Fornits

Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry

Since Sue Scheff has updated, her Whitmore blog and added my name to it - I wanted to re-address another issue that Scheff  wrote about me in her blog:

 Sue Scheff wrote in her Whitmore Blog:
"No matter what it is/was;, all of this led to a civil case instigated by this mother."

Scheff is incorrect: The lawfirm representing the Whitmore parents in the civil case against the Sudweeks/Whitmore--HOWARD, LEWIS, & PETERSON -- was initially hired by the parents of the student who first alleged he was abused by the Sudweeks in November 2004 as reported by KLS TV in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Samanatha Hayes Reported on November 30, 2004
"A Troubled Teen Home Investigated for Abuse"
"A facility for troubled teens is under investigation tonight after strong allegations from one boy.
Carol Sisco, Child & Family Services: Our licensing office notified them we intend to revoke their license."
http://tv.ksl.com?index.php?sid=136013&nid=5

Scheff blog continues:
"What a mess - in the end - the most beautiful program to help families is closed, since it has to handle the legal mess this mother caused, in my opinion."

The Sudweeks did continue to have "legal problems" but I did not cause them.

Kristen Stewart's report in the Salt Lake City Tribune, "Boarding School: she stands accused of child abuse and hazing at now defunct treatment center." on June 11, 2005.
Cheryl Sudweeks was charged with 5 counts of child abuse and 2 counts of hazing against 4 Whitmore students.

Jared Eldridge, the County Attorney did not bring any charges on behalf of my daughter.
I am not privy to why the State of Utah removed the Sudweeks's license to operate Whitmore Academy. Ask them!
http://www.isaccorp.org/whitmore/whitmo ... 11.05.html

On September 22, 2006 Linda Thomson's report in the Deseret Morning News, "Plea deal for ex-school operator" reports Cheryl Sudweeks's plea bargain, in which she agreed to not operate a facility in Juab County "for the rest of her life."
In explaining this plea bargain, County Attorney, Jared Eldridge says: "These kids made some allegations of abuse, and I completely believed them. That's why I filed the case."

Again: I had nothing to do with this plea agreement. Why did Cheryl Sudweeks accept a plea bargain, instead of going to trial to prove the innocence she seems/wants to claim? I don't know. ASK HER!

I have no idea WHY or WHEN the Sudweeks decided to close the Whitmore Academy. Again---ASK THEM!!!

Summary: I did not initiate the civil case against the Sudweeks.
ANYONE who says I paid any parents to join this civil case is a LIAR. Anyone who says I paid any parent, or any child/student to lie about the Sudweeks is a LIAR.
My family was not a part of the criminal case against the Sudweeks. My family is not a part of the civil case against the Sudweeks/Whitmore Academy.

NOTE: I had never heard of the Sudweeks in 2001 when Mark Sudweeks was involved in his FELONY Animal Abuse case in Canada: Regina VS Sudweeks; and when the Sudweeks were evicted from Mexico for operating a school without a license.

So: hopefully Sue Scheff will not try to blame these legal problems of the Sudweeks had in these 2 countries on me, too "in her opinion.".

It's interesting that Scheff continues to update her Whitmore Academy blog since this facility is closed.  Why continue to BLOG and promote a defunct facility that closed amid abuse allegations and a criminal case against the owner; especially while a civil case is ongoing?

Since Scheff seems to enjoy blogging about what she considers "secrets" and the personal lives of others - wonder why she doesn't BLOG about a facility that is open for business; one she reportedly refers parents and their children to; one where her own daughter and new son-in-law reportedly work as counselors?

Surely, Scheff's blogging reading public would have more interest in reading her views  about Harbor Oaks Boarding School ; and reading more about her daughter and son-in-laws new jobs at Harbor Oaks Boarding School( if they still work there)---than reading about some closed down facility in Nephi, Utah !

Does Sue Scheff avoid writing, blogging about her daughter and son-in-law working at this facility - because there might be some conflict of interest to have her daughter working at the same facility that Scheff/PURE reportedly refers many children to?
Just asking, since a topic has been posted that asks if Harbor Oaks Boarding School is Sue Scheff's new "cash cow?"  I certainly wouldn't know.

Perhaps Scheff can give insight into how one goes from Gymnastic coach, stunt graduate to "teen counselor at a boarding school" that supposedly Scheff/PURE recommends to parents and their children.

Perhaps Scheff could BLOG about another facility that is currently open for business that she should possibly know about - Focal Point Academy in NV - rather than spending so much blogging time on the defunct Whitmore Academy?

Another topic of interest that Scheff might could address in her BLOGGING could be an explanation  of why Isabelle Zehnder took her off CAICA's "Advocate of the Month" list.
 Perhaps Scheff could update her "Sue Scheff - All About Me" and explain it there?  
When other people have titles ripped away from them - don't they usually make a public statement and explain WHY?  When public figures like Miss America, or Miss USA lose their "titles" there's usually a public explanation.
Why did Sue Scheff lose her title of "CAICA Advocate of the Month?"

Or, if Scheff really just enjoys writing BLOGS about "secrets, and people's personal lives" - perhaps she could write a BLOG from her own personal life experiences:
Maybe Scheff could BLOG about abusive "boyfriends" and what it's like for a relationship to spiral out-of-control to the point of filing domestic violence and taking the guy -friend to court, etc - as stated in all those public documents posted.
OR, perhaps Scheff could BLOG about the effects of an "alcoholic, non-suporive ex-husband" which has been reported; and gossiped about - if any of that is true.

It really does seem Scheff has an array of things in her own personal life she can draw upon to BLOG about that might be more interesting than me.
She's been pounding on my "personal secretive life" a couple of years now - and doesn't seem to understand - it's old, old news; and the shock value wore off when the Fornits topic "Joyce is a Slut Woman" was posted.

