Nobody knows when the next panic will occur. Our best defense against future panics is awareness of past panics. - Religious Tolerance.org

You are here: Home   Satanic Ritual Child Abuse     Next Page Satanic Ritual Child Abuse

‘That baby was delicious.  My compliments to the chef.’
 - Alex Jones

It is shocking to read what was being said about the Satanic Ritual Child Abuse cases in the Saskatchewan Legislative Assembly. A complete failure of elected officials to protect their constituents from a corrupted administration of justice.   Saskatchewan Justice used the children by manipulating them into testifying about being abused by a satanic cult.  The children were stressed out because no one within Saskatchewan Justice and Social Services gave a fishes tit about them.  The children endured years of being video taped, doctors examinations, prosecutors preparing them for court and when they told the people in charge of them that they lied in court they were told that it didn’t matter. 

When politicians deceive the public with a sham about not proceeding with the charges because of the stress this would cause the children it was not the children they were concerned about.   There should have been a public inquiry.  Its not to late.  These idiots are still working for Saskatchewan Justice and the elected, and appointed to the bench idiots are the reason there was no public inquiry.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF SASKATCHEWAN

February 14, 1994 - ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

ORAL QUESTIONS

Martensville Trial
Mr. Toth: -- Mr. Speaker, my question today is to the Minister of Justice. Mr. Minister, as you are aware, the Martensville sexual abuse cases have been forefront in the newspapers for some time. All of the details surrounding this serious issue have yet to be explained. Some have said that the technique used by police in interviewing the children was wrong.
Others have questioned why the Justice department did not hold preliminary hearings instead of using direct indictment.

Mr. Minister, the parents feel the justice system has failed them, and has failed them completely. Mr. Minister, the questions are numerous but the only answer you have given them to date is the Justice department did what it believed was right.

Mr. Minister, are you going to look into this matter?  Will you indeed hold an inquiry?

Some Hon. Members: mHear, hear!

Hon. Mr. Mitchell: -- Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for his question on this very important subject, and one that is of great concern to all of us.

The Martensville trial was the longest criminal trial ever held in the province of Saskatchewan. It's my understanding that a great deal of the time in that trial was taken up by an examination of the techniques that had been used in developing the evidence of the children, in interviewing them, and in trying to ascertain exactly what their evidence was.

A preliminary inquiry was not held in the case for a couple of reasons, which I consider to be very valid. It was a decision made, of course, by the prosecutions -- it's their decision to make -- the prosecutions unit.  They felt that to put the children through the additional procedure would be just too hard on them.

And secondly, it would have consumed another approximately one year of time, which would have yet delayed the trial and made the recall of events even more difficult for these children.  So I think that that was the right decision.  In those circumstances, considering all of the circumstances, I don't think a public inquiry is appropriate and I have said so publicly.

Mr. Toth: -- Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Minister, the problem that we are facing today, and as you have alluded to, is the fact that a lot of people, people right across this province, and in my riding I run into it . . . I know that other members have run into the same question.  I think what's basically cropping up is a fact that people in general are beginning to really question the whole judicial system. And it's not just a matter of the Martensville cases that has spurred this question, Mr. Minister. I think that people need to know that this justice system is working, and working on their behalf.

Mr. Minister, do you not think that a public inquiry would be the best way to restore confidence in our judicial system, the best way to -- once and for all -- put an end to the accusations?

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Mr. Mitchell: -- Mr. Speaker, the first thing that you would have to ask yourself is what is it that you would inquire into?  And I'm just a little short of understanding what it is that ought to be the subject of the inquiry.

Certainly the evidence of the children has been inquired into at great lengths.  The files are full of transcripts of interviews of those children by various police officers: first of all the Martensville police and the officer that they had assisting them from Saskatoon and then re-interviews as the case was developed after the Department of Justice got involved. And then they spent weeks and weeks on the stands. From an evidentiary point of view, I think that the case provided that kind of an inquiry.

And if it is the way in which the police conducted the interviews, I think that subject was examined at great length during the trial. The conduct of the prosecution, I think, is not being questioned by anyone. So I'm not sure what it is that we would inquire into.  And I think we would have to know that very clearly before we could seriously think about holding an inquiry.

Mr. Neudorf: -- Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.  I would direct my questions to the same minister on the same topic.

Mr. Minister, by agreement with the mayor of Martensville, we both agreed that we would keep strictly out of it, as I think all politicians should have stayed out of this issue until it has been resolved. And I guess from your answer so far we are about as far along as we're going to get in the resolution of this.

But I would say to you, Mr. Minister, from the perspective of the people of Martensville and surrounding areas where I have my office and so on, it is still an extremely contentious issue, and it's a very personal issue with those folks.  And there are a lot of questions out there.

What went wrong with the system? I have yet to speak to anyone in that area, Mr. Minister, who is satisfied with the judicial process. No one is satisfied. They all have questions. What went wrong with the system?

