Protecting Pedophiles is always at the expense of victims.

An assistant professor of sociology and criminal justice at Old Dominion University (VA) has an interesting twist on preventing crime and child advocacy. buttons&utm_campaign=site buttons. Or maybe a twisted interest. Professor Allyn Walker defended their book, A Long, Dark Shadow: Minor-Attracted People and Their Pursuit of Dignity, calling for pedophiles who do not act on their desires to be called “MAPs,” because there is nothing immoral about such a sexual attraction absent the commission of a crime on minor, and the word pedophile has become synonymous with sex offender. Due to safety concerns for the professor and the campus, Walker has been placed on administrative leave.

I don’t even know where to start. The fine points about the definition of “pedophelia,” which Miriam-Webster specifically defines as “a psychiatric disorder in which an adult has sexual fantasies about or engages in sexual acts with a prepubescent child;” the attempt to give a “nicer” name to those who are sexually attracted to children but do not act on their desires (yet); or the attempt to make me the immoral one for thinking MAPs are still pedophiles and as such ticking time bombs?

Victims of child sexual exploitation/abuse have the sanctity of their bodies, their safety, and their dignity taken away. The entire world crashes down around them because of this heinous, violent and criminal violation and abuse of power disguised as sex acts. Many times they are not even believed by people close to them, or are threatened so they won’t come forward at all, to anyone. If they do, the legal system usually finds a way to re-victimize in one way or many ways. The law in every state dictates that a minor cannot consent, under any circumstance, to sexual contact. Yet society is supposed to give a gold star to people for not acting on their illegal sexual impulses? A special name, a special category? If Professor Walker is serious about child abuse prevention, maybe next they can research how many MAPs remain that way for life and don’t cross into using child pornography or acting on their desires. Compare the studies of how many victims an “offending” pedophile usually has over the course of a lifetime, and how these criminals do not “age out” of their sex crimes. Society deems what is moral and immoral, not the defenders of “harmless” sexual attraction towards minors. How can they defend such a fine and warped line?

43 Comments on “Protecting Pedophiles is always at the expense of victims.”

  1. PATRICK T. COFFEY says:

    Isn’t it ALWAYS the case that such Professors just Can’t and Don’t live within the definition of established terms and norms, and try to redefine them ? Next they will be saying Cannibalism is just a dietary choice vs. being a crime against nature. I have never cared for such people who seek to redefine terms that the rest of society is adapted to and comfortable with. They are the odd men ( and women) out, and seem to seek attention for some worthless book they are publishing just to get notoriety in their academic community; this despite the social cost to us all if their positions were adopted.

  2. David says:

    I am stunned. There is no moral reason for sexual desires of a child. There is no glossing the terminology, or facts. As a child who was victimized, I know the shame and disgust I had for myself. Frank Shelden stole my trust in people, and my trust in myself. There are no gold stars for those that haven’t yet acted on these feelings. You are a pedophile, period. End of story. You are correct that children even when they do come forward, are scrutinized, and some disbelieved. I just recently began sharing my story, and I’m sure there are people that disbelieve me. Why did it take so long for you to come forward? It’s been years are you sure you remember correctly? I’m not the only one who kept quiet as a child. I’m sure there are many adults still holding onto their secrets.

  3. Adrian Millane says:

    Let’s look at the track record of those who make claims of the innocuous “love” of children but who ultimately seek sexual pleasure with a child (that is driven by the adult’s desire almost always).
    We had Dr Frits Bernard on the DONAHUE show with an audience stacked with NAMBLA cheering as his ‘protegé’ who had been for years a happy ‘man-boy-love’ (read child f*ckbuddy) participant (recipent?).

    Dr Frits is not worth quoting and you can read his sick shit all over the net – but the point I make is, he presented this happy, ‘well balanced’ (by Frits decree as a psychologist) young man, presented as ‘proof’ of how ok it was for this boy to be targeted and sexually used, oh but ‘lovingly’ by adult men (who of course DID NOT INCLUDE the great Dr Frits who denied until very late in his sick life, that he himself was a paedophile. Oh no, he was an “expert” sex psychologist, serving the modern needs of humanity to ake up to what tyranny it is, for the “persecuted minority” he called paedophiles, to be so treated, just because they wanted to ‘love’ children with their sex organs – oh but they were caring mentors before they penetrated the kids who had no defence, and were too young to understand, but could be made to “feel good”.
    Frits can be quoted a little, to show his sick manipulative mind – “Ever since birth children experience pleasant bodily feelings. A well-known example is sucking by breastfeeding. Children will soon try to rouse this pleasant feeling by f.e. sucking their thumbs: without the need for feeding. Body cavities and certain parts of the skin are important sources for pleasant feelings in children – etc ( … see also

    so if kids feel good in their sexuality – why not f*ck them? Is that the logic – the child can get aroused so it must be valid for the adult to take advantage?? n’est ce pas?

    On the other hand – Frits claims innocent professional analysis of the “normal variation” in human sexuality.
    He has credibility with his Dutch enclave of paedophiles and the wider universities have acclaimed his ‘revolutionary’ and very deep insights. Why, it’s just another variant – like being gay – except for one minor detail. THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD TO BE INNOCENT. The fact that it is the adults making the approaches and seducing the child – or even if not, even if a boy has desires, the adult is the one responsible to protect the child from their own naiveté and folly. How can the child know the consequences of this activity?

