Published  Feb. 21, 2019                                                                                 see also

   Truth is my business!            Hoaxtead Watch No. #83

Child Interrogation Techniques #1

     The following is presented with claims to fair use clause under then the copyright law and vitally important in the war to stop SRA and Satanism, or at the very least, expose it, that people might better be able to avoid it and warn others. The following is a description the proper techniques for interviewing children, and understanding how they think and express themselves and what avoid that might lead a child. That said, most accusations of leading children are very exaggerated or more often, completely lied about and distorted.

I will be talking about that as we go along. I refer the piece that I will be discussing:

International Journal at Law and Psychiatry, Vol. 7, pp. 89-103, 1984 Printed in the U.S.A. All rights reserved.

0160-2527,84 $3.00 + .00 Copyright 4, 1984 Pergamon Press Ltd.

This is an important subject since Satanists always claim that children were led or even more absurd, that false memories were planted in them by scheming therapists cooperating in some vast conspiracy sure to bring them all millions in no time at all. Oddly, not a shred of evidence has ever been broth forth or introduced to demonstrate the conspiracy or to show in court, a demonstration of implanting a false memory. Yet without a shred of evidence, the court still allows and recognizes and even dignifies the treacherous lies and deceit of those sympathetic to Satan's cause. For this reason, I bring up this subject and the Journal referenced earlier above.

Also covered are issued of consent on the part of Children.

page 89

Complications, Consent, and Cognitions in Sex Between Children and Adults

Gene G. Abel,* Judith V. Becker,** and Jerry Cunningham-Rathner***


Sexual activities between children and adults are relatively common occurrences. Approximately one in four college-aged females in the United States report having had a sexual experience with an adult while they were children (Finkelhor, 1979a). Child-adult sex offenses frequently come before the court and few crimes elicit such strong emotional reactions from all concerned (the child, the child's family, the offender, the criminal justice system, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers and defense and prosecuting attorneys).

Part of this emotional reaction to child-adult sexual activities stems from the polarization of opinion as to the quality and quantity of harmful effects that such activities may have on the child. Some expert witnesses refer to severe complications while others suggest that complications to the child are infrequent and usually result from the responses of those around the child (parents, the criminal justice system, etc.). Often, in the heat of legal process, it is difficult to evaluate clearly the consequences of such activities on the child because of the polemic position of the opposing counsel.

There is also the issue of consent. Is it possible for a pre-pubertal or post­pubertal child to give consent to participate in sexual activities with an adult? Again, in the courtroom, polemic positions are taken by the opposing counsels that a child is or is not able to give informed consent for sexual activities with an adult. Unfortunately there is minimal discussion of what the criteria are for informed consent and whether a child can meet such criteria.

A final area of concern, for those who work with the offender, are the attitudes or beliefs held by the offender regarding his sexual activities with children. As members of the criminal justice system, legal system, psychiatric or psychological services interact with the offenders, they find that some have an entire set of beliefs that they feel justify sex between a child and an adult.

Truth1:  Given that many Christians are apt to read this, I must clarify a few things. I only enforce or insist upon, What God clearly prescribes in the Bible. The USA and other nations, prefer Satan's laws when it comes to sex, marriage and similar. Any Christian who advocates  or promotes Satan's laws, is not a Christian, and is in fact, a Satan worshiper in preferring Satan's laws to Gods. But we do have to constrain ourselves, living under the rule of nations, that Satan designed to deny what God did not deny. That being that any person who has fully completed puberty is a viable acceptable candidate for marriage. That Satan should heap shame on that is so that he might control the "candy" and use it exploit the natural desires of men, that they may be blackmailed or otherwise have their reputations maligned and even be imprisoned.

Many have been brought into Satan's fold because of these wicked laws, with the full support of most churches and self-professed Christians. Needless to say, those going in thru the narrow gate are few, according to Jesus.

Any Christians supporting these unjust laws and denying teens the right to begin lives of marriage and breeding, which in our day, also forbids teens from working the same as any other adult; These are not Christians at all and they will NOT inherit God's kingdom. They are allies of Satan. I just needed to get that out of the way. <<T1 end


* Professor of Clinical Psychiatry, Columbia University & Director of the Sexual Behavior Clinic, New York State Psychiatric Institute, 722 W. 168 St., N.Y., N.Y. 10032.

** Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Columbia University & Co-director, Sexual Behavior Clinic. *** Project Coordinator, Sexual Behavior Clinic.

This chapter was prepared under NIMH grant (MH33678) awarded to Dr. Abel. Reprint requests should be directed to Dr. Abel, Sexual Behavior Clinic, New York State Psychiatric Institute, 722 W. 168th Street, New York, N.Y. 10032. The authors wish to thank Carole Singleton for her help in preparation of this manuscript.