And, Mr. Minister, I don't think that you can simply duck behind the procedures that have been followed and say that's all we can do.  I am asking you, let us have a judicial public inquiry as to what went wrong with the system. I don't advocate getting the kids up or anything like that to give more pressure on them. That's not what I'm asking.

I'm asking let's draw back, and have from a provincial perspective . . . to see what went wrong, to assure, sir, that something like this can never happen again.  That's why I would lend my support to our critic of Justice and say, let's have a look at this.

Some Hon. Members: mHear, hear!

Hon. Mr. Mitchell: -- Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the intervention of the member.  There is no question that in a situation like this people are troubled and people ask the difficult questions which includes the question: what went wrong?

We are, of course, in the Department of Justice, reviewing this as we would review any other major case, to try and do that. And I know that the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) are doing the same, going through the same process. Now the member indicates that something more than that is required and I have not accepted that suggestion, because frankly I don't know what it is that we would inquire into. I don't know what it is that we would inquire into.  The machinery of the state is set up to deal with alleged crimes and evidence is placed before a jury of ordinary people who determine whether or not a crime has been committed.  And it has been determined by a jury, in this case, that in the case of Mr. and Mrs. Sterling Sr., no crime has been committed.

Beyond that the state doesn't have any machinery to find out what happened.  That's not the function of the criminal law system. Now as to what went wrong, the interviewing techniques have undergone great examination during the trial, which was a public process although it couldn't be reported.  But that part of the case was reported in great detail so we know a great deal about how the investigation was conducted. The fact that the jury found the Sterlings not guilty, that of course can't be the subject of inquiry. That is the end of that matter.  And so far as the conduct of the Crown is concerned, the prosecutors, I don't think that has been the subject of any criticism. So I don't know what it is that we would inquire about.

Mr. Neudorf: -- Mr. Minister, what we would inquire about is what went wrong with the system.  Where was the Crown prosecutor; where was the Department of Justice involved?  Where did they go wrong? Mr. Minister, one of the bigger concerns, a big concern that I have as well in this issue, is that we have three -- and I'm sure for you as well -- and that is that we have three police forces that are being tainted right now and the people are asking themselves: do we have confidence in our police forces?

We have the Martensville police force, we have the Saskatoon city police force, we have the RCMP involved. That cloud is still hanging over their heads.  That has not been resolved. And simply by staying it and saying we are going to wait for a year and see how this whole thing develops, without a clarification of the process, in the public's mind . . . You can have all the reviews that you want in the Department of Justice.  That is not going to allay the concerns that the public has and I think this should be a public inquiry so everything can come out in the wash, and that's why I'm asking you that, Mr. Minister.

Hon. Mr. Mitchell: -- Mr. Speaker, that's what I tried to answer directly to the member before.  I don't think anyone is suggesting that the case was improperly prosecuted.  I think that there is no criticism of the way in which the department or the prosecutors functioned.  So far as the way in which the matter was investigated by the police, I just say again, Mr. Speaker, that that question was examined in great detail in the trial.  Indeed it was the theory of the defence that it was the investigation that was wrong and that that led to all of the difficulty that led to the charges. So that has been examined at great length. And we will all have to review that situation to determine what we learn from it.  But I don't see what it is that would be gained by going through some kind of public inquiry to rehash what was already heard at the trial. But I want to say this, Mr. Speaker, because I think this is a very important line of questioning.  We must learn what we can from the whole experience surrounding this trial, and we must all work very hard and very diligently to learn what we can and to take whatever steps are available to us to ensure that if there were mistakes made -- and I think there were -- not to repeat those mistakes, not to have to go through that again because little children have to be protected.
 

April 7, 1997 - Hansard - Public Prosecutions Report

Mr. Hillson: - Mr. Speaker, I am extremely concerned that public confidence in our Department of Justice has been seriously eroded in the last several years. Indeed it may not be much of an exaggeration to say that the Thatcher prosecution was the last high profile prosecution in this province that did not come to grief and lead to embarrassment.

We now have a situation where our government, after reneging on a deal, is involved in litigation with its own judges that it appointed. We have for the first time in Canadian history, prosecuting a prosecutor for the conduct of his duties. Also possibly a precedent in Canadian history. We have the department re­prosecuting an accused when it publicly admitted that the first prosecution was wrong because of mishandling by the department.

With widespread allegations of satanic ritual abuse that came to nothing, now we have a report. Why was it delayed for six months? Why has it sat on the minister's desk for six weeks? What will be done to restore confidence to the public in our prosecution office and to the Department of Justice?

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Mr. Nilson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member is obviously anxious to get a copy of the report which he will receive within the next couple of hours. And I think that a number of his questions will be dealt with and answered at that time. I think that it's appropriate that we wait until the report is provided to everybody.