    BUT forget all that – we now know what a lying hypocrite was Dr Frits Bernard – now exposed for traveling regularly, along with criminal Francis Duffield Shelden,TO RAPE YOUNG BOYS IN WEST BENGAL and indeed Frits also had a school in Pakistan where I believe he also had some pet boys.
    These proponents of the ‘normal variation; crept into darkest corners of the world, and took boys violently according to the man I met, whose eyes were tunnels of haunted grief and agony, as he told me, on camera, of these friends of “Father John Robert Thwaytes” whp came regularly – to whom he was taken with other boys, in groups, by elder orphan boys who also joined in the orgy of rape, with the priest, with Frits, with Frank, as these dogs made ‘man-boy-love’ as they called it, raping boys who could neither speak English, could not refuse or escape, could not find any safety, as these sex tourists, all connected back to Detroit, to the period when Thwaytes was a seminarian priest at Maryglade Seminary, a stone’s throw from the perverted Shelden, from the OCCK crime/body discovery sites, and of course in reach of North Fox Island, the secret rape venue which ‘persecuted minority’ Shelden conspired to set up as if a Catholic retreat for troubled boys, such as the courageous Michael F who has spoken out through his devastation, to report these horrors.

    THERE IS NO ROOM FOR ‘MINOR ATTRACTED’ persons – put them into psychiatric care under close watch and keep them far from children.

    A man or woman who desires sexual contact with a child is not only sick psychologically but is a danger to a child.
    Children may experiment sexually – most do – but this is not an entré for adults to seize opportunistic pleasure.

    There is a basic desire – penetration and gratification.
    There is NO LOVE INVOLVED.

    An adult who “loved” a child would never touch that child in any way that may disturb the child – and clearly sexual contact from adults is massively damaging to children.
    Even sexualised (non contact, non physical) relations with adults is shown to have lifelong consequences.
    The ‘Daddy’s little girl’ espousing – or “mommy’s good boy” espousing of parents is terrible non physical incestuous example well explained by many top psychologists –

    KIDS NEED TO BE LEFT TO BE KIDS – they need to be safe in the emotional and physical contact with others, not targets, not sources of adult pleasure or security.
    It is not okay to be attracted sexually to children.

    It is fuxking SICK!

    HERE is an Indian man, Shiv Priy Alok, sexually abused as a boy, never helped in pathetic ignorant India, dragged himself up to desperately try to make this forst ever documentary about the hidden (denied) major sexual crime in India, the dominant child sex abuse, which is MALE CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE.
    The stigma attached to being a victim, the taboo attached to discussion, the refusal of the nation to acknowledge that boys can be sexually abused – even while conservative official (but under-reported crime) statistics state that 55% of child sex abuse is suffered by boys – and 53.4% of all children are sex abused – while 75% of an adult focus group of 250 men privately admitted they were sex abused as kids …. all means SILENCE.

    we not only cannot tolerate such crap ‘minor attracted’ we must speak out tirelessly and vigorously to expose the agenda which is basically penetration of young flesh – there is no love – it is lust.
    please watch the video poor Shiv battles to make – it is unfortunately hard and even outside the legal rules to send him money – but his efforts in this trailer deserve recognition.

    This video refelcts what he thinks of ‘man-boy-love’ and ‘minor attraction’ – a woman’s sexual abuse of a boy is reflected also in this in your face trailer for a first ever documentary in India.

    The world needs endless documentaries and exposure.

  4. PATRICK T. COFFEY says:

    Can I just go out on a limb here and say I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE THE DEATH PENALTY FOR PEDOPHILES. I arrived at this conclusion after 35 years of doing polygraph tests off and on of such people, received their confessions; and know the average one of them have about 30 victims before they are caught. No Psychiatrist or Psychologist claims they can CURE them, and only the self serving statement that they can Treat Them. Screw That !!!!! As no amount of treatment can make them fit to live among us in society. At the very least they should be stripped of their US Citizenship, deported to some ridiculously Liberal society abroad, after their prison sentence, and banished from among us.

    I know what you are thinking !!! The answer is YES I could be in such a firing squad, or pull the switch on the electric chair, or flip the switch on lethal injection. No Apologies, No Regrets, No Looking Back, No Second Guessing IT !!! They are NOT FIT to live as Pedophiles and be considered fully human.

    It further begs the question as to why are those who advocate for such pedophiles able to be paid with taxpayer money, when clearly this is advocating for sex crimes against humanity. This in an era where we have record human trafficking of children and women for sexual exploitation.

    • Inquisitor says:


      35 YEARS WOW! I knew you stated 5 or 6 times during the Children of the Snow documentary that you had all of that experience but I didn’t know it was that many. What is even more unbelievable is that you can’t help or shed any light on Hasting’s failed polygraph. I guess it just shows how sad the state of affairs really are behind the scenes and has been all along. All speculation and nothing that ever gets resolved. There is a reason why they concluded what they did. Let’s find out why!

      • Patrick Coffey says:

        INQUISITOR: Yes, I graduated an APA Polygraph school in the mid 1980’s. Much of my career has been spent assisting law enforcement here in the SF Bay area and elsewhere. Further, training allied foreign nations in the computer polygraph field.