Page 90        GENE G. ABEL et at.

It is difficult to understand how or why these beliefs or cognitions develop, and how to deal with them.

This discussion will focus on

(1) the factors making it more or less likely that negative consequences will result from sexual activities between a child and adult,

(2) the requirements of children giving informed consent for participating in sexual activities with adults and

(3) how the cognitions of offenders are often distorted by their participation in child-adult sexual experiences.

 Truth1: However well intentioned, this subject is not rocket science. It was in Psychology Today magazine, I think in the late 80s, that an article cited a study that found that children universally found sex or exploration with anyone 26 or older to be very undesireable and causing bad feelings if not extreme residual harm, and even trauma.

But as the age got progressively lower from 26, each year younger was not as bothersome, with kids preferring other kids their own age or near to. Young teens seemed to be tolerated, though not thrilled by any means. I knew a guy who was seduced at age 7, by a 14 year old girl across the street. He did not mind it and said it felt good. I don't know if he felt any discomfort or reluctance at first, but he did not express any. He seemed to be very positive about it. But boys don't have hymens to be shred, either. I think that makes a big difference. But even for girls, the closer the age, the less apprehension they had about it.

To me, this makes it quite clear that 26 and older is out. Children are intimidated by adults unless they are very young looking and aged. I think the article found 22 or 23 to be pushing it, while earlier 20s was not nearly as strong a reaction. It would seem to me that this study would definitely make anything in the 20s as forbidden to young children, whereas it would seem possible that some teen girls do go for guys in their 20s and even low 30s. They may have daddy issues, but that does not affect the consent issues. But no adult, and I point out that adult was 20 in the Bible, should be trying to seduce a young child who can only be intimidated when urged by an adult.

To spell it out! Children do not want to have sex with adults. They might be very interested in exploring with other children near to their age, but not adults, that I know of. But now the push is on to say that silence is consent. That is utter crap and BS. If it is a woman of 20, then yes, I think silence is consent. Its it in the Bible. But children will be afraid to say anything with an adult. If the child is asked if such and is OK, they still might not dare to say no.

Jesus once bought a child into the midst of his disciples. he said, Unless you become like one of these, you can not enter the kingdom of God. The child was likely quiet and fearful to speak, unless asked something. It is good evidence that Jesus recognized the humility and mildness of the child in the midst of grown men. On the other hand, some of the grown men were speaking of who was the greatest among them. The child never would have placed himself as an equal to them, least, the greatest among them.

What apparently seems to escape the notice of Satanists and perverts is that children do not have post pubescent levels of hormones that make the desire for sex so urgent and compelling. The initial pre-pubescent levels of sex hormones leave children to pursue other things and wait for greater cortex control of urges that will be difficult to hold back as teens continue to grow more self control, which seems to reach good levels at age 30, the age required to be a priest in the temple.

But this article wants to explore what might constitute possible consent, if that is ever possible. Since we have teen issues, then it might be worth examining. <<T1 end

The Consequences of Child—Adult Sexual Interactions

Our culture, for the last few centuries, has attempted to suppress discussions of sexuality. The potential impact on children of sexual interactions with adults has been difficult to assess because of strong sanctions against discussions of sexuality and especially the sexual behavior of children. Research evaluating which factors make it more or less likely that negative consequences to the child follow sexual interactions with adults has been strongly influenced by the moral judgments of researchers and their methods of gathering information.

Truth1: I disagree. The reason they are reluctant, if that is what is being indicated, to discuss where or at what point a child might or might not be adversely affected, is that Every possible interaction between children is called/labeled as "sex." Kissing is called sex. Complimenting them is called sex or grooming. Looking at them for more than 3 seconds allows their every motive to be questioned and assumed evil in intent. Men are accused of "toxic masculinity." But worst of all is the government, who wants to place teens out of reach, when they are often quite capable of desiring adults in their 20s and 30s. in this way, anyone who might desire the youthful neoteny of many teens, have to join evil governmental interests, who will protect them if they engage with teens in carefully secured ways at often result in trafficking to service the "privileged."

Moreover, the government desires to keep all teens in brainwashing programming centers called public education schools. Were teens allowed to work and breed as is a normal thing to desire, would cause governments to thwarted in their attempts in poison and indoctrinate the minds of teens if not even 9-12, as children worked on their dad's farm at those ages and factories, too. So the government forbid any excuse to avoid their concentration camps, I mean, public schools.

