5/30/05 Battle of the psychologists in sex abuse case
Battle of the psychologists in sex abuse case
Tania Broughton
May 30 2005 at 09:58AM
It will be the battle of the psychologists on Monday morning in the trial of a Russian couple, convicted of using their own children to generate child pornography, when opinions of defence psychologist Louise Olivier will be put to the test under cross-examination.
Later in the day, it is expected that the state's own expert witnesses will contradict Olivier's submissions that the couple are not paedophiles, that they did not "directly" sexually abuse their children and had only exposed them to "age-inappropriate sexual behaviour".
The couple - who cannot be named, to protect the identity of their four young children who are now in care - were arrested at their Bluff, Durban, home in August 2003.
They have been in custody since Durban regional court magistrate Mike Lasich convicted them earlier this year of indecent assault, possession or creation of child pornography, contraventions of the Films and Publications Act and committing indecent acts with children under 16.
They 'only exposed them to 'age-inappropriate sexual behaviour'
Much of the evidence centred on photographs of the couple performing sexual acts with their children and pornographic images found on their computer, which had been downloaded from websites.
On Friday, a 154-page report from Olivier was handed in to court and was used as the basis for her lengthy evidence, during which the couple were huddled together in the dock.
Regarding the 38-year-old father - who is a qualified surgeon but does not practise in South Africa - she said he was domineering but had no personality disorders.
He found obese, busty women attractive and had complained when his wife had lost too much weight.
As evidenced by the website pornography - which showed older, overweight women with younger men - he was constantly re-enacting his own seduction by an older woman when he was 16.
he practised paganism - or 'naturalism'
She said he practised paganism - or "naturalism" - a belief system which promoted nudity but not sexual interaction with children.
"He believes that he was educating his children... he was not sexually stimulated by them.
"He still does not see what he has done wrong ... sex with children abhors him."
Regarding the mother, also 38, she said she had a dependency personality disorder. She had not liked her husband taking the pictures, but he had convinced her they were "just family photos".
"She said he would become sulky and upset if she did not do what he said... he had assaulted her a couple of times and she displays symptoms similar to that of battered women."
She, too, did not perceive the children as sex objects and insisted that a photograph of her apparently performing oral sex on her 8-year-old son was just her lubricating his sore penis.
Another picture of her naked with her legs open pointing to her vagina had been taken when she was pregnant.
"She was showing him (her son) where the baby would come out... she viewed it as educational."
Regarding the two older children (now nearly 10 and five), Olivier said neither had displayed psychological symptoms of abuse before their removal from their parents.
However, both were now suffering and underachieving. The older boy continued to deny that he had been sexually abused by his parents.
The two younger children - one who was just four days old when he was taken away from his parents - were not interviewed by Olivier because they were too young.
Olivier argued that "there is no value in sending them to jail".
"They are not paedophiles and society does not need protection from them."
She argued that they needed psychological counselling - not available in prison - to understand their actions and to be taught parenting skills on "how to heed the norms of society". She also said that the children needed to be reunited with their parents in a year-long step-by-step process.
"The family have been scattered and they are all the poorer for it," Olivier said.
This article was originally published on page 5 of The Mercury on May 30, 2005
Tania Broughton
May 30 2005 at 09:58AM
It will be the battle of the psychologists on Monday morning in the trial of a Russian couple, convicted of using their own children to generate child pornography, when opinions of defence psychologist Louise Olivier will be put to the test under cross-examination.
Later in the day, it is expected that the state's own expert witnesses will contradict Olivier's submissions that the couple are not paedophiles, that they did not "directly" sexually abuse their children and had only exposed them to "age-inappropriate sexual behaviour".
The couple - who cannot be named, to protect the identity of their four young children who are now in care - were arrested at their Bluff, Durban, home in August 2003.
They have been in custody since Durban regional court magistrate Mike Lasich convicted them earlier this year of indecent assault, possession or creation of child pornography, contraventions of the Films and Publications Act and committing indecent acts with children under 16.
They 'only exposed them to 'age-inappropriate sexual behaviour'
Much of the evidence centred on photographs of the couple performing sexual acts with their children and pornographic images found on their computer, which had been downloaded from websites.
On Friday, a 154-page report from Olivier was handed in to court and was used as the basis for her lengthy evidence, during which the couple were huddled together in the dock.
Regarding the 38-year-old father - who is a qualified surgeon but does not practise in South Africa - she said he was domineering but had no personality disorders.
He found obese, busty women attractive and had complained when his wife had lost too much weight.
As evidenced by the website pornography - which showed older, overweight women with younger men - he was constantly re-enacting his own seduction by an older woman when he was 16.
he practised paganism - or 'naturalism'
She said he practised paganism - or "naturalism" - a belief system which promoted nudity but not sexual interaction with children.
"He believes that he was educating his children... he was not sexually stimulated by them.
"He still does not see what he has done wrong ... sex with children abhors him."
Regarding the mother, also 38, she said she had a dependency personality disorder. She had not liked her husband taking the pictures, but he had convinced her they were "just family photos".
"She said he would become sulky and upset if she did not do what he said... he had assaulted her a couple of times and she displays symptoms similar to that of battered women."
She, too, did not perceive the children as sex objects and insisted that a photograph of her apparently performing oral sex on her 8-year-old son was just her lubricating his sore penis.
Another picture of her naked with her legs open pointing to her vagina had been taken when she was pregnant.
"She was showing him (her son) where the baby would come out... she viewed it as educational."
Regarding the two older children (now nearly 10 and five), Olivier said neither had displayed psychological symptoms of abuse before their removal from their parents.
However, both were now suffering and underachieving. The older boy continued to deny that he had been sexually abused by his parents.
The two younger children - one who was just four days old when he was taken away from his parents - were not interviewed by Olivier because they were too young.
Olivier argued that "there is no value in sending them to jail".
"They are not paedophiles and society does not need protection from them."
She argued that they needed psychological counselling - not available in prison - to understand their actions and to be taught parenting skills on "how to heed the norms of society". She also said that the children needed to be reunited with their parents in a year-long step-by-step process.
"The family have been scattered and they are all the poorer for it," Olivier said.
This article was originally published on page 5 of The Mercury on May 30, 2005
posted by Aestrea Raven at Tuesday, May 31, 2005
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home