Customer Reviews

Spectral Evidence: The Ramona Case: Incest, Memory, And Truth On Trial In Napa Valley

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I first learned of this fine volume--named from an expression born during the Salem witch trials--while at a skeptic's meeting the keynote speaker for which had gone through a bogus "therapy" which ended her marriage and nearly her life. The person who told me of the book pointed out that the book's alleged victim, the one who'd "recovered" her memories--one of the turns for the worst of the victim culture--is now a therapist. Why does that not surprise me?

The author, Moira Johnston, did a remarkable job of examining all dimensions of the incident. In fact, her closing chapter lists how she proceeded with the investigation. While reading the text, I felt she was clearly in favor of the alleged culprit, Gary Romano, whose life was forever changed, and nearly destroyed, by the incident. But after reading the technique Johnston employed, I had to reconsider. The case which Mr. Romano had filed against the therapists and the institutions in which the memories were "recovered" provided enough evidence to convince a jury that there had been malpractice, i.e., there was not enough evidence to convince the jury that Romano had raped his daughter Holly, the future therapist--repeatedly according to her between the time she was a toddler until she was about 16--despite her therapists' encouraging her to believe that he had. So the author at best took the same stand as the jury.

The story was not atypical of recovered memory cases. A young woman suffering from her own problems, in this case bulimia, went to a therapist. Johnston provides a thorough background by showing that of the 46,000 of the type of therapist Holly was seeing, half of them were in California. (The requirements expected of that sort of therapist were comical at that time too!) They therefore, she surmises, had to develop a niche for themselves. The "recovered memory" niche was just becoming popular. One such case had convicted a father--also in California--not long before this trial of having killed his daughter's friend a couple of decades before. The ostensible evidence of this crime was memories which the daugther allegedly "recovered" while she was under the care of another therapist. (That case was later overturned. But not to get sidetracked...) Holly couldn't understand what was going on with her, and her therapist helped her "recover" memories of having been repeatedly sexually abused by her father. After Holly insisted that she partake of the "truth serum" sodium amytal, and her therapist(s) encouraged her to believe what she "remembered" while blitzed on that stuff, she confronted her father with the "facts." He was caught totally off guard and, to make a long story short, lost is wife, his job, and nearly everything as a consequence.

Ramona wanted to file suit against the therapists but his attorneys insisted that (1) no such case had ever been filed by someone not directly affected by a therapist's malpractice (i.e., patient/client)and (2) Holly's therapy records, probably the prime evidence, could not be used as evidence as they're strictly confidential. When Holly eventually filed criminal charges against him, those files could be opened, and the case began, setting a precedent for malpractice against "mental health professionals."

At the same time this memory recovery fad was picking up steam, scientists were studying memory, but that was still pretty much confined to the Ivory Tower. There were "true believers" in the recovered memory concept, among them Holly and her mother Stephanie. There were, however, scholars who refuted the concepts. And they became some of Romano's key witnesses, challenging the claims of Holly's therapists whose livings depended on their encouraging the ill-founded concept.

The trial itself was a sideshow. Between discussion of Gary Romano's sexual idiosyncrasies--personal details that would embarass anyone not truly insane--and Stephanie's claims that were transparently false, even jury members began to wonder where the justice system was headed.

The verdict: The therapists were guilty of malpractice. However the benefits to Gary were few. He'd been making upwards of $500,000 a year on the job he lost--partly because of the gossip following the allegation, according to one element of the case. He was awarded the equivalent of one year's salary. Nonetheless, Romano felt vindicated. He HAD set a precedent; the recovered memory "movement" was given a profound setback (followed by many since the book's publication).

I have to hand it to Johnston. While she did, at least inferrably, side with the jury, she did include other sides of the story. Her investigative technique included conversations with all parties including defense attorneys and Holly and Stephanie and their allies. And her eye for detail is remarkable, from the mannerisms of the witnesses and their potential influence on the jury and the audience to the clothing chosen by each.

And, after her detailed description of what happened--this isn't a short read but full of relevant detail--she includes a chapter on what continues to happen with the "recovered memory" nonsense. She included pieces from prestigious law journals, written by, for example, feminist ideologues who feel the Romano verdict was more evidence of patriarchal lack of concern for women's well-being--and those of other feminists who remind their fellow attorneys that a concern for the rights of the accused needs to overshadow ideological shading.

In short, it's a fine book that I solidly recommend to anyone who's been accused of anything based on something as shady as "recovered memory," anyone who knows anyone who has, or anyone who will be. And that means just about all of us. So it may be time to consider the punishment, not just fines, for unethical "mental health professionals," prosecutors, and law enforcement quacks who capitalize off of bogus concepts such as "recovered memory."

