In the late 1980s and 1990s, "satanic panic" swept the nation. Tales of satanic cults engaging in ritualistic abuse and murder frightened parents around the nation.
In 1983, the McMartin preschool case prompted day care sex abuse hysteria when the mother of a 3-year-old boy jumped to the conclusion that his painful bowel movements must have been caused by sexual assault. Judy Johnson accused her estranged husband and by Raymond Buckey, a teacher at the McMartin preschool, owned and operated by Buckey's grandmother and mother.
The accusations spiraled out of control with hundreds of children being interviewed. Despite bizarre claims unsubstantiated by evidence, seven people related to or employed by the McMartin family were criminally charged with sex abuse and satanic ritual abuse involving 48 children.
The initial accuser was subsequently diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic and died of complications from alcoholism before the preliminary hearings took place.
Over six years on investigation and criminal trials, no convictions were obtained, and in 1990, all charges related to the McMartin case were dismissed.
The case prompted further hysteria in Texas, when Fran and Dan Keller were accused of Satanic ritual abuse at the Oak Hill day care facility they operated. The Kellers were accused after a child seeking therapy for behavioral issues related to her parents divorce said the pair had abused her. Again, dozens of children were interviewed using the same dubious techniques by which the McMartin children were "coached." Despite bizarre unfounded claims, despite the initial accuser saying she had not been abused and that her testimony was coached, the Kellers were convicted and sentenced to 48 years in prison. Their conviction hinged on a medical expert's testimony that he found two tears in a 3-year-old girl's hymen that were consistent with sexual abuse, and that the tears had occurred within 24 hours of her examination.
However, the case didn't seem to add up, and Late last year, the pair was freed from prison after re-examination revealed recanted testimony and the admission of the medical expert that three years after the trial, he saw an example of a normal pediatric hymen that was identical to what he had seen in his examination of the "abused" girl.
After serving 21 years in prison, the Kellers were freed. However, a judge says that while their conviction has been overturned, the two have not proven their innocence. Thus, they have been freed, but not exonerated. The Kellers argue they are the victims of unethical therapy techniques, shoddy police work, and serious legal errors, and that they should be exonerated. However, the court has ruled that there must be new evidence--such as DNA evidence--to overrule a court's finding of guilt. But when that guilty verdict was based on a lie, should burden of proof be with the wrongfully convicted?
Our court system is based on the premise that someone should be held innocent unless proven guilty. Why should wrongful conviction nullify that premise for exoneration?