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr. Hillson: - I appreciate that the minister will be addressing as to what steps are being taken now to restore public confidence in our department, but can he tell us, though, why it has taken a year when it was supposed to take six months? Can he tell us if he is prepared to release the entire report and not just a laundered version of the report? And can he tell us why it sat on his desk for six weeks before he was prepared to release it to the public?

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Mr. Nilson: Mr. Speaker, I will happily answer those questions, as I have very clearly over the last number of weeks. Basically, the report has been on my desk so that we can look at recommendations, and we're providing that as well. The full report will be revealed, as I've always said.

And I guess the big worry that I have is that a member of this legislature - and also a member of the law society - is taking on the independence of the prosecutorial branch. This is an extremely difficult job prosecutors have to uphold and work in our justice system. And the job is made even more difficult when members such as that person opposite raises the kind of questions that he does in a political manner; when they're not political questions. And I think that he should seriously examine his role as a person who is part of this government and as part of this legislature and make sure that he understands also his role as a lawyer.

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr. Hillson: - Mr. Speaker, you talk about respect for the independence of the judicial system, and yet it was the minister's government that said we needed an independent judicial commission, and that was set up by legislation. It was promised by the Minister of Justice's predecessor, and now it has been cancelled. At the time this government said this was integral and essential to the proper and independent administration of justice. And yet this government cancelled this independent judicial commission and now accuses me of interfering in the justice process and the independence of the justice.

Will you reinstate the independent judicial commission you said was so important to the independence of the judiciary and the proper administration of justice in this province and quit accusing the opposition of interfering in the justice system and its independence?

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Mr. Nilson: Mr. Speaker, I will just reiterate what I said before, that we all have a role as legislators to respect the independence of the prosecution, respect the independence of the judiciary. And it's unfortunate that many of the comments that are made by members of this legislature end up causing great difficulty for the proper administration of justice.

All I would say today is that, take a look at the report when it comes forward; ask some questions based on the review of the prosecutions; and we will then have some further discussion about how we can make sure we have the best justice system in Canada.
 

April 8, 1997 - Hansard - Prosecutions Review Report

Mr. Hillson: - Mr. Speaker, we now have the Martin­Wilson report, for which I thank the minister. However, it's now clear that the mandate of the inquiry was so narrow that the inquiry was precluded from looking into the very problem cases which had spawned demands for the inquiry in the first place.

Furthermore, because of the directions given to the inquiry, they spoke almost exclusively only to employees of the justice system. Victims' rights groups, those wrongly accused in Martensville and other cases were not consulted. The general public was by and large excluded from the process.

In view of these oversights, does the minister agree that some broader process is still needed in order to lay to rest the questions that the public has? Particularly as to why so many innocent people got caught up in allegations over Martensville which turned out to be baseless. Will the minister agree to a broader process?

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Mr. Nilson: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank the member for the opportunity to respond to that particular question. This whole matter was set out very clearly in the mandate that we gave to Mr. Martin and Mr. Wilson. It was not an inquiry, it was an operational review of the prosecutions division.

As the member well knows, as a lawyer, the matters are before the court and specifically the cases that he is talking about. Those matters are still before the court in a number of appeals and other pieces of litigation surrounding the various incidents and so it's inappropriate for me to comment at all. And I think practically, the answer is that we are waiting for all of that process but we have no intention of setting up an inquiry.

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr. Hillson: - Mr. Speaker, it is clear from the report that at least some of the problems associated with our justice system are of the minister's own creation. On page 80 of the Martin­Wilson report it states that when the minister made remarks to the effect that too many people were being incarcerated, that this created problems for our prosecutors because when they would request a prison term for an offender, the judge would ask them if they were going against the minister's stated policy.

Will the Minister of Justice comment and tell us what he intends to do about this perceived interference with prosecutors and their day­to­day work, and how they will be given a free hand to call and ask for sentences as they deem appropriate.

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Mr. Nilson: Mr. Speaker, I'm frankly quite surprised by the member's question, given his long experience at the bar. But what I would say is that in this job I have worked to my utmost to make sure that the prosecutors have their complete independence. And I would challenge anybody to show otherwise or to make any comment about that.

Now practically, what happens in the justice system is that the department of public prosecutions has a role to play in presenting the evidence to the court. And when they do that, they are doing that in an independent fashion, and they're doing it in a way that Mr. Martin and Mr. Wilson have said is competent, very careful, and is of the match of any other prosecution service in Canada.

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr. Hillson: - Mr. Speaker, as one the people who was interviewed for this report, I concur with the conclusion that our prosecutors are by and large competent and professional.

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr. Hillson: - However we still have the problem that a few years ago reports coming out of our justice system led many people to conclude that satanic child abuse was a serious phenomenon and problem in this province. In the wake of those cases falling apart, we now have many lawsuits against our prosecutors.

