Dr. Rawls was amazed and "unhappily surprised" at the results:

	Seven of the 30 children (23%) said that they had been inappropriately touched: 3 disclosed genital touching. 2 reported touching under their upper clothes. 2 said that he had touched "their bottoms" or vice versa. 2 reported mutual touching under their clothing.
	Children's "errors appeared to evolve" during subsequent interviews.
	The children created many new errors when a diagram of body parts was introduced during the second interview.
	Closed, suggestive questions (e.g. "Did he touch you on the...") generated the most errors.
	Open, general questions (e.g. "What happened then?") produced an accuracy of 32% during the first interview; closed questions were 9% accurate; mixed questions were 20% accurate.
	None of the children told the "secret" without prompting; 23% did not disclose the secret when prompted; 20% consistently provided accurate description of the secret when prompted.

The scary part of this study is that under different circumstances, Trevor could easily have been prosecuted on the basis of seven children's stories out of the "class" of 30. He could have received many lengthy jail sentences. Fortunately, the video tapes of the games proved that none of the children's disclosures actually happened.

In preparation for the publishing of their 1995 book, Drs. Ceci and Bruck reviewed all available literature on children's suggestibility and memory. This included excerpts covering 300 years of testimony, from the Salem Witch trials to the recent Little Rascal's day care case in Edenton NC. ₁ They concluded:

	Preschool children are more suggestible than older children.
	Suggestive and repetitive questions can lead the children to describe events that never happened to them.
	Non-abused children can create memories of being molested, using source materials supplied by other children.
	Children who are asked to visualize how an event might have happened to them can emerge from counseling with false memories that they were abused.
	There is no way to later separate accurate from false memories of children who were interviewed using defective techniques.
	All interviews of children should be recorded; interviewer's notes have been shown to be inadequate.
	The use of "anatomically correct dolls" with very young children is not recommended.
	"Expert" witnesses often reach conflicting conclusions as to the reality of abuse after reviewing interview records.

Dr. Bruck and Ceci cite a number of interesting studies:

	Saywitz et al. used anatomically correct dolls to interview five and seven year old children who had previously had an examination by a doctor for scoliosis (curvature of the spine). No genital or anal touching was involved. But 3% of the children "falsely affirmed vaginal touch" and 6% "falsely affirmed anal touch when the experimenter pointed to the genital or anal region of the doll and asked, 'Did the doctor touch you here?'". 2
	Bruck et al. interviewed three year old children who had just visited the doctor. No genital or anal touching was involved. Immediately after the exam, the children were interviewed, using anatomically correct dolls. They were asked "Did the doctor touch you here?". 50% of the children incorrectly answered yes! 3
	Bruck & Ceci describe a girl aged three years, six months who was examined by a pediatrician. Immediately after the exam, she was interviewed and correctly stated that the doctor had not touched her genitals or buttocks. She was shown a doll and given a direct request: to show how the doctor had touched her genitals and buttocks. She again correctly denied that it happened. 3 days later, she was re-interviewed, given the doll and asked to demonstrate everything that happened during the exam. She inserted a stick into the vagina of the doll and said that the doctor had done that to her; upon further questioning, she recanted, saying that the doctor had not done that. 3 days later, she was again re-interviewed and asked to show her father what the doctor had done. "...she hammered a stick into the doll's vagina and inserted a toy earscope into the doll's anus." Asked again whether it had really happened, she said "Yes it did." The father and interviewer tried to convince her that the doctor would not do these things, but she tenaciously stuck to her story. 4

Since a typical MVMO investigation might have involved interviews of 100 children, one might conclude from the Saywitz study that an average of three would disclose nonexistent vaginal abuse and six would disclose nonexistent anal abuse in response to a simple direct question. One direct question to each child would generate 9 false charges per 100 children! This would probably be sufficient "evidence" to send the entire staff of a day-care center to jail for decades.

Web ReligiousTolerance.org

Page Translator: This page translator works on Firefox, Opera, Chrome, and Safari browsers only After translating, click on the "show original" button at the top of this page to restore page to English.