Not many in any legal, social, or psychological field, to say nothing of law, are going to slight government indoctrination and insist on parental rights to decide for their children instead of governments and SS "social workers, i.e the Gestapo or KGB. Parents have lost all their rights. We as a society, do not want to fix anything. We just want to preserve the government status quo brain washing. That is why we can not discuss what is or is not harmful. Government "enforcement" says any touch is a bad touch, always and that only schools can protect children, despite numerous teacher pursuing students, as evidence to the contrary. <<T1 end

Constantine (1981a) has demonstrated that information gathered through the court system or psychiatric-psychological clinics is very likely to report the highest instance of negative consequences for the child (since only those cases most likely to outrage the community or cause emotional repercussions reach these routes). He also reports that non-patients or individuals reached through the mass media are more likely to report fewer negative consequences for the child.

How soon the data are gathered after the occurrence of the child-adult sexual interaction also influences the outcome. If children are questioned shortly after an occurrence, negative consequences are more likely to be recalled. If years have past since the child-adult sexual interaction, negative consequences are less common, apparently blunted by the passage of time, by the child's decreased recall of the event, by unconscious forgetting of the experience or by reappraisal of the event within the context of the child's total maturation experiences.

Truth1: One thing I have noticed in trials or investigations of teens having sex with adults, is that those examining or questioning the teens, do not do so without pressure and coercion. for instance, if a girl of 17 (It happens to 14 year olds, too.) were to admit she willing engaged in the relationship sexually and often and loves the man of +21, that would never be accepted. the law has already proclaimed that teens can not consent and are not in anyway, intelligent and knowing their own minds.

Oddly, Rome considered any girl of 12 or more, without parents, to be of the age of consent. If one includes 750 BC as the start date of Rome, and considered Byzantium to be Roman and existing to at least 900 AD, then the law of consent at 12,  was in effect for 2,650 years and many other nations had similar laws. why was it good and right for 2600 years and then geniuses in 1860, said no! No more! It was not for the concern of females that this was done. It was done to prohibit parents from letting teen daughters marry, instead of being brain washed by school.

You wanted the truth? You can't handle the truth. You are all to blame for willingly giving your kids to the state for education, indoctrination and brain washing. Taka a bow, idiots! You did not defend your rights and ownership of your own children. You all worship the devil! You could not prove otherwise.

So we have a problem here. The agenda of the government will never let anyone suggest anything except teen girls can not consent or like sex or want to marry anyone older than themselves. They supposedly have no idea what they are doing.

It does not stop there. If a girl of 17 were to insist she did love a man of 21+, she would be bullied verbally and intimidated until she relented. They would say, what will the parents of your friends say about you. This is said to imply that no parent will continue to allow their daughter to hang around Miss 17. She will be derided in school and be shamed. Everyone will think bad of her. It might or might not be so,  but just the threat and potential of it, will either force her to go along with the state and psychologists or social workers and blame it all on the man. If she were to hold her ground, they would continue harassment and pressure for as long as they had to. After a while, the girl gets worn down and "broken."

These kinds of tactics are the weapons of intelligence agencies, the Military and its interment camps, kidnappers, Torturers and Mind control programmers. So the system is actually abusing any teen who dares to say she might really like or love, God Forbid, an older man. May she rot in hell for the ultimate sin!

This is why we can not get anywhere. All the motives of our collective nation are against the honest objective inquiry of where that inquiry of consent might really lie and why. Our laws are not based on the consideration of desires of human beings. They are designed to prevent children from escaping indoctrination and its corrupting influence; and to make it easier to ensnare men in black mail for what is normal and natural for men. So we are to blame for allowing governments to pursue their sinister agenda by making decent people criminals with laws of evil intent. Lets see psychologists and lawyers tackle what I have brought up. I am afraid that non-existent hell would freeze over first.

This is the only place you will get the 100% pure concentrated Truth1. <<T1 end


Many studies have also inadvertently selected biased samples. If a newspaper advertisement requests information from participants who recall positive child-adult sexual experiences, the descriptions obtained will be predominately positive, while advertisements simply requesting replies from individuals involved in any type of child-adult sexual interaction will find more negative consequences.

Other factors influencing conclusions about positive or negative consequences are:

(1) the type of sexual activity engaged in,

(2) the developmental maturity of the child and

(3) the relationship between the child and the adult.

If the child is flashed by an exhibitionist, the negative consequences to the child are fewer than if the child is brutally raped by a sadist. If the child involved is an emotionally mature 15-year-old, a sexual encounter with a 40-year-old may be seen as a more positive experience than if the child were eight years old and quite immature. Sexual interactions with a person unknown to the child appear to be much easier for the child to deal with than sexual encounters with members of the child's family. Unfortunately, when the consequences of such encounters are described in court, these compounding factors are

Continued on page 91 on the next blog

 Truth1 Out!               

Hoaxtead Watch Article list/Menu page

Back to Home/Index       Truth 1 - The best site on the internet!
Back to Top

                                                       Truth is my business!

The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.  .  .  .   George Orwell

#008000  #CC0000