The report says that morale of our prosecutors is very low because there has been no clear, definitive statement that the Minister of Justice will stand behind our prosecutors and will save them harmless for any possible claims which may be made against them in any judgements which may be entered against them. Will the minister now publicly state in this House whether the government will back its prosecutors in the suits they now face, or will those prosecutors be left to hang out to dry?

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Mr. Romanow: Mr. Speaker, I want to answer the question on behalf of the government. I think the hon. member knows, as a member of the law society and as a member of this House, that in the execution of functions by any department, whether it's the Department of the Attorney General or any department, in the absence of any evidence of gross, wilful malfeasance or negligence or some high act of impropriety, the government always stands behind its employees acting in good faith. And that is the case particularly with the issues that the member raises opposite. That has always been our position, and it is the position throughout the British parliamentary system.

Before I take my place however, and the reason that I get up is on the question of political interference and the last question. Let's be clear about the rules of this, Mr. Speaker. If in the last question the hon. member from the Battlefords gets up and says that because the Minister of Justice or some other minister has made a comment pertaining to a policy issue on the area of Justice, that that amounts to political interference, then be clear about it. Don't get up and ask us questions about young offenders or people stealing cars or about the problem of child prostitution in the same argument - saying on the one hand that it not political interference if we respond, and on the other hand, when we do respond, saying that it is political interference.

You've got to clean up your act. Stop political interference.

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr. Hillson: - Mr. Speaker, may I respectfully point out to the Premier that it was not me who said the minister's comments were causing problems for our prosecutors, it was the Martin­Wilson report that said that.

One of the items addressed in the report which has concerned me greatly over the years is the treatment of women who are victims of spousal abuse. And of course the report pointed out that if a woman reports abuse by her partner and then subsequently decides she does not want to cooperate with the prosecution against her partner, she is often the one who ends up to be charged by the justice system for mischief or obstruction or possibly perjury. So that while her partner goes scot­free, she is the one in trouble because of directives from the minister. And this report has said that that directive should removed.

I'm going to ask the minister if he will now end that barbarous practice of turning the tables on women who initially charged abuse and then don't cooperate; so that they will not be the ones in trouble.

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Mr. Nilson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As is quite clearly set out in the recommendations and responses that we have from the Department of Justice, all of the ministerial orders as well as a number of the head office policies, are being reviewed very carefully, including the one that the member refers to.

And when I have received some advice from the department of public prosecutions as it relates to all of these various policies, then I will be making whatever appropriate decisions should be made. But at this time I cannot respond to your question.
 

April 9, 1997 -Hansard

Mr. Hillson: - Mr. Speaker, a few years ago a criminal investigation in this province got so seriously off the rails that we had many people in this province and indeed throughout Canada believing that satanic child abuse was rampant in this province. How and why this happened was not part of the Court of Appeal case considered by our Court of Appeal, nor is it the focus of the present cases for malicious prosecution against our prosecutors. And of course the Martin inquiry was forbidden to look into this area.

Does the minister believe it is important to get to the bottom of the Martensville investigation, to find out how and why it happened and how similar problems can be avoided in the future, or does he simply hope that this matter will quietly go away?

Hon. Mr. Nilson: Mr. Speaker, thank you very much for that question. As was set out in the Leader­Post today in their editorial, they concluded with this paragraph which I think is very appropriate. It says:

While these actions (referring to all these public actions and the report) should help deal with some specific problems, it will be up to the politicians (both sides of the House) to help rebuild public confidence in the system by making sure any comments are based on fact and are not attempts to make political points.

There are many circumstances relating to this matter in Martensville that are a matter of public record, and it's a fact that the allegations of sexual abuse against children were brought forward to the police. Those allegations were investigated and charges were laid - more than 160 charges against 9 individuals.

This attracted significant public attention and concern. Speculative comments were made in relation to possible ritual or satanic abuse from a number of different people called upon to comment. I don't believe the Crown prosecutors ever characterized the abuse in this fashion, and no charges which supported so­called ritual or satanic activity were taken forward by the Crown. I ask that the members of this House be very careful in the facts that they state publicly before national television or anywhere else.
 

June 21, 2002 Hansard

Prosecution Settlements

Mr. Hillson: — The first malicious prosecution case arising out of the allegations of satanic child abuse was settled this week at a cost of $1.3 million. Yet the Minister of Justice, while signing the letter of apology, said there was nothing more than errors in judgment and continued to deny that any malicious prosecution had occurred.

Meanwhile this week a malicious prosecution judgment came down in Alberta. Jason Dicks had spent 22 months in prison. The prosecutor, who is no longer with the government, had lied to the court and made use of a forged letter in building his case.  If a case that sent a man to jail for two years and involving the most despicable prosecution tactics results in a payment of not
much more than half of what Saskatchewan paid, then what are we paying for?