        In regard to the Hastings case, I did not do, nor have I seen the charts from that test. Looking at him as a suspect shows no actual foundation, other than fruit of the poison tree via the late Helen “The Felon” Dagner. She admitted she lied to law enforcement about several aspects of the OCCK Case, above and beyond her conviction for fraudulently raising money supposedly for one of the victims. Further, there is concurrence from all sides that actual pedophiles, such as Busch, Green, Etc. JUST DON’T STOP AND/OR CAN’T STOP. Hastings as I understand it has been in Georgia long term, and has no sex related crimes, nor any convictions to my knowledge.

        You claim Hastings failed a polygraph exam. I’ve not heard that from a reliable source. Please don’t confuse an “Inconclusive” result with a failure. An Inconclusive test result in his case would not surprise me, given he has been ridden about this for decades, and it just never ends as being a false suspect. If that was the result, then just know an Inconclusive resultare not one in the same as a Deception Indicated result.

        My position is and always was that the OCCK child killings was a group effort vs. an individual. I was a minority in that opinion pre-2012 on blog sites; but it has certainly proven itself out as true. All evidence I know of only speaks to that since 2006, and Hasting’s is simply NOT part of that group. Hasting’s supposed confession to Dagner over a hamburger has never panned out, and you give credibility to Dagner in that where she has / had none from law enforcement’s point of view, nor under the law as a felon for her fraud activities and conviction within the case itself. Example: I can tell you that two lies she told me personally over the phone in her calls to me were 1. That her husband as a former law enforcement Officer was the one who responded to the Ess lake call by one of Busch’s neighbors concerned about Busch having young boys at that cabin, wherein this neighbor knew Busch’s felon background. In fact, Dagner’s husband was never an officer in this jurisdiction at any time. Further, I’m told Dagner’s conviction itself caused her husband to be fired from his U.P. Agency, and he then came home and ate his gun. Helen then played the poor widow of a fallen Officer for years, which was just bullshit. She may have been a fine archivist of the case, BUT don’t confuse that with her actually having credibility in her obsessive “John” theory. 2nd, Dagner claimed to me that at some point she had a picture of Timmy King taken while he was in captivity while missing, and which had been in the possession of Hastings A statement she was later asked about by law enforcement, and admitted she lied.

        I’ve never met Hastings, nor seen his charts, but I know those who have. One of whom was good friends with another of the known four victim’s families. You just can’t extrapolate from the known evidence any role played by Hastings with the OCCK case itself, especially if you take the Dagner factor out of it. He became her obsession at a fairly young age, and she rode it all the way until her death. There is nothing to connect him to any of the four known victims, or an actual pedophile group; other than his having lived in a nice neighborhood not far from where Busch lived, but nobody has been able to place them as friends, nor having common interests. I’m very open minded as to WHO ELSE may have been involved in the OCCK among a sick cult of pedophiles, but Hastings just does not add up to that, and by all accounts he is a long term, middle class, working Joe in the transportation industry. He is a loner by most all accounts, and not part of the clear group think that manifested these cases. Birds of a Feather you know !!!!! To this date, Dagner remains the only individual convicted of a felony in anything directly related to the OCCK case itself, as she has / had attached herself as a parasite to it.

        • Inquisitor says:


          I should have maybe stated ahead of time that I already know your opinion of Hastings and even Dagner as far as that goes before you went into all that detail. I’ve read plenty of your discussions over this thru the years as recently as OCCK FaceBook and as far back as Topix. Some of your information has been wrong and you seem to refuse to correct it. I’m not asking for your opinion or anyone else for that matter because that don’t tell us anything. I’m asking for someone to help recover the conclusions from Mr. Duncan’s (And his boss) conclusions of Hastings polygraph tests from Georgia which were partly specified in the FOIA documents with what did leak thru. And some of the wording was written very strongly at that and seems to be specifically related to Busch. Need real information, ,we are talking data possibly, the redacted blanks from the FOIA docs themselves and maybe even the DVDs that were produced of their findings. That same stuff that Cathy has been trying to obtain for a couple years now and still counting. Is someone in a position as yourself have the pull to be able to get to the facts over this matter? Are you able to go around and get her useful information that the MSP and Oakland Country refuse to do so? Why did they (Duncan & his boss) conclude that Hastings was involved with the OCCK murders and knew Busch absolutely without a doubt? Where did they come up with that and written so strongly as they did. I really wish you could help in this area because where it stands right now, you are the only one that may have the pull to do so.

          • Inquisitor says:

            Oh well, I didn’t really expect a response. Some things just don’t change! I was never really good at sugar coating things anyway.

            • JN says:

              As I do respect Patrick and what he’s done concerning the case. I disagree with his stance on it. Patrick feels that just because Hastings didn’t have prior convictions, that he’s not a reliable suspect. That’s a terrible mistake. Ted Bundy didn’t have any prior convictions before he decided to cut woman’s heads off. Granted , yes Helen did fabricate things concerning John boy, however; Hastings was a suspect way before Dagner. Hastings had two girl friends that thought he could be the killer. Who looks more like the Composites at Hunter Maple more than Hastings? Surely not Grizzly Adams. There’s no way in hell Patrick you think it was Busch that was talking to Timmy that night. You can’t think that Busch and Hastings didn’t know each other. Same age, both short hand cooks. Live two streets from each other . What’s the probability? There are a lot of unanswered questions concerning John boy. It’s a historical fact that he’s had mental health treatment. Was he seeing Dr Bruce Danto? Dr Danto just happened to work at the same institution as Hastings sister Mary. COINCIDENCE? should Hastings be brushed off? Should the so called inconclusive polygraph be forgotten? Should Duncan’s opinion that Hastings was involved be forgotten?