The fact remains:
I don't claim to be "an advocate;" I don't refer children to programs; I don't run a facility for chldren.

 

.

I assume the reference to me:
"Hey BITCH Why don't you share Joyce Harris's Happy testimonial"
is referring to the ISAC Statement made by my husband, Richard Harris and myself in 2005?

This was my comment to Maia's article:

Sue Scheff has written a blog "Whitmore Academy-My Experiences" in which she promotes the defunct Whitmore Academy; and praises the owners, Mark and Cheryl Sudweeks. This blog fails to disclose these owner's criminal histories in 3 countries -Canada, Mexico and the United States. Yet Scheff bashes, and posts lies about a parent critic. Scheff blames this parent for the Sudweeks'legal problems - yet Cheryl Sudweeks accepted a plea bargain in her Whitmore criminal case; in which she was charged with 5 counts of abuse, and 2 counts of hazing against 4 Whitmore Academy students.
Scheff has announced that she has a 2nd Whitmore blog she will release entitled:
"Whitmore Academy, THE SECRET, SHHH" in which she advises her readership to "stay tuned" for some secrets about this parent she promises to reveal; in what appears to be another attempt to silence this parent's criticism.
Is this what Scheff defines as "freedom of speech?" Does Scheff really know the meaning of defamation?
I received a letter from Scheff's attorney, David Pollack, when I voiced criticisms about Whitmore Academy; and Scheff/PURE's referral of my daughter to Whitmore. Scheff criticized WWASP; yet she wanted to silence my right honestly voice my opinion as written in my statement to International Survivors Action Committee: www.isaccorp.org
The full account of the Whitmore story can be read on www.sueschefftruth.com

]

I guarantee the 2 staff who let my son die will never work in this industry again

Sadly, there are no such guarantees in this industry.

Jared Eldridge, the County Attorney charged Cheryl Sudweeks with 5 counts of child abuse and 2 counts of hazing against four children in the Whitmore Academy criminal case.  Yet, he allowed Cheryl Sudweeks to cop-a-plea to 2 counts of attempted hazing!

In a statement in the Deseret Morning News in this article, "Plea deal for ex-school operator, She agrees not torun another re-hab facility in Juab,"
"These kids made some allegations of abuse and I completely believe them. That's why I filed the case. But the fact that I believe them is one thing, whether a jury is going to believe is a whole different question," Juab County Attorney Jared Eldridge said.

The woman Cathy Sutton hold directly responsible for the death of her beloved daughter, Michelle Sutton, continues to work in this industry, today.

Sadly, there are no guarantees that these two staff members will be stopped from working in the industry, either.
But, I sincerely hope this mother is correct!

My next email goes on to express my opinions that the children in these court cases usually have no choice about being in these cases -- and their confidentiality should be protected:

From: JOYCE
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 11:57 AM
To: 'Isabelle Zehnder'
Subject: RE: Whitmore Academy

Isabelle,

Your email stopped mid sentence.

Yes---all court documents are “public recordâ€

ORIGINAL EMAIL FROM JOYCE HARRIS; Zehnder's reply

-------------- Original message --------------
From: "JOYCE"

 

Dear Isabelle,

I wanted to give some update information about Whitmore Academy.

Cheryl Sudweeks’s trial date has been set for:  September 18-- September 29, 2006.

Could this be posted on the Whitmore Academy “topic.â€

Sue Scheff does not seem to believe that people have the same exact RIGHTS that she has.

Sue Scheff claims that her daughter was abused in a WWASP facility; and for years, she has highly criticized WWASP and its owners loudly and consistingly--verbally, and in print about her daughter's abuse.
I don't write BLOGS about Scheff--defending WWASPS facilities; while praising the  Litchfields and Kays as loving, caring  peeple who have spent years sacrificing themselves for all these children who have spent wondeful happy years in their  WWASP "schools."

I don't blog, blaming Scheff for any, and all of Litchfield and Kay's legal problems; just because Scheff complains about her daughter's abuse in their facility.

I certainly don't blog and insinuate that Scheff' perhaps wrongfully complains about WWASP, and their owner,s because perhaps, maybe, it seems,  other may have said; or that I heard [/---Scheff withdrew her daughter from this WWASP facility early because she ]may have feared [/i]that her daughter might reveal family secrets that Scheff didn't want her daughter to reveal.
I didn't speculate in a BLOG that perhaps Scheff may have removed her daughter from this WWASP facility early because Scheff may have feared her young daughter may have revealed her mother's past relationship a boyfried, who was so abusive, that it required Scheff to file domestic violence charges against him in a court of law.  I didn't blog and ask, "What else did this daughter know that she might reveal?";

I don't speculate in a BLOG that perhaps Scheff may have removed her daughter early; and that in my opinion she probably lied about WWASP because she may have feard her daughter might have been getting ready to reveal some other family secrets of what? perhaps family abuse, maybe violence--since it has been said this girl's father may have had drinking problems; and [someone saidthis mother may have struck this daughter in the face and attempted to choke her?  .

The above 2 paragraph 2, is the type of hearsay, vicious gossip, and opinions that Sue Scheff wrote in her BLOG "Whitmore Academy- My Experiences."

I believe Sue Scheff's daughter was abused in that WWASP facility.
I don't believe children are "manipulative liars" who lie about their experiences in these programs.
And I believe Scheff has the right to criticize her daughter's abusers.

BUT: I maintain that I HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS SUE SCHEFF.I have the RIGHT to criticize the abusive facility; and its owners where I placed my daughter for education and treatment.
And Sue Scheff, of all people, does not have the right to try and silence my criticism - since she, and her company PURE recommended Whitmore Academy to my family.