Mr. Speaker, there are still approximately another 15 similar case arising out of bizarre allegations of ritual satanic child abuse. The Popowich settlement suggests that Saskatchewan
taxpayers could well be on the hook for 10 to $20 million. To pay out that sort of money without a full-scale inquiry, and while the government continues to deny that anything very much went wrong, is as illogical as the initial allegations that ritual satanic child abuse and the eating of babies was a widespread phenomenon in this province.

Mr. Speaker, we need the answers. The Minister of Justice needs to tell more to the people of Saskatchewan who will have to dig deep in their pockets to pay for the bungling.

The Speaker: — Before I go further I would just advise themember, in future when he’s making statements with respect to people who are in or out of the Assembly — and I’m not disputing facts — but I would ask him to watch the language that he uses and there are certain words that we don’t use in this Assembly.

Rev. Colin Clay: Committee Against Ritual Abuse of Children

In the late eighties a small group of people in Saskatoon were suckered in by Rev. Colin Clay (Anglican), Chaplin at the University Of Saskatchewan, into believing there was a satanic cult that was sexually abusing and sacrificing children in Saskatoon and surrounding area. 

Colin Clay was considered by the students at the University to be an expert on cults.  He had a collection of hate lecture for the asking.  One of his favourite targets was the Mormon Church. A post office box at the main post office in Saskatoon had a increasing number of Canadians from across Canada writing. Parents and grandparents were writing with their concerns that their children/grandchildren were joining the Mormon Church or about to be married to a member of the church. 

The Mormon church was not alone in taking advantage of the fact that Canadians were turning their backs on the established Christian churches.  The established churches were no longer teaching the Gospel, they were in damage control. The number of people filing legal claims for damages as a result of the sexual abuse of children in facilities run and controlled by the churches would have resulted in the selling of the churches to pay for the damage they caused to thousands of helpless children in Canada. 

Canadians abandoned their churches to die hard religious extremists and con-men pedophiles.  Bingo was out, fear, control, Satan and the Devil became the churches main source of income. In a just society the churches would have been closed, sold and rebuild by Canadians based on Christian values that children must be protected, not pedophiles must be protected. 

Rev. Colin Clay’s “Committee Against Ritual Abuse of Children” will go down in Saskatchewan history. The damage caused by a small hand full of crazy people within Saskatchewan Justice and Social Services is nothing when compared to the damage done to Saskatchewan by a small hand full of judges in the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The Hunt For Children

The Satanic ritual child abuse hysteria in Saskatchewan started with Rev. Colin Clay’s, ‘Committee Against Ritual Abuse of Children‘. A small group of delusional Christian extremists.  The hysteria was fuelled by the Government of Saskatchewan and the media in Saskatoon.

Saskatchewan Social Services funded, with tax payers money, a seminar on the subject of satanic ritual child abuse.  Transcript Ross, Ross & White, Page 719.

The hunt was on in Saskatchewan. Not for cult members who were sacrificing and barbecuing babies. The hunt was on for their child victims.

Hunt For Children is Over
The Boy in a Bubble

Michael London Ross
Born, on October 18, 1979

- 1980 10 months old. Michael was seen at the Alvin Buckwold Centre at ten months of age, at which time he was somewhat developmentally delayed.

- Twins sisters born in March, 1982

MacNeill Clinic. Child Psychiatry Saskatoon

- 1982 Michael - 3 years old.  Psychological assessment in 1982 showed significant delay in both receptive and expressive language.  At the time, he presented with a very short attention span and independent, stubborn and non-compliant behaviour. He had very little spontaneous oral language. He was seen by the speech therapist at MacNeill Clinic in November, 1982.

- 1983 Department of Social Services was contacted in 1983, one of the twin girls was admitted to hospital and appeared to be suffering from malnutrition.

- 1986 September.  Michael started school in September 1986. He was "acting out sexually" and demonstrating "inappropriate sexual behaviour". He had to be placed in a special program at school. There he came under the supervision of a Mrs. Garnet Francis, who soon noticed that the boy, though just seven years old, was given to some unusual sexual behaviour.

- 1986 December. Psychological assessment was attempted in December, 1986 but not completed because of lack of attention and cooperation.

- 1987 February. All three children apprehended by Saskatchewan Social Services in February of 1987 and placed into foster care.

- 1987 February 13. Within a short time of their arrival, foster parent observed the children engaging in behaviours of a sexual nature.

- 1987 August. Karen Clarke of the Sexual Assault Centre and Corporal Marv Hanson visited with Michael.  He refused to talk about a incident of sexual play with his sister. He behaved as if he thought he was in a lot of trouble and tried to distract them from the issue. He indicated that he had never been sexually assaulted by anyone himself.

Foster parent principal concern is, touching girls. After the initial incident with his sister, he again initiated sexual touching with her in April, and with another girl in the neighbourhood in June. He also took his pants down a couple of times with other children, the last time being in June.