              • Inquisitor says:


                These same arguments have been going on for way over 10 years now with PTC. One of the problems is that many years ago Helen’s web rivalries accused her of raising money for a fraudulent Jill fund which never really did exist. It’s not true and has never been true in any way but as Helen already had fraud charges in her history, it appeared that she fits the bill. So it’s like using her bad image in one instance to crush her on something completely different. It works all the time on the internet and although PTC has access to records like everyone else and could find out the truth over Helen’s charges, he seems to want to continue with this fallacy and state it like it’s fact. It’s very strange for a professional as himself to behave this way but he does. He’s been corrected numerous times by many and maybe even others behind the scenes as he seems to want to continue with this as he has the clout to do so. Very sad and pathetic both as PTC has played an important part in this OCCK case but at the same time is a barrier to the truth. He could maybe be the one helping Cathy and getting to the truth over Hastings polygraph conclusions and finding out what really happened in Georgia and how they reached their conclusions but instead continues to just shoot his mouth with his strong opinions over the case. So nothing gets anywhere and remains going nowhere.

                • Inquisitor says:

                  What is really perplexing to me is that PTC seems to want to go back to Hastings passing the polygraph or suggesting it was ‘inconclusive’. This was old information and wrong information that was passed around for years. Anyone who has been following this blog to any degree in the last year or so has read that the Hastings polygraph has been very questionable and points to some type of OCCK quilt right in the wording. It sure reads like he failed it and miserably at that. And this is base on the FOIA papers themselves what was leaked thru and quite obvious. Why must this famed professional OCCK polygrapher himself (Mr. PTC) miss these details? Can anyone get him in tune with what has been covered here? Seems like he wants Busch to be centered around this whole thing so much and not accept any other outcome while most of us would just like to find the truth where ever it takes us.

                  • JN says:

                    If you have followed Patrick and paid attention to why he disregarded Hastings as a suspect. You will know it’s because of Helen fabricating information on Hastings and because Hastings has no prior convictions pertaining to pedophilia activities. Anyone that knows criminology, would know that means shit. Like I’ve mentioned 100 times. Ted Bundy had zero convictions prior to him cutting womans heads off. Most people in their 20’s don’t have convictions . I am puzzled with Patrick on why he refuses to acknowledge the so called inclusive results from the 2009 Hastings polygraph . How can one disregard Duncan’s findings? I’m not accusing or theorizing , but it almost makes you wonder if Coffey has some connection to Haystack. I have to give him credit to where credit is due. He got information from Wasser on Busch. Where would we be without that information?

                    • Inquisitor says:

                      Agree. I sure wish I could pull some of his old posts from Topix. Stuff that would make you gringe reading it. Basically Patrick tends to claim that polygraphs may not be accurate unless he conducts the tests himself. Therefore he will find fault with other polygraphers especially if the outcome is not what he wants it to be such as Duncan (And his boss). Or something on the lines that Patrick is the only one in the entire world that can conduct a polygraph with 100% accuracy guaranteed every time. Something that I never knew was even possible. I guess it’s something for the record books as I never knew there was that much assurance in such a thing.

                    • Inquisitor says:

                      Coffey having a connection to Hastings is really reaching for the stars. Although one my my greatest pet peeves with him is how he has steered people away from ever considering Hastings a possible suspect with his large influence on things. I strongly suspect he steered the late Barry King from ever considering Hastings a suspect. I remember also that he insisted over and over that the original Grand Jury was investigating Busch upon his request. Seems like that didn’t hold any water. I guess it was known that Grand Jurys don’t investigate the deceased or that’s the way I understood it. Whatever the case it’s a power trip like everyone else and unfortunately distances our selves from ever getting to the truth!

                    • patricktcoffey says:

                      INQUISITOR: Do you even understand what an Inconclusive test means. It means there is Not Enough data to have a finding. Further, unknown to YOU, the research shows that the most likely cause of an INCL result is due to Poor Pre-Test Interview. !!! It is not always why this outcome happens, but the most likely cause. That is why neither YOU, nor the GBI can put any weight on such a test if that was the result. Duncan’s “Feelings” seem to only be impressive to YOU.

  5. Brian says:

    Are you familiar with Edward Brongersma – the Dutch politician and lawyer that Shelden briefly appointed as executor of his trust, when he was trying to wrestle back control of his money from Starchild?

    Brongersma wrote many books promoting his ideas about “child-love”. Interesting how that term speaks of engagement; “minor-attracted” is a re-branding, indicating not an act but a feeling, or disposition, not toward a child but a minor, which allows one to debate the demarcation of childhood, as if the age of consent hadn’t already established a clear line.

    Upon Brongersma’s death in the late nineties, his considerable collection of “social-sexological” materials and private archives were given to the International Institute for Social History; minus the “visual material,” which had been seized by LE.

