u/Special_Pattern7842

Prosecutors in the Michael Jackson case arguably hit their lowest point - by showing obvious embarrassment at a man touted as one of their star witnesses. On the stand was Stan Katz, the psychologist who first interviewed the teenage boy at the centre of the case and subsequently reported his allegations of sexual abuse to the police. The jury and press gallery were primed to hear a detailed account of what Gavin Arviso disclosed to Dr Katz about Jackson's alleged attempts to seduce him.

Instead, Tom Sneddon, the Santa Barbara County district attorney, did little more than establish the circumstances of Dr Katz's involvement and then, after barely half an hour, abruptly terminated his questioning. The prosecutor's reticence almost certainly had to do with Dr Katz's association with one of the most notorious child sex abuse investigations in American history - a catalogue of appalling professional errors and mass hysteria surrounding a Los Angeles area pre-school in the 1980s that scarred dozens of lives but failed to lead to a single criminal conviction.

Dr Katz's organisation, Children's Institute International, believed at the time it had uncovered sex crimes and satanic rituals at the McMartin pre-school in Manhattan Beach. After interviewing 400 current and former students, it concluded that 369 of them had been sexually abused - lured into underground tunnels, forced to perform bizarre forms of devil-worship including the disinterment of coffins, raped at a car wash and filmed with their adult abusers for pornographic purposes.

The problem with CII's "discoveries" was not only that they failed to meet the basic test of plausibility. They were also based on highly coercive interviews, in which the children systematically denied anything was amiss until the interviewers started putting ideas into their heads. Over and over, the children were asked if they had participated in a certain "game" or if a teacher had touched them. If they said no, they were called "dumb". If they said yes, they were called "smart".

When the case reached trial, jurors were able to see the coercive techniques for themselves because the interviews had all been videotaped. Not a shred of corroborating evidence ever surfaced and the defendants, all members of the same family, were exonerated. Among family psychology professionals, the case is now a byword for how not to conduct a sex abuse investigation.

CII has never conducted a thorough review of its mistakes in the McMartin case, and indeed the woman who conducted the bulk of the sex abuse interviews - a social worker with no formal training in psychology or family therapy called Kee MacFarlane - was later promoted to become CII's director of education and training. She has since left the organisation, but continues to consult and lecture on child abuse.

All this, of course, plays very nicely into the hands of Mr Jackson's defence lawyers. Mr Sneddon's abbreviated questioning of Dr Katz denied them the opportunity to reveal the full horrors of the McMartin case to the jury last week, but they did get Dr Katz to acknowledge that he was personally involved.

The association with McMartin is not an automatic black mark on Dr Katz's reputation. The science of sex abuse evaluation was in its infancy in the 1980s, and he was not personally responsible for Ms MacFarlane's interview techniques.
Likewise, his involvement in the Jackson trial neither augments nor diminishes the credibility of Gavin Arviso and his brother Star, who allege that Jackson put his hand inside Gavin's underpants and masturbated him at least twice while the boys were guests at his Neverland ranch in central California.

But Dr Katz does present the latest of a series of headaches for the prosecutors, who badly need some authoritative figures with direct knowledge of the case to tell the court why the boys should be believed - despite the vagueness of some parts of their account and their acknowledged record of lies and rowdy behaviour.
For this purpose, Dr Katz is effectively useless, the risk being that he could only fuel the defence's contention that Mr Jackson's accusers are being egged on by a cabal of unscrupulous professionals out to fleece him for as much money as they can.

He and the private litigation lawyer Larry Feldman, who referred the Arvisos to him, were both involved in an earlier case against Mr Jackson, in which Jordy Chandler, then 13, accused the singer of molesting him. Chandler's family dropped their charges only after receiving a $20m (£10.6m) settlement.
It is far from proven that the allegations against Mr Jackson are part of a witch-hunt analogous to the McMartin case, but that does not mean that the defence won't try to argue it anyway.

Read full article here:

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/jackson-witness-is-linked-to-america-s-most-infamous-child-sex-claims-530900.html

Is there undercover Rockstar agents in here trying to get us to buy the game? I notice people comparing GTA 6 to games that came out like 10 years ago, and it’s just people worshipping how modern GTA 6 looks compared to a game that came out 10 years ago… like yeah, no shit. And then there’s people saying you’re just ragebaiting if you criticize the game at all for downgrading its graphics or not doing any physical sales, and you’ll see people rush to defend Rockstar right away and offer alternative explanations. It feels like you’re exiled as soon as you offer any criticism. I feel like it’s just an echo chamber of bots and Rockstar employees in here trying to hype us up for the game.
Also, as soon as you hope for something that the game has, like a lot of buildings being enterable, you see a nerd riding Rockstar’s defense and telling you to be happy with what you get, even though it’s still gonna be capped at 30 FPS and we’ve been waiting for 15 years with billions of dollars put into it lmao. This is worse than the Nintendo fanbase.

Despite the glitches during launch (which were mostly caused by players and streamers breaking the game by jumping around the map and ignoring the intended progression), I think Scratch Creek is an excellent game and one of the best in the series.
The voice acting was a huge step up. Every character felt believable, especially during emotional moments. Whether they were scared, angry, or suspicious, the performances felt natural. Harry is a great example, he comes across as someone who’s simply wary of outsiders but still wants to help. As the story unfolds, you realize he’s trapped under Bill’s control, which makes his character even more interesting.
I also love how the game connects to Ironbark Lookout. There are several subtle references, like watchtowers and ironbark signs visible in the distance, the town of Roseburg being mentioned again, and Marcus and Tessa talking about a new diner near Roseburg, which is likely the same diner from Ironbark Lookout. These little details make the world feel connected.
The atmosphere was also one of the game’s biggest strengths. Even when nothing was actively happening, I constantly felt like someone was watching me. Moments like the tree falling, walking across the bridge to the parsonage, or simply stepping outside created an incredible sense of tension.
One thing I don’t see many people mention is the chain of events involving Buck’s truck. First, you see it near the house where the tree falls. Later, you hear the horn and the same truck follows you near the motel. Then you encounter it again at the auto shop. It’s kind of a subtle way of showing that you’re being watched long before the game tells you.
The mission where you’re sent to the unknown house is another highlight I love. You arrive, see the Confederate flag outside, hear the old woman yelling “Billy boy!”, and immediately feel uneasy because you have no idea what’s waiting for you. The game also constantly makes you question who you can trust. Bill gives you a flashlight and seems helpful. Harry tries to repair your car before falling victim to Buck’s plan. The uncertainty keeps you on edge throughout the story.
I also liked how co-op separates the players. Instead of staying together the whole time, each player has to handle different situations without knowing if the other person is okay. Scenes like Miss Julia catching you downstairs, exploring the church tunnels, and eventually returning to Bill’s house after the chase even more intense. By the end, you realize how connected everybody was, and it makes the entire story feel much more satisfying.
So I think Scratch Creek deserves a lot more credit than it gets. It has some of the best atmosphere, strongest characters, and fantastic Easter eggs in the series. If it hadn’t launched with technical issues,and people using the game wrong, I think more people would be calling it the best Fears to Fathom episode so far.