- 1987 September. The twins started kindergarten, Mrs. Francis noticed that the twins were given to some unusual sexual behaviour as was their older brother. 

- 1987-88 school term. - The children were found together from time to time in the girl's bathroom, in the same stall, engaged in sexualized behaviours. And, though only eight or nine at the time, Michael became "very verbal in sexual comment," continually suggesting to one of the female volunteer teachers, for example, that they have sex, and go to bed, and the like.

- 1989 June. By the time Michael left school in June of 1989, his behaviour was so abnormal the school system was unable to cope with him. Michael could not be left alone with young children.

- 1989 Sept. Saskatoon Police Corporal Brian Dueck and Lyle and Marilyn Thompson talk with the three children at their school.

The hunt is over.

Perverted Sick Child Abuse

Marilyn Thompson testified that she did not know and was not told if Michael Ross had a sexual problem when he was moved into her foster home.  The reason she and Brian Dueck interviewed Michael Ross at his school was because they both knew he had a serious sexual problem. These two, with the help of her husband and the Ross children’s social workers were on the hunt for a child victim of Colin Clays ritual satanic child abuse stupidly. Marilyn Thompson testified Michael Ross broke down crying one night. He was a seriously dysfunction child that any reasonable thinking adult after hearing what he said would have immediately taken steps to arrange for him to see a child psychiatrist.  Page after page of shocking details of three seriously dysfunction Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder children and not one mention of a child psychiatrist.  Mr Kergoat, one of the defence lawyers must have been dumbfounded after hearing her testimony and her answer, no, to his question if Michael was seeing a child psychiatrist.

Mr Kergoat was not the only one concerned about Michael Ross’s dysfunctional behaviour.  A small group of his school teachers demanded that someone help him just before he was moved to the Thompson Special Foster Home.  As a resuilt he was refered to Dr Reebye, child psychiatrist. His report and dianosis would have possibly been quite different if the doctor was told the history of the children and the reason his teachers requested that Michael see a psychiatrist. The doctor was not told about the long-time serious dysfunctional sexual behaviour of the children. Michael was found inserting a butter knife and liquid soap into his sisters vagina and other dysfunction sexual behaviour clearly detailed in medical documents by other doctors with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder child patients.  This was the reason for the teachers concern. In any event the doctor’s recommendations were ignored by social services and his teachers were told there was nothing wrong with him.  It should have been Michael Ross’s teachers that accompanied him when he saw Dr Reebye. 

Why would the doctor not be told the Ross children’s history?  That question is answered by what happened to Michael Ross after he was moved into the Thompson Foster Home by Social Services shortly after seeing the doctor.   Michael Ross later admitted that he was not telling the truth in court. He said that he was taken to church with the Thompsons and subjected to the teachings of the satanic ritual abuse of children.  He was then subjected to questions from Marilyn Thompson who was clearly after disclosure of satanic ritual child abuse to pass on to Brian Dueck and the social workers.  What is incredible is that Marilyn Thompson kept notes of the disclosure by Michael Ross about his parents killing, eating, cooking and de-boning babies and burying them in the back yard. Page after page of notes about the stories of satanic ritual child abuse that Michael heard about at church. This sick women was manipulating a young helpess child into satisfying her sexual need to hear stories of perverted satanic ritual child abuse. Marilyn Thompson’s testimony was that she believed Michael’s incredible stories about what his parents had done to him. Of course she believed the stories, she was a fantasist, as were the other perverted child abusers masquerading as a police officer, social workers and foster parents.   Had doctor Reebye been told the truth about the Ross children he would have seen that they received the medical help they so badly needed.

A Public Whipping

Reading the sealed transcripts of the Ross, Ross & White Ritual Satanic Child Abuse case in Saskatchewan would leave anyone wondering about the mental capacity of the people responsible.  Supposedly intelligent people within the religious community, Saskatchewan Justice and Social Services to ministers of the Crown, all in the name of the Queen, were intrigued by their own creation of scandals regarding sex with children.

I can not continue to read the transcripts of the Ross, Ross & White case. What was done to the Ross children in Saskatchewan leaves this old fart feeling sick and vomiting.

The cover-up by Saskatchewan judges also leaves me wondering about the mental stability of these judges. Proud intelligent judges with a history of sound judgements over the years were reduced to writing judgements that are nothing more then well planed and executed hogwash dribble. After reading the sealed transcripts, a read of the written judgements not sealed in the Ross, Ross & White case and the Johanna Lucas case has left this old fart feeling sick and vomiting again.

These people should not be allowed to continue working within government or the Saskatchewan courts.   Jail is not good enough for them, what was done to the Ross children and Johanna Lucas deserves a public whipping on the steps of the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan.

A baby cooked, de-boned, eaten and the remains buried in a back yard in Saskatoon.