Destined to be a "classic" of all the books on the memory wars. The author masterfully recounts a tragic case of alleged incest by a father against his daughter, and captivates and educates the reader. This book excellently reounts the family's background, the therapy and the confrontation, the science and the theories and counter-theories involved, and the court case and its aftermath. This is a must read for anyone interested in false and recovered memories, and the legal cases spawned by the same.

What and how do we really remember? Is memory ever really "the truth"? And why are all these people remembering things that supposedly never happened, yet are willing to destroy their lives in the process of asserting their perception of reality? Although this book has more questions than answers, it is very thought provoking and enlightening.

Whichever side of the recovered memory debate you find yourself on, Moira Johnston's book has something to both please and enrage you. Somehow, Johnston has been able to stay fairly objective to the end of the book, addressing the fact that, when memories of child abuse are recovered by adults, *no one* really wins. Johnston has seemingly talked at length with all the major players in the memory wars: the "celebrity survivors", the compassionate clinicians, the skeptical scientists, the driven attorneys, and the friends, neighbors, and colleagues of Gary and Stephanie Ramona. Her sympathies lie with all those who were affected by this landmark case, and she tells both sides admirably. Whatever you think about recovered memories, read this book. It's got cutting-edge memory science, courtroom drama, and intense family dynamics. I read it in three days, and it was over too soon.

This was an interesting story, but it left so many questions unanswered. If Gary Ramona was reported in his eldest daughters therapists office to have raped her, at a time when he had another 11 year old daughter living in his home, why wasn't there a saftey plan immediately put in place? If he was believed to be a child rapist, why wasn't there anyone reaching out to his psychiatrist, whom they had regular contact with, to get him immediate help? Why wasn't his own treatment ever discussed? The reader must be content with your own opinion, because there's not alot of fact here. If Holly's therapists were remiss in their duties, it was for not keeping records & not trying to handle the whole family system's needs, because incest cases have their own protocol & it usually involves treatment for the offender & validation of the victim. The book presented Holly's memories as if she was watching them not experiencing them firsthand, which wasn't addressed in the 'expert' discussion of how memory works. I also found myself wondering if 'recovered memory' was just a misnomer for a child victim who had kept the abuse a 'secret' as they were told to do from the start and then finally felt empowered enough to expose the abuse as an adult. It's possible they remembered all along but waited to expose it and then felt the need to explain why it took so long to admit & just conjectured their way into this 'I forgot but now remember' explanation. Maybe 'forgetting' is a metaphor for 'I put it out of my mind' in victim speak. Who really knows, but the fact remains that being accused of this type of act is a symptom of something. Although the author didn't clearly state her own opinion, it was very obvious in her description of all the characters; and reeked of 'male worship.' Whatever the truth, Stephanie's support for her daughter should be applauded, especially when you consider all the outrageous cases in which mother's side with their children's offenders or blame their own children!! The court arguments never even mentioned the word 'denial' as far as the book reports, and it's so rampant in child sexual abusers, especially those that lead a double life to hide it and trick everyone (think about the priests). Whatever you believe, please don't ever forget how indignant and self righteous pedophiles can be, even when they are caught in the act! Just because someone emphatically denies it and is really great at persuading people doesn't mean they're innocent- that's actually an inherent part of committing such a sick act. It appears in this case, that Stephanie didn't give him a way to admit and keep his life/the family together (ie treatment/ safety plan) so Gary may not have seen any other alternative than to just deny & keep pushing it. The treatment team should have helped them work it through in a much less extreme way, and should have had more to go on than is presented in this book,IMO.

Boring at times, may too much detail about experiements and backstories that i felt wasn't necessary. Sometimes less is more..

This is a true account of a well-known Napa Valley family that is torn apart when daughter, Holly, reveals repressed memories of sexual abuse. The story covers details of the family's early years to allow the reader to understand the dynamics and the people involved later on when the accusations begin. This is a very in-depth coverage of a very dysfunctional family.

I connected well with author Moira Johnston. She tells the story smoothly, in a matter-of-fact manner. This is a long read, but I was held captive right up to the end. A lot of legal facts and psychology jargon are included, but the author does well to explain and break it down for the layman. The legal issues focus on the reliability of memories, the involvement of therapists and doctors, medical malpractice, medical science, and involves the input of experts from various psychological fields.

The author also brings the emotions of the family into play, as well as friends, business associates, the community, and even long-distant supporters who attended the trial. Moira Johnston writes from a neutral position, laying the facts without imposing personal influence.

I enjoyed this book and I'm glad I read it.

A thoughtful reader will ask how this book can be purported to be objective when a key person (Holly Ramona) was never interviewed. A key to the slant of this book is in the title itself, "Spectral Evidence," which is suggestive of "no evidence." What, then, could account for the estrangement of Holly, her sister and mother, from Gary Ramona?