Twisted Soul

Here is an email I received last night from someone who wants to “help” and “information share.”

I do not want to discount the reality of ritual abuse, which I have no doubt was taking place in Oakland County based on information I have received over the years. https://information.pods-online.org.uk/demystifying-ritual-abuse/. Just as I believe the most active of the “upper-crust” ” pedophiles in Oakland County were based in and operating in Birmingham, Michigan.

If you have information, get to the point, name names and give addresses and substantiating information. Quit playing games. Choking back vomit.


7 Comments on “Twisted Soul”

  1. Paul Jolliffe says:

    Ah yes, the old “crazy Vietnam vet with PTSD was THE OCCK” meme.

    Nope.

    Sorry, “Beautiful Soul 21A”, no matter how sincere you may (or may NOT) be, the OCCK killings were NOT the work of one single individual. Multiple men were involved on various levels. If you haven’t learned that by now from this blog, then you know nothing about the case.

    And I mean that literally, “Beautiful Soul 21A”, you know nothing.

  2. Anonymous says:

    How is it that people claim to know who the killer is but never give a name, it’s always some encrypted story that people have to decipher like we’re playing Cluedo.

    Reality is that the people that know have never gone public,hence the crimes still unsolved to this day.

    The perpetrators if there is more than one involved were not criminal masterminds, the MSP were incompetent at best and perhaps corrupt to a certain degree.

    As one other reader pointed out if there was cctv available back in the day then these crimes would have been solved long ago.

    Humans involved in immoral behavior tend to keep the truth to themselves i.e read Hell in the Heartland. Where multiple people over multiple years knew what the truth was but never came forward because of fear or loyalty but most likely because there wasn’t anything in it for them.

    Matt

    • cathybroad says:

      I feel like this type of information falls into two camps. One, the person truly believes they know who killed the four OCCK victims. These people seem to most often fall into the “just one deranged killer” camp. Cannot keep an open mind if the evidence points elsewhere; has to be right.

      The second is a person who is waging a warped misinformation campaign because he/she is someone who has guilty knowledge or participation in these crimes and/or the overlying pedophile and child porn rings that were operating with impunity in Michigan, and has every reason to still be looking over his/her shoulder. This second camp likes to intimidate, directly or indirectly.

      At a certain point, someone who had important information and kept quiet, whatever the reason, becomes morally complicit (at a minimum).

      • stellamills26 says:

        Well said.

      • camfaults says:

        I go with the second paragraph of Cathy’s post. The theory of “Beautiful Soul 21A” reminds me of the 1977 Allen letter. A rehash of a theory that pushes the focus away from the Busch-pedophile ring and GM. In other words, away from the evidence.

  3. bitamoney says:

    Harold Depp is/was a self defrocked Catholic priest who was convicted of child abuse. I have mentioned him many times because I grew up right across the street from his family on Winthrop St. in Detroit. Why is there no apparent interest in looking into him?

  4. cathybroad says:

    A reader sent the following concerning the link I provided regarding ritual abuse:

    Speaking of misinformation…
    “Demystifying ritual abuse: the basics explained”, which you provided a link to, contains several false and misleading statements.

    1) The description of “Ritual Abuse” at the start of the article, taken from “Los Angeles County Commission for Women, 1989” differs substantially from the definition of that term provided by the person who coined it; Dr Lawrence Pazder.
    Dr Lawrence Pazder invented and coined the terms; satanic ritual abuse, ritual abuse and ritualistic abuse, in 1980, all of which refer to Pazder’s definition;
    “repeated physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual assaults combined with a systematic use of symbols and secret ceremonies designed to turn a child against itself, family, society and God.” Pazder noted that “the sexual assault has ritualistic meaning and is not for sexual gratification”.
    None of those terms existed in child abuse/ child protection or medical/psychiatric literature, prior to Pazder, therefore Pazder’s definition for these terms is the only correct, legitimate one.

    But Pazder’s definition didn’t ‘work’, for various persons and organizations wanting to exploit the idea of child sexual abuse occurring in the context of “secret ceremonies”, for their own purposes, so they concocted and promoted their own personal variations on Pazder’s definition, or claimed Ritual Abuse was “sometimes called” something else like; organized abuse, extreme abuse, sadistic abuse, etc.
    This process of repeated subjective revision, over the last 40 years, effectively means the term now has NO set definition and “means”; whatever the person using it wants it to mean at that moment. Terms with no standardized definition are literally ‘without meaning’.