The citizens of Saskatoon were told about the death of a baby.   This child had been subjected to a brutal death.  The baby was sacrificed in a satanic ritual abuse, it was then cooked, de-boned, eaten and the remains buried in a back yard in Saskatoon. The majority of Canadians outside of Saskatchewan would have dismissed “sacrificed in a satanic ritual abuse” because of the location of the alleged offence, Saskatoon.

At the following preliminary hearing and trial (R v. R,R & W) of the three people charged, the news media and the public were banned by court order from attending in the court room.  Justification for banning the media and the public from the court was the children, protect injustice by hiding it behind the children.  This has been perfected to a art form in Saskatchewan. The media and the public could order copies of the preliminary hearing and trial transcripts at the end of the trial was the prosecutors argument.  Following the preliminary hearing of 11 others accused (R v. Klassen/Kvello) the Honourable Donald K. MacPherson, Chief Justice, Court of Queen's Bench sealed all the transcripts of the preliminary hearings, the trial, and he also sealed the judgement.

Why did the police or the RCMP forensics unit not dig up that backyard.  The officer in charge of the investigation, Brian Dueck, claimed that he asked an expert in satanic ritual abuse, Rev. Colin Clay, chaplain at the university and was told he would not find the body as the satanic cult members would have removed it. The only ones in the court room that found that statement to be incredible were the three people charged and their lawyers.   This and the majority of the other testimony was considered to be a reasonable response by the judge and prosecutors.   It went right over the tops of their empty heads. 

The Saskatoon StarPhoenix newspaper was left to report on the hysteria.  Protect your children from cults soon resulted in a satanic panic in churches across Canada. A warning article on the third page of the Saskatoon StarPhoenix written by the experts, Rev. Colin Clay, chaplain at the university and the Rev. Joseph Bisztyo, the Saskatoon authority on Catholic exorcisms. The article was entitled, “Exorcisms not for amateurs”.  I do not believe the news clips of reporters in helicopters searching for the devils church, or the “Exorcisms not for amateurs” article would have been taken seriously by news editors outside of Saskatoon.  There was one reason and one reason only for sealing the transcripts, keep the public from ever finding out what happened in the court room.

Saskatchewan’s Satanic Panic

Saskatchewan is the only jurisdiction, that I know of, that elected a political party supported by the KKK to the Saskatchewan Legislature. After the election a new school act in 1930 included the following section.

No emblem of any religious faith, denomination, order, sect, society or association shall be displayed in any or on any public school premises during school hours, nor shall any person teach or be permitted to teach in any public schools while wearing the garb of any religious faith, denomination, order, sect, society, or association.

A anti-Catholic government had been elected in Saskatchewan. The Ku Klux Klan was incorporated under the Benevolent Societies Act in October 1932.

The separation of church and state ended in Saskatchewan in 1929.  This resulted in a turf war for political power between the different religious factions in Saskatchewan.  Religious fundamentalists and church leaders were running for elected office and the Saskatchewan Legislature became their battle ground.  The resulting chaos in the Legislature was averted over the years by political appointments to the courts, and positions of power within the Government of Saskatchewan.  The coalition church at work gang in some ways has benefited the people of Saskatchewan, but it has left the province years behind in the real world of human rights and justice for all. 

Religious fundamentalists have been around and mostly ignored for years. Their quest for acceptance and power has been dismissed by most reasonable thinking people as the ranting of lunatics.    There in no wicker or evil depiction in society then paedophilia and the sexual abuse of children.  The Satanic Panic would have been dismissed by the public as just another crazy attempt by religious fundamentalists to gain credibility when the public realised there were no dead babies or child victims of ritual abuse.  There were no satanic cults abusing children in Saskatchewan until it was talked and written about in the Saskatchewan news media. 

The Saskatchewan Government was spreading the Satanic Panic by funding a seminar about the ritual abuse of children. Brian Dueck, the cult cops list of seminars attended is here.  The second one was funded by Social Services. This spending of public funds was not debated in the Legislature.  It was a decision made by the Minister or Deputy Minister at the highest level within Social Services in Regina. 

There is a real danger for children when fundamentalists, feminists, social workers have complete control of the legal rights of children in Saskatchewan. The sexual abuse of children is a criminal offence that should be investigated by highly qualified police officers with the help of equally qualified medical doctors. Crazy people and cult cops should not be allowed to investigate. This is what happen in Saskatoon when one of the Ross Twins, a full ward of the government of Saskatchewan, was taken to a Saskatoon hospital after a suspected case of sexual abuse.  This child, her sister and older brother, who were also full wards of the court, would soon become the Governments of Saskatchewan’s pawns in their creation of a scandal involving the ritual abuse of children.

