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.orgThe full account of the Whitmore story can be read on
www.sueschefftruth.com