    2) “A great deal of child pornography shows children being abused in a ritualised setting” – this statement is either false or meaningless, or both.
    Originally, (circa 1980’s), statements like this were meant to imply commercial child pornography wherein children were sexually abused in the setting of a “satanic black mass” or otherwise recognizably “occult” secret ceremony. Even then, material of that nature was so rare that “satanic” or “occult” were never used as categories of child pornography in forensic analysis, and still are not today.
    Sometimes, irresponsible statements by journalists or even police investigators lead people to falsely believe that child pornography “with a satanic theme” has been seized in a particular case. A recent example of this, would be the case of William Joseph Bustillos and his fellow pervert Joseph Lee Suder. This was a very serious case of CSA involving a 5 year old boy, some of which was recorded by Bustillos.
    Police investigator Sgt. Chris Lind was quoted in reports, saying; “His apartment was basically set up as a sex room. His bedroom included a bed with nets to mount cameras to record sex acts and a little satanic ritual set up with cameras satanic totems”, but the basis of Sgt. Lind’s assumptions about a “satanic ritual set up” and “satanic totems” turned out to be…a banner with very common, generic pentagram depicted on it, on one wall of the room.
    Criminologist Michael Salter, an ISSTD member, has also made claims that historic CSA images depicted “ritual abuse”, but Salter is really referring to images depicting children abused in B&D and/or S&M gear and associated sexual torture devices.
    No one ever denied that there had been commercial child pornography of that nature, but calling B&D or S&M “ritual abuse” is just a ploy to create false ‘evidence’ for historic ritual abuse. B&D is B&D, S&M is S&M, and nothing is gained by labelling them “ritual abuse”.
    Speaking of misinformation…
    “Demystifying ritual abuse: the basics explained”, which you provided a link to, contains several false and misleading statements.

    1) The description of “Ritual Abuse” at the start of the article, taken from “Los Angeles County Commission for Women, 1989” differs substantially from the definition of that term provided by the person who coined it; Dr Lawrence Pazder.
    Dr Lawrence Pazder invented and coined the terms; satanic ritual abuse, ritual abuse and ritualistic abuse, in 1980, all of which refer to Pazder’s definition;
    “repeated physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual assaults combined with a systematic use of symbols and secret ceremonies designed to turn a child against itself, family, society and God.” Pazder noted that “the sexual assault has ritualistic meaning and is not for sexual gratification”.
    None of those terms existed in child abuse/ child protection or medical/psychiatric literature, prior to Pazder, therefore Pazder’s definition for these terms is the only correct, legitimate one.

    But Pazder’s definition didn’t ‘work’, for various persons and organizations wanting to exploit the idea of child sexual abuse occurring in the context of “secret ceremonies”, for their own purposes, so they concocted and promoted their own personal variations on Pazder’s definition, or claimed Ritual Abuse was “sometimes called” something else like; organized abuse, extreme abuse, sadistic abuse, etc.
    This process of repeated subjective revision, over the last 40 years, effectively means the term now has NO set definition and “means”; whatever the person using it wants it to mean at that moment. Terms with no standardized definition are literally ‘without meaning’.

    2) “A great deal of child pornography shows children being abused in a ritualised setting” – this statement is either false or meaningless, or both.
    Originally, (circa 1980’s), statements like this were meant to imply commercial child pornography wherein children were sexually abused in the setting of a “satanic black mass” or otherwise recognizably “occult” secret ceremony. Even then, material of that nature was so rare that “satanic” or “occult” were never used as categories of child pornography in forensic analysis, and still are not today.
    Sometimes, irresponsible statements by journalists or even police investigators lead people to falsely believe that child pornography “with a satanic theme” has been seized in a particular case. An recent example of this, would be the case of William Joseph Bustillos and his fellow pervert Joseph Lee Suder. This was a very serious case of CSA involving a 5 year old boy, some of which was recorded by Bustillos.
    Police investigator Sgt. Chris Lind was quoted in reports, saying; “His apartment was basically set up as a sex room. His bedroom included a bed with nets to mount cameras to record sex acts and a little satanic ritual set up with cameras satanic totems”, but the basis of Sgt. Lind’s assumptions about a “satanic ritual set up” and “satanic totems” turned out to be…a banner with very common, generic pentagram depicted on it, on one wall of the room.
    Criminologist Michael Salter, an ISSTD member, has also made claims that historic CSA images depicted “ritual abuse”, but Salter is really referring to images depicting children abused in B&D and/or S&M gear and associated sexual torture devices.
    No one ever denied that there had been commercial child pornography of that nature, but calling B&D or S&M “ritual abuse” is just a ploy to create false ‘evidence’ for historic ritual abuse. B&D is B&D, S&M is S&M, and nothing is gained by labelling them “ritual abuse”.

    3) “The theme of denial however continues today despite the growing number of convictions for ritual abuse in Britain, and many more worldwide, including convictions for satanic ritual abuse which involves both forensic physical evidence and the witness testimony of survivors (Oksana, 1994; SMART, 2014; Morris, 2014)”

    “…convictions for ritual abuse…” and “convictions for satanic ritual abuse” are both false statements. No one in the UK or North America has ever been “convicted for ritual abuse”, because THERE IS NO “RITUAL ABUSE” CRIMINAL STATUTE.
    People are convicted of crimes against children, of a sexual nature, all the time of course; sexual assault, sexual interference, rape, sodomy, prostitution, production of child pornography, etc. Those are the criminal statues they were charged under, and those are the crimes they were convicted of. Anyone’s personal opinion, that the crimes occurred in “a ritual abuse” setting or were somehow “ritualistic”, is irrelevant.
    Again, no one has been convicted of a crime against children under a “ritual abuse” or “satanic ritual abuse” criminal code statute, so it is false to claim anyone was “convicted for ritual abuse”.


Leave a Reply