Previous Entry Share Next Entry
I died on this day, in 1991

Whittaker Chambers said: "Innocence seldom utters outraged shrieks. Guilt does."

August 20, 2009-Addendum:
I was going to rename this post...THE AFFLICTED RULE... Because they do!

Even people who know and love me, won't agree with me on this. Well, this is the 18th anniversary of when my children and I were vaporized in divorce court, by one of the Champions Of The Afflicted, Sarah Buel.

In 1692, several prepubescent girls became hysterical about their interactions with The Devil. These girls and now boys, live on as Neo Marxist Feminists and Suicidal Hippies...And they are in the process of razing the Western World. 

Charlie Manson named what we're going through right now...Healter Skelter (how it was spelled in blood, on Sharon Tate's wall).

Salem Afflicted

Here is a list of those afflicted during the Salem Witch Trials and where they resided. Click here for a statistical analysis of the afflicted.

The hysterical boys who are terrified of everything, except things that are truly dangerous, are the pony-tailed, priapic Hippies. The Western World is ruled by these throw backs. Think you can talk them out of their terror? Good luck with that! 

You might consider sending several exorcists by bus, to DC.

These monsters aren't just Hippies, They're the Manson Family.

This is my special anniversary post. On August 24, 1991, my then wife, Jean McIntosh (maiden name) said...If I knew how to load your rifle, I would kill you with it, to keep you away from the kids.

I called the Weymouth Police after Jean's mother came in the house without knocking, and collected her daughter and our children, Holly and Ken.

The police officer wrote the only report generated in our entire relationship. He asked me if I wanted Jean picked up for observation, and did I wish to take out a restraining order on her. I said no, that I didn't want to put Holly and Ken through that. Even if I did, I would have been vaporized by Sarah Buel when I got to Quincy District Court, anyway.

buel.jpg picture by dishmael_bucket

SBUEL@LAW.UTEXAS.EDU  In case you want to send some kudos to the little succubus.

This is the lovely but lethal Sarah. Sarah is mentioned three times in Who Stole Feminism, by Christina Hoff Sommers. Sarah has perpetrated some of the most foul anti-father propaganda in the last thirty years. In Massachusetts, Sarah was joined by Judge Christina Harmes, Judge Eileen Shaevel, and finally Judge Robert Langlois. My attorney was able to get Judge Shaevel to recuse herself, in 1997.

Judge Robert Langlois, said to me, on December 2, 1997...This must be torture for you. He then turned to Jean and her troll of a lawyer, Nancy Harmon and recommended that Jean petition the court for a LIFE LONG RESTRAINING ORDER. Which he promptly granted. 

In her petition, Jean mentioned where I had, "tried to drown," Ken in our above ground swimming pool...3 times in 1991. I weighed about 200 lbs., back then. Ken weighed about 35 lbs. and couldn't swim. When I saw the petition, I almost did the happy dance. Ol Judge Langlois probably didn't read it, or he was under Jean's spell. She and her parents had me for 16 years.

Remember, mine was the only police report ever generated during our entire relationship. Jean must've forgotten that I "tried" to kill our children, lo those many years ago. Ho hum.

I had met a freelance writer at a father's group meeting, named David Biederman. David knew my case inside out and was present on that cold December day in 1997. My case was to be about 1/3 of a story he was preparing for Atlantic Monthly Magazine, on how father's get screwed in divorce court. I saw him talking to my father-out-law in court. The story never got published.

I understand why Jim McIntosh didn't want to have this happen. His father molested Jean when he was baby sitting for her, while Mom and Dad were becoming EDUCATORS.

Just before I had a complete break down in *Vermont, this is what David wrote for me. I call it my Dead Dad's Resume. I have been posting it without my real name, but I am not going to edit it this time. (*A story for another day)

One grows weary of injustice in our modern world; there is so much
of it, so much brutality, so much unfairness, so much that is
simply wrong. Our attention is caught for a few moments on one
terrible tale, and then on the next.

On the face of it, the Merchant case is almost banal. The
lawyers, the judges, the experts and the idealogues have all had a
hand in giving it an appearance of a routine event. As have the
years; over time people lose interest, change or move on.

Yet there is one terrible fact at the core of this case, a case
that if one was told had happened in the Soviet gulag, would be
dismissed as too unbelievable, too cruel to be true. David Merchant has not been allowed to see his children for the last seven years.
Not a letter, not a phone call, not a touch.

David Merchant can be a difficult man, and at some point in his
marriage to Jean McIntosh he may have shoved her. Undoubtedly he
screamed at her and scared her.  

In hundreds of pages of court documents there is no evidence of any
kind that David ever struck his wife. It has not even been alleged
that he hit her. The one instance in which he was accused of
striking his daughter was refuted in writing by an examining
physician, who said she had been struck by a tree limb, as the
daughter herself reported to a case investigator.