    The Institute set up a Fund for Scientific Research of Sexuality. Some of their stated objectives included: supporting parents, guardians, educators, teachers, public relations officers and care and welfare workers by effectively channeling the knowledge gained from research; promoting debate in circles of lawyers, sociologists, government officials and politicians on the social and legal frameworks that are needed to contribute to sexual emancipation and sexual health, and to helping to develop the capacity for relationships, an awareness of interaction and a sense of responsibility.

    In other words, our objective is to teach the effective teaching of propaganda. Gain influence. Normalize. Change the conversation. Confuse the issues. Play with the language until the meaning is hollowed out. This is why Mr. Norman’s early mail order business was called Odyssey, just like the organization created to address the proliferation of criminality “towards” children.

    Brongersma was the equivalent of a Senator.

    When charges were brought in Britain against the alarmingly long-lived PIE (Pedophilia Information Exchange), the offenses in question posed serious semantic questions. Can an organization which publishes magazines called Childhood Rights and Understanding Paedophilia be trusted, let alone allowed, to publish ads which promote the organization and mobilization of pedophiles through language that is intended to deceive? What does “contact” mean here? Were these ads “calculated to promote indecent acts between adults and children”?

    Of course they were – under cover of semantics, which is why everything such people ever named should be regarded as code and thoroughly mined.

    The chairperson of PIE fled to Holland. Various members were eventually – as in years later – convicted of sexual assault against children. One was investigated as an alleged member of a pedophile network operating from within the school system. Letters which detailed what were described as fantasies were confiscated. Sir Peter Hayman, who formerly worked with MI6, seemed to have corresponded with everyone there was to correspond with in this group: just making contacts, and sharing fantasies, like, say, instructions for establishing a youth camp. See also the states objectives of both Boy’s Farm and the retreat on Fox Island.

    This professor seems to have been schooled well in the tactics of word salad dog whistles.

  6. robertjkenney52 says:

    Bob Kenney

    This is yet the latest attempt to give academic standing to the idea that sex with children is okay and that the laws should be changed to essentially make paedophillia legal.

    One only needs to follow the OCCK case to see the trail of destruction left by these child rapists to see this is total bullshit!

    As Adrian posted, “THERE IS NO LOVE INVOLVED!” Amen, Hallelujah!

  7. lisalink63 says:

    Sexual abuse of children impacts more than just the victim and perpetrator.
    My friend grew up in an extremely dysfunctional home with many siblings.
    Her mother worked long hours during the day and the step father worked the
    night shift. When the stepfather came home drunk every morning the children
    would all scatter and hide. My friend Debbie would hide in the closet. The only
    sibling who couldn’t run was her baby sister. We’ll call her Evelyn. Debbie
    would hide in the closet until her drunken stepfather finished abusing her
    baby sister. She didn’t understand what was going on (she was 4) but she
    knew it was over when she heard Evelyn fall onto the floor and her stepfathers
    snoring. My friend would scoop up the baby and run to care for her. Her mother
    did not believe the abuse was happening. Her mother didn’t have the mental and
    emotional skill set to process these upsetting incidents.

    Fast forward some years Debbie is a single parent of a son. Evelyn has come
    to live with her and provide childcare for Debbie’s son Chris while she works
    to keep a roof over her head.

    More years later Chris is an adult and he tells Debbie that Evelyn had abused
    him from 4 years old to 12 when he was grown enough to rebuff Evelyn. Debbie con-
    fronted Evelyn who denied it. Debbie told Evelyn to quit her job (as a 2nd
    grade teacher) seek counseling and apologize to her son. Evelyn countered with
    a lawsuit ensuring Debbie’s silence. The cherry on top was when Debbie shared
    the story with her mother and other siblings. All of them had the same response
    “boys can’t be raped by girls”. It was easier to write off Debbie’s story
    than to confront uncomfortable memories.

    Today, Debbie’s relationship with her mother and siblings is tenuous. Her son,
    upset that this was brought to light, doesn’t speak with her. She is missing
    time with her son and grand kids. This eats away at her emotions constantly.
    And her sister Evelyn is now living with her mother and older sister. She is
    still a teacher and single mom. She now has a baby boy of her own.

    All this to say DO NOT GIVE ONE INCH IN THIS FIGHT! MAP my ass! Pedophilia
    is a cancer that must be treated. Preferably with a hot lead injection to the
    head. Kinder folks would suggest therapy. But no one should ever try to
    normalize this in our society. It’s not normal no matter how you lie to yourself
    and others.

  8. cathybroad says:

    More bullshit: I’d like to see some solid stats on how many sex offenders, especially pedophiles are “rehabilitated.” Instead of spending time on the “a rose by any other name” arguments, how about spending time on legislation eliminating the statute of limitations in sex crimes?

  9. cathybroad says:

    And this week we have another graduate from MAP to pedophile: Hopefully soon to be convicted pedophile.

