an opinion *during* the trial, based on the evidence presented---which is just exactly what she was supposed to do.

Juror: don't let this anonymous idiot scare you.  A quick search of the site's ip logs will clear you of his/her baseless, irresponsible allegations.

Timoclea

[Anonymous]

On 2005-01-08 08:35:00, Anonymous wrote:

"The Juror said: Maybe it will help bring attention to the fact that people need to think before handing over control of their kids to unqualified strangers."





Did the judge also say you were free to air your opinions on a hate forum? From what you said above, I absolutely do not believe that you didn't do some surfing during the trial and that spilled over into your decision or was discussed amongst the other jurors. Isn't there something about "influencing" the jury?  Parents do think about handing over control to unqualified strangers....does that include friends?



Unfortunately Mr. Long WAS qualified.   "

Hello?  Mr. Moron?  After the trial is over, the jurors can "air their opinions" anywhere they damned well please, in the full protection of the First Amendment that the *rest* of us enjoy.

I don't care what you "absolutely do not believe"---fortunately, nobody else does, either.  You can "absolutely" not believe that the world is round if you want.  Ain't nobody's business if you do.  But I don't think there's likely to be a run on "falling off the edge" travel insurance just based on your say-so, either.  :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:

Timoclea

[Antigen]

On 2005-01-08 10:28:00, Anonymous wrote:

Juror: don't let this anonymous idiot scare you. A quick search of the site's ip logs will clear you of his/her baseless, irresponsible allegations

Even that would be pretty much an idle threat for a number of reasons.

1. The same search could be done and probably would be requested on the accuser. And that would reveal every post by them. And I have a sneaking suspicion that even this person might be able to wrap their mind around how that would, not only damage what credibility they might think they have, but really pile onto the other side of the argument.
   
   
2. My hosting provider is outside of the country and, therefore, not subject to US law. Now, I trust these guys because I've done business w/ them for a number of years and found them to be entirely trustworthy and honest. But that's not the same thing as meeting a standard of evidence in a US court.
   
   
3. There is another, more legally binding, source for this information; the users' local ISPs. If you check the user agreement w/ any US based ISP, you'll probably find that there are stipulations regarding legal conduct using the connection. Harassment and slander are illegal. And that source would show, not only hits to this site, but all traffic in and out over whatever timespan the ISP keeps such records. I suspect that the last thing in the world our friend Phoenix and his or her bestest friends want would be for all that traffic to become a matter of public record.
   
   

But it's a moot point anyway. I think it's fairly obvious to anyone who's been paying much attention that Phoenix here is crasping at straws.

Not so moot, though; we should all note the extremes of logic and activity to which a deluded believer will go to protect their sacred dogma. That's why I said to Juror15 that, though I hope dearly that they will talk to the media, I wouldn't ask it of them. I'm confident, though, that these folks have a better than average understanding of what they're up against and are prudent enough to take reasonable steps to protect themselves from any slapp suits or other kinds of retaliation.

And, btw, there's a growing network of resources to help you in case you need it. Montel Williams might well be in the same boat real soon. I'm pretty sure his legal staff have prepared. Maia Szalavitz is almost ready to publish her book. She's not leaping blindly either. And there are others. Speaking for myself, I've been ready to throw down!

If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the
government's ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.

--President Bill Clinton