The Ross children were classic examples of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder.  The children did not receive the medical help they needed in Saskatchewan.  They were placed into the new government growth industry in Saskatchewan. Their was no money being directed to help Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder children by the Government of Saskatchewan. There was a vast amount of money being spent to help child victims of Ritual Abuse. A special foster home, training and seminars had the doctors, child care workers and therapists eager to get onto the government gravy train.  There was very little money to be earned treating Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder children who were mostly Native Children.  Child victims of ritual abuse were white children.

How to manipulate a child in grade four into lying. The Saskatchewan way. 

How a pack of crazy religious fools manipulated the Ross children into telling the stories of ritual abuse that resulted in the jailing of their parents and Donald White is documented in the taped police interviews and the notes made by their foster parent Marilyn Thompson.  The notes and taped interviews were not entered by the defence lawyers at the trial.  The police soft room at the Saskatoon police station was being used to make a documentary film, funded by Social Services about the ritual abuse of children, staring the Ross children.

The Transcript of Taped interview of Michael London Ross by Corporal Brian Dueck and Carol Bunko-Ruys October 20, 1990 contains very little information about the alleged sexual abuse.  There are about 13 pages about the ritual abuse of dogs, then about cats, page after page about the containers used to collect the animals blood and the drinking of the blood. The sexual abuse of the animals came next, back to the blood, a babies blood this time, sacrifice and murder of two babies and it continued on with page after page of this stupidly. 

The charges of sexual abuse against the children’s parents were based on the disclosures made by the children to Marilyn Thompson.  What good would a documentary film be without the visions of Satanists dancing around in their costumes like the KKK with their white sheets and dunce caps.  This is only one example where the Ross children were manipulated during the taped interview when there was a contradiction with the Thompson Notes.

Michael told Marilyn Thompson his mother was wearing a gorilla mask. Ms. Thompson made notes of this.  The linked pages I have highlighted the relevant text in red.  

On page 46 the interviewers start to ask questions about what the people were wearing. Michael answers. “They ain't wearing nothing“.

Again on page 78, 79, 95 and on page 96 Michael answers, “No, they wore nothin', nothin', nothin', nothin'.”

Michael is getting a little pissed off and the interviewers realize they are not going to get the answers they want.

On page 99 there was a adjournment that lasted for 23 minutes.   After the adjournment Michael is eager to please.

Without being asked. On page 100, the second answer given by Michael is: And my mom —, there is a encouraging interruption from CPL. Dueck, “Yeah”, she bought a gorilla mask, there is yet another encouraging “Mm hinm“ interruption from CPL. Dueck and Michael finished his answer with “and whenever she wore the gorilla mask she wore black clothes.” 

Jail is just not good enough for people who manipulate a child in grade 4 into lying.  Saskatchewan judges and Justice have knowingly been lying to the public for over 17 years to protect their own asses.   Blame it on the children. There should be a new motto engraved in the stone entrance at the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.  Deny, Deny, Deny.

Children will remain at risk from Social Services, police officers and judges in Saskatchewan.

It is easy to understand how the Satanic Panic in Saskatchewan started, it is difficult to understand why it continued for as long as it did until one reads the Government of Saskatchewan court documents gagged and sealed over the years.  Most of these documents are now available on the internet.

In a letter dated February 24, 1992 to Crown prosecutor, Matt Miazga, from David Macknak, Regional Director, Family Services, Mr Macknak says: ”- we are led to the inescapable conclusion that we will likely have more cases of this nature in the future.” Mr Macknak is referring to the Ross and Klassen satanic ritual child abuse preliminary hearing.

There are a large number of letters and reports written by the people involved.  They are congratulating themselves and heaping large amounts of phrase on each other in a self-serving charade that left the impression on anyone reading the documents that they had done an excellent job with the best interests of the children as their motive.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

Mr Macknak was right.  The Vopni family was destroyed by Social Services and Saskatchewan Justice.  There will be more children in the future who will have their families, and their lives destroyed, by these fools rushing in. The child protection system in Saskatchewan needs to be investigated and fixed.  Until that is done children will remain at risk from Social Services, police officers and judges in Saskatchewan.

Most people’s memory is jogged by the news reports over the years regarding the many court cases filed for damages by the people maliciously prosecuted, or by the related court cases filed by the children who were in the care and control of Saskatchewan Justice and Social Services.  There were also the court cases related to the people maliciously prosecuted who tried to help these children and their claims for damages.

I had always wrongly assumed the Ross, Ross & White case was the first satanic ritual child abuse investigation in Saskatchewan because this was the first case that proceed to a preliminary hearing and trial.   I had also wrongly assumed that it was the police that investigated a case of child abuse. Nothing could be further from the truth. 
 
The first ritual abuse case investigated was not R, R & White, it was the Kvello/Klassen case. It was not the police who did the investigations into alleged ritual abuse, it was Social Services and child therapists.

Search Star Chamber Proceedings

Search This Site and all related sites