  10. Inquisitor says:

    Quote from Patrick T. Coffey above
    November 18, 2021 at 11:21 am (Last Paragraph)

    – “I’ve never met Hastings, nor seen his charts, but I know those who have. One of whom was good friends with another of the known four victim’s families. ” –

    Cathy has been looking for charts or any other traces of his polygraph tests for years now. Good news as someone has seen his charts. Is this the Georgia polygraph from 2009? I don’t recall anyone present from Michigan at those tests which is part of the whole problem. Maybe they saw the data afterwards? Or are we talking something else? Not very clear. Anyone want to guess? This thread was buried way too soon!


    Hey Nickel Nuts,

    You are saying things here I have NOT represented. In simple terms, Either You DO have a diagnostic finding that Hastings failed a polygraph test (aka; A Deception Indicated result) or You DON’T !!! Which is it ??? Further, Just to bring you up to speed in the modern world, NOTHING involving human beings in the equation can EVER be 100% Percent——– 100% of the time. The Key is whether the data equates to being at or above the level or Statistical Significance (95% or higher). In our discipline we have BOTH good old fashioned Hand Scoring which is always primary, and secondarily there are about eight current software algorithm scoring packages that can run the data for their own separate findings.

    I have trained polygraph examiners both here in the US, as well as all around the world in the MiddleEast, Asia, Eastern Europe, Etc. to the standards of the American Polygraph Association, and ASTM Standards. You continue to cast dispersions about ME, My Profession, and my stance in just wanting to see an Actual Test Finding regarding Hastings. You don’t seem to have that, I don’t have that, nor does anyone other than perhaps the GBI, or OCCK Task Force. You seem to believe that I or any other professional in the field has access to every other professional’s database. Guess What, we don’t. Your naïve mindset is like having a little brat around that in reality needs their ass slapped and corrected. You are a grown man, so act like one; and get out of this negativity and obsession. I have not displayed anything like the arrogance you have here, and have actually DONE SOMETHING for this case, and still will if I can, rather than just sit around like you and nag, bitch, wine, and moan.

    When YOU write that Officer or Detective Duncan in GA. is quoted as saying he thinks Hastings is involved, THAT is NOT a polygraph test finding, and rather a comment that might be made to a peer, but perhaps in frustration due to an Inconclusive tests. What I would need to actually add anything of value is in fact a diagnostic finding, and have repeatedly said so, rather than have to listen to incomplete speculation you are spewing.


  12. Inquisitor says:


    It’s been discussed here many times over in the last year or so. Duncan claims he was absolute certain that Hastings was involved with these murders and that he knows Busch personally. This was in the polygraph conclusion and claimed both him and his boss (unspecified who) who observed the entire test concluded the same thing. The rest of the document was so heavily redacted that there is not much left to read so many unknowns to this. I’m sure someone here can send you the pages if you’re interested. They offered to hold him for the MSP to prepare papers to pick him up. Does this sound like just an inconclusive fluke reading to you? Perhaps it was. You are the expert.

    All speculation on my part you are absolutely correct. So here I go where I suspect that the way it’s worded with so much certainty is that perhaps Hastings cracked and confessed to some things. Does this ever happen with your testing? Hastings has been known to go into some weird trances in the past from time to time which maybe launched this.

    Many here would just like to know why they concluded what they did.

    Did I read correctly your previous posts? Did someone view Hastings polygraph data from 2009?

  13. patricktcoffey says:

    INQUISITOR: Why don’t you post under your REAL NAME ? I do. Also, You continue to Pinocchio the hell out of my prior statements, and twist them into some other meaning only you get out of them. I know your type. You are a word twister. You have nothing to really offer, so you just seek to turn up the heat aka: just a shit disturber.

    If Hastings is a viable suspect then law enforcement has not found it so. Are you suggesting that good men and women of law enforcement who are working family people would cover for Hastings ? If so Why ? I doubt his family has the money the Busch family did !!! Also, Quit being Helen’s Ghost Parrot from the grave, and offer something new vs. rehashing old shit already gone over.

    Also, You seem to ascribe to me powers I simply don’t have, and have never had as to what I can do or have done in this case. I’ve sought no attention to myself, nor fame, nor money; and rather spent money to assist any way I could for my childhood friend Tim King, his memory, and his family. I’ve done what I could with what I had, and when I could. There is more, but not known to you, nor do you deserve to know. So get off my back asshole. !!! If you are a guy, and were in my presence, I would probably deck you. If you are a woman, then I’d just shun you for the Delilah presence you bring among us. Either way, I know your type and you just don’t bring out the best in anyone around you no doubt. I’ve been a true friend to a friend(s), and you are just a drag on all of this. You manifest the 9th commandment in it’s worst form. So FUCK YOU !!!

    • Inquisitor says:

      If they found that he was linked to Busch – Absolutely! Which is probably why no more information on this poly can be obtained. It appears Gray or someone buried the DVDs and related docs to the poly test. What’s the use, it’s sure not worth discussing! Cathy, good luck with all of this. Bye.

      • patricktcoffey says:

        INQUISITOR: So NOW you want to imply that Hastings must have confessed to something in 2009 !!!! Wow, are you ever making a spectacle of yourself here. Do you really think anyone would allow 12 years to go by and not work with such information if it existed ??? Post what you have in regard to AN ACTUAL POLYGRAPH FINDING PLEASE. Not more of your arm chair quarterbacking of no merit. Show Me !!! Either a diagnostic finding paragraph, OR something other than “Feelings” or disgust or conjecture on Duncan’s part perhaps with a non-cooperative test subject in Hastings, who may be fully burned out on the subject after all these years. There is such a thing as Ethics you know. He has been looked at from head to toe.