As ordered by the court, David attended two "batterers treatment"
programs. He spent almost five hundred hours at the two programs
over the course of four years, even though they had no state
certification, were of dubious legitimacy and were routinely
humiliating and unfair. He has pursued every legal option
available, to the point where he was forced to declare personal
bankruptcy. All to no avail; he cannot even see his children in a
supervised setting.

What did this man do to deserve this? To be deprived of the sight
and the touch of your children under threat of jail? For what?

Over the past year there has been a small shift in public sentiment
about the danger to individuals posed by mere allegations. The type
of mass hysteria seen in Fells Acres, MacMartin Daycare and
Wenachee, Washington seems to be a thing of the past. A few high
profile cases involving allegations, including that of our
president, has alerted people to the fact that they could be next,
and that their lives could be destroyed.   

Justice demands that David Merchant's case be retried. A judge must
be asked to look into his heart and soul and ask what it means to
be deprived of the company of your own two children for eight
years, and if the punishment in this case fits the crime. David is
well aware of the emotional stakes for the children. He is prepared
to see them occasionally, slowly, under supervision if necessary.
But he must see them, and they must see him. He is their father.

David Biederman



"According to [the] last March of Dimes report, domestic violence (vs.
pregnant women) is now responsible for more birth defects than all other
causes combined. Personally [this] strikes me as the most disgusting piece
of data I've seen in a long while." This was, indeed, unsettling news. But
it seemed implausible. I asked my
neighbor, a pediatric neurologist at Boston's Children's Hospital, about
the report. He told me that although severe battery may occasionally cause
miscarriage, he had never heard of battery as a significant cause of birth

I called the March of Dimes to get a copy of the report. Maureen Corry,
director of the March's Education and Health Promotion Program, denied any
knowledge of it. "We have never seen this research before," she said. I did
a search and found that - study or no study - journalists around the
country were citing it.

Domestic violence is the leading cause of birth defects, more than all
other medical causes combined, according to a March of Dimes study. (Boston
Globe, Sep. 2, 1991).

Especially grotesque is the brutality reserved for pregnant women: the
March of Dimes has concluded that the battering of women during pregnancy
causes more birth defects than all the diseases put together for which
children are usually immunized. (Time Magazine, Jan. 18, 1993)

The March of Dimes has concluded that the battering of women during
pregnancy causes more birth defects than all the diseases put together for
which children are usually immunized. (Dallas Morning News,  Feb. 7, 1993.)

I called the March of Dimes again. Andrea Ziltzer of their media-relations
department told me that the rumor was spinning out of control. Governors'
offices, state health departments, and Washington politicians had flooded
the office with phone calls. Even the office of Senator Edward Kennedy had
requested a copy of the "report."

When I finally reached Jeanne McDowell, who had written the Time article,
the first thing she was, "That was an error." She sounded genuinely sorry
and embarrassed. She explained that she is always careful about checking
sources, but this time, for some reason, she had not. Time has since called
the March of Dimes to apologize.
An official retraction finally appeared in the magazine on December 6,
1993, under the heading "Inaccurate Information."

I asked Miss McDowell about her source. She had relied on information given
her by the San Francisco Family VIolence Prevention Fund, which had
obtained it from Sarah Buel, a founder of the domestic-violence advocacy
project at Harvard Law School. She in turn had obtained it from Caroline
Whitehead, a maternal nurse and child-care specialist in Raleigh, North
Carolina. I called Miss Whitehead.

"It blows my mind. It is not true," she said. The whole thing began, she
explained, when she introduced Sarah Buel as a speaker at a 1989 conference
for nurses and social workers. In presenting her, Miss Whitehead mentioned
that according to some March of Dimes research she has seen, more women are
screened for birth defects than are ever screened for domestic battery.
Miss Whitehead had said nothing at all about battery causing birth defects.
"Sarah misunderstood me," she said. Miss Buel went on to put the erroneous
information into a manuscript which was then circulated among
family-violence professionals. They saw no reason to doubt its

I called Sarah Buel and told her that it seemed she had misheard Caroline
Whitehead. She was surprised. "Oh, I must have misunderstood her. I'll have
to give her a call. She is my source." She thanked me for having informed
her of the error, pointing out that she had been about to repeat it yet
again in a new article.

Where Were the Skeptics?
WHY WAS everybody so credulous? Battery responsible for more birth defects
than all other causes combined? More than genetic disorders such as spina
bifida, Down syndrome, Tay-Sachs, sickle-cell anemia? More than all these
things combined? Where were the fact-checkers, the editors, the skeptical



Log in