          • Inquisitor says:

            I see your post on the link above. I guess the math didn’t quite work out for Duncan’s conclusions so they are not legit.

            • Inquisitor says:

              Same type reasoning, 12 years went by and they suddenly conduct a polygraph? It had to do with a possible Busch link at that point. Then he denies he knew Busch during their discussions but later with the polygraph they conclude he knew Busch. What gives here?

              I stated that I speculate he might have confessed. You are now doing the same thing that you accuse me. Changing my words around on me. Somewhere in that doc or other docs it was specific that he knew Busch and was involved with the murders. It never states a confession by word.

                • Inquisitor says:


                  Along with that old link above. There was a follow up zoom meeting with Marney & Cory which I viewed. They both discussed the questionable Hastings polygraph along with the whole OCCK presentation for her book. They both admitted that this was overlooked all of this time. Cory which happens to be the best cop ever put on the OCCK, reveals he did not know anything about this questionable Hastings polygraph all of this time. He seemed surprised. The fact is that he was taken off the OCCK task force from Det. Gray at that time. So you ask why was this known questionable polygraph showing OCCK guilt of some sort put under wraps for some 12 years now and still counting. I sure wish someone could find an answer to that. A real answer, not some lame excuse with lame logic or some overblown technical jargon. I hate to spill this to you after all of these years but not all of the dedicated LE staff that you describe has all been trustworthy or forthcoming

      • INQUISITOR: You continue to spin this in directions that don’t lead anywhere. I do however, based on what you have said, want to clarify a few things that stick out.

        1. There would NOT be a question in a polygraph exam as to whether someone knew someone (ie; Hastings knowing Busche) as that is NOT A CRIME QUESTION.

        2. There are FOUR (4) possible outcomes of a polygraph exam, and not three as you have suggested. The first possible outcome is called NDI or No Deception Indicated. It means by point values on a fixed scale that the person was considered as Truthful. Next, DI or Deception Indicated, wherein by point values on a fixed scale that person was regarded as NOT Truthful. Next, an INCL or Inconclusive test result wherein from that same point scale there is not enough point values to tell. Every scientific based measurement has some Inconclusive results. Last, An Interrupted test result; meaning that due to Tornado, Earthquake, Fire Alarm, or other environmental reason, or the subject stopping the test itself; there was no actual measurable result given the incompleteness of the event.

        From what I have read, and the nature of what are claimed as Duncan’s statement about Hastings from the test; there is not a diagnostic finding of DI or NDI, and rather a probable INCL or Interrupted event from which no finding could be given. Therefore, the statement of ” I think he did it” or “I think he is involved” is NOT A POLYGRAPH TEST FINDING, and rather a subjective statement based on a human to human interview which is subjective. If that is the case I have no doubt Duncan, or any Examiner in his shoes, would be frustrated with a test subject, and would only be left with making such a statement, but shy of diagnostic information to back it up. My understanding is that Hastings has been polygraphed a few times, and he must be wondering “When is enough—–enough already”.

        We have a professional language we speak in the profession, and shy of a clear finding of a Deception Indicated result, It is wrong for you to claim Hastings failed his test. Further, You claim none of the boxes were checked, and this further reinforces my position that there is NOT a finding ———for a probable INCL or more probable Interrupted or incomplete test.

        I would have to go back and check, but I believe I wrote a prior statement about the Ninth Commandment: Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness against thy neighbor. You thought or processed, and later wrote, you thought I was referring to “The Ninth Amendment” to the US Constitution. It is known as the Enumeration clause, which is intended to keep the Feds from exerting powers that are not specifically afforded it in the Constitution itself. You can also borrow from this in speaking to what you know and therefore are empowered to comment on vs. taking unto yourself how or what others are trying to say. Multiple times you have written “Patrick Thinks” or “Patrick Feels” , etc. You don’t speak for me, nor have I observed your ability to process what I have written in it’s proper context. I don’t know You Inquisitor, but I’m just not impressed thus far from anything you have written that takes us all to a new paradigm.

        I put it to you plainly Inquisitor. Do YOU have some background in Investigations, or the Intelligence community, or a degree in Psychology, Criminology, etc. Just what do YOU bring to the table here exactly. I have a CV that almost fully describes my fields of expertise and experience, and would send it to anyone interested. Do YOU have one ?, Or are you just sitting around content to stir up shit as you have vs. making some actual meaningful contribution ?

        Patrick Coffey

        • Inquisitor says:

          Thanks for your input.

        • Inquisitor says:


          There is lots of conversation between JN and me and it’s intertwined so I believe you mixed me and him on a couple instances but regardless your points are well taken.

          There might have been 4 choices on the form as I’m going by memory but as far as I know none of the boxes were selected in the FOIA papers. Perhaps it defaults to ICL as you say or that the selection was removed like many other things in the docs were.

          So are we concluding that the polygraph in Georgia is disqualified some way because the person was previous polygraphed? Seems like that is what you are hinting at but again I’m accused of so many things at this point. I believe he was only polygraphed once previously in regards to this but I could be wrong.

          Regardless, I guess this polygraph is not even worth pursuing or looking at if that is the case.

          Sorry I did not impress you.

  14. JN says:

    As I did some thinking Patrick you do have a point. You can’t abuse the 9 amendment and condemn someone on theories and hearsay’s . You are right in the fact that Helens blatantly lies discredit anything she has said. That being said , this case is manly built on theories. Until there is any solid evidence that’s all we have . We all have our opinions and theories; however, those mean nada in a court of law. That being said , I still feel Hastings inconclusive polygraph should be examined and addressed. I know the findings was based on personal feelings. Those personal feelings should be examined.

    • Inquisitor says:

      Who says the findings were based on feelings? I guess because Patrick says so that is what it is. The polygraph testing itself was put on DVDs for MSP to review. Surely there is more there presented than just the polygrapher’s feelings. One thing that does stand out on feelings is they felt dedicated to present their findings and concerns and put it on a DVD as well. Sadly it all vanished to never see light in Michigan. As far as Helen, yes she told lies. We all know that. She told the truth on some things as well. Why anyone is still justifying Hastings being a possible suspect over Helen’s credentials is beyond me. At some point people have to go beyond that. Willing to override the polygraph conclusions because of Helen? This is complete nonsense. The OCCK case is on a continuous spin cycle with no resolution on anything.

      • JN says:

        Duncan’s opinion was that Hastings was involved and that he knew Busch. That was based on the reading of the polygraph. His interpretation. How reliable are polygraphs? You know my theories and that hasn’t changed . I feel Hastings WAS the one and only killer. Well with possibly one other. Can I prove it? My beliefs were from an accumulation of consequences. Can I prove that it was Hastings at HM on March 16, 1977 at 8:30 pm? If I did prove that I’m sure Patrick would say “ so that doesn’t mean it was him that abducted Timmy”. Can I prove that Hastings knew Busch? No Busch is dead.

        • Inquisitor says:

          Patrick hates Helen and it’s deep and there is no way he will ever admit Hastings is a suspect. There’s where the feelings come into play. It’s my understanding from Helen that they talked a few times on the phone and somewhere here in his posts, he admitted to one of the discussions. I remember when he threatened Helen that he was going to sue her. Someone out there probably has some screen shots of the old Topix posts from years ago.

          • Inquisitor says:

            As far Duncan’s opinion was that Hastings was involved and that he knew Busch based on direct reading of the polygraph. I don’t think it went down exactly in that way from the reading itself but with such little information available it’s all speculation. But If you go back to the link I provided for Patrick and go to Cathy’s download with the famous Duncan quote highlighted and look up a few paragraphs. Duncan is describing some weird behavior coming from Hastings like he keeps correcting himself to what is the ‘truth’. This reads to me like someone is starting to crack and I still speculate that he started to spill the beans on things but with so much redacted out of the doc, it’s really hard to tell. I wish someone could get their hands on the DVDs and we could find out what really happened and why their conclusions are what they were and put this thing to bed. Way too much speculation.

          • JN says:

            Helen made it very difficult what to believe concerning John boy. So say you discredit everything she has said. You can’t discredit Bill “ Alpena witness”. He over heard Hastings admitting to the crimes. Let’s say Hastings was lying just to get coffee and a meal. Is that something a normal person would lie about? Is that someone that should be walking freely? I’d like to know if Doug Wilson seen Hastings photo? Surely that’s not a face you would forget under those circumstances. These are all theories . Theories that could possibility lead to something concrete .I can’t believe after all these years , these conversations hasn’t jarred someone’s memory

            • Inquisitor says:

              All good points & good questions. Helen is mentally handicap some way and she was really into her own little world I guess you could say. She never felt that her lies would catch up with her. It’s very difficult to describe but yes that is why this thing was driven the way it is and the cops continue to discredit the whole mess. I agree that Alpena Witness is the real deal. Regardless of the outcome, if you consider the maps drawn and all the details, it’s always been so obscure. You and I agree that the OCCK sketch matches John to a tee but you sure can’t get everyone on board on that one. Who else matches the sketch other than Greene so we have people arguing over him being out of jail at the time even after Cathy’s research proofs otherwise. Doug Wilson sketch also is interesting match to John. I guess we just throw those away as well because Helen’s character. You would hope and think that something like polygraphs would help in this case but for some reason the docs are missing except for the little bit of print that got thru. Here we are with all of this speculation on the polygraph.

              And BTW, the FOIA papers that document the Georgia polygraph had three check boxes and I can’t remember what they were off hand but the first one was ‘inconclusive’ which was on the first page and thru the years, many of us interpreted that was the choice they made because it was the first check box but it was pointed out by someone it might have been Cathy that there were actually three choices and they were all blank. In other words the redacted process took out what was chosen originally so we really don’t know the results of the polygraph. The word got around though that it was ‘inconclusive’ and that stuck for a long time. That is old information though and unless someone knows for sure it should remain unknown. Hard to say if Patrick has a connection out there on this or just base on the old heresay. Some things I guess we will never know.

  15. cathybroad says:

    Comments for this post will now be disabled. Of course this Duncan/Hastings issue needs to be looked at again. The notes Garry Gray put in the OCCK file concerning the interview and polygraphs were WITHHELD from Det. Cory Williams who is the only honest cop who worked the case. End of discussion.