The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
BackRefresh Options Favorite

Rep Def client Sue Scheff's strange story

There's sme weird stuff to this latest Rep Def "poster ...
Electric ungodly shrine coffee pot
Court Transcript (wwasp vs. PURE)
Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
odious charcoal brunch internal respiration
Not just that
Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
odious charcoal brunch internal respiration
Liable? Especially if they knew they were propagating lies t...
Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
"Basically they try to pervert the results of google se...
hateful hairless hell
xo discusses the guilty RD whitewashes the guilty ya, bi...
Mind-boggling mildly autistic hunting ground
Does Ellen Nakashima of the Washington Post know about this?
aromatic orchid rehab
That I know of, the only people to publish Carey's side of t...
Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
This is scary, if true.
Seedy sweet tailpipe
Carey Bock's Blog
Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
New site on the topic
Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
Looks like Sue Scheff really is being sued, no? http://ww...
Dead base fat ankles
Correct. Here is another thread on the matter (there are a ...
Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
Lawsuit Update
Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
text of complaint against Sue Scheff already posted http:...
yellow adulterous trust fund indirect expression
spectacular fishy property goyim
"Sue Scheff is a Concerned Mother and so-called advocat...
galvanic lilac twinkling uncleanness
spectacular fishy property goyim
http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/0/267/RipOff0267011.htm ...
spectacular fishy property goyim
brilliant contagious factory reset button plaza
http://www.sueschefftruth.com/?p=18 Sue Scheff Lies About...
brilliant contagious factory reset button plaza
http://www.sueschefftruth.com http://www.sueschefftruth.com...
spectacular fishy property goyim
teh list appears to be getting longer http://digg.com/pol...
Unhinged Stead
pwned http://www.reason.com/news/show/122156.html Toug...
Dead base fat ankles
Has she ever been a sous chef?
diverse chocolate piazza wrinkle
Unhinged Stead
http://www.sueschefftruth.com http://www.nowpublic.com/sue-...
fantasy-prone gas station generalized bond
Now Sue Scheff's gonna try to change her name to "Susan...
fantasy-prone gas station generalized bond
Unhinged Stead
Sue Scheff seems to be Reputation Defender's most satisfied ...
disgusting aphrodisiac meetinghouse
Avocado goal in life pozpig

Poast new message in this thread

Date: July 5th, 2007 6:14 PM
Author: Electric ungodly shrine coffee pot

There's sme weird stuff to this latest Rep Def "poster girl" Sue Scheff.

Seems that Sue Scheff was a DEFENDANT in a civil case of her very own...



WWASP vs. PURE Inc., Sue Scheff and Does 1 through 10

Statement of Facts

The facts surrounding this issue appear to be largely uncontested.

In 2000, Sue Scheff placed her daughter in a residential treatment facility recommended by WWASP, the Carolina Springs Academy…. Ms. Scheff sent communications to CSA expressing her satisfaction of the program. In November 2000, Sue Scheff sent an extensive email to a list of individuals regarding her ideas of how to deal with teens. She referred favorably to Teen Help (an organization to which WWASP referred clients) in the email, and sent a copy if the email to Ken Kay expressing her "dedication" to the program.

At some later point, however, Ms. Scheff's opinion of WWASP changed. This change of opinion coincided with her establishment of her own referral service for troubled teens, PURE, Inc., based in Florida. Like WWASP, PURE refers teens to programs based in southern Utah.

Dr. Lon Woodbury operated an internet "chatroom" dedicated to these residential treatment facilities. The chat room was based in Idaho, but parents from all over the United States used the chat room as an informal, influential source of information concerning various teen programs.

According to an affidavit filed by Mr. Ken Kay of WWASP, in December 2001 a series of messages were posted in the chat room, disparaging the services of WWASP. In an attempt to identify who was making the statements,

Dr. Woodbury obtained a computer "fingerprint" and determined that six ostensibly different "posters" were. In fact, all operating from the same computer in Florida. On December 27, 2001, Dr. Woodbury revealed his findings to the participants in the chat room. The six ostensible posters were "Mark D.W.", "Lara", "Deb C.", "Tracy Brittany Reese", Sue Scheff, and "Hilda." Mr. Woodbury concluded the posters were fairly well informed about the internal workings of WWASP. Jeff Berryman also had a relationship with Sue Scheff and posted comments in the chat room. Sue Scheff responded to Mr. Woodbury’s “outing” of the posters by indicating these individuals were working in her office.

…On December 18, 2001, the thread of ant-WWASP sentiment continued as “Tracy Brittany Reese,” “Lara,” and “Mark D.W.” all weighed in with their comments against WWASP. “Lara” sent two messages, “Mark D.W.” another message, and “Hilda” sent two messages all expressing negative information about WWASP. On December 19, 2001, the thread continued as “Lara” weighed in again and Dr. Woodbury reported that the allegedly abused boy that “Mark D.W.” had reported two weeks earlier did not in fact exist.

…On December 27, 2001, Mr. Woodbury identified the participants in Ms. Scheff’s scheme and banned them from posting on the site. Sue Scheff responded to Mr. Woodbury’s “outing” of her group by entering the chat room under a new name “Suzanne Lisa.” On December 27, 2001 she responded and reasserted her complaints about WWASP.

… Sue Scheff and PURE first contend that Ken Kay’s affidavit was not based on personal knowledge. But, Ken Kay’s affidavit was based on reading the series of emails that anyone who visited Lon Woodbury’s chat room could read.

And while we've heard about that civil case she has against Carey Bock, I guess there might be another side to that story, too...


Sue Scheff and PURE Win Empty Victory over New Orleans Mom

International Survivors Action Committee (ISAC)

10/9/2006 9:21:45 PM

BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA (October 10, 2006) - On September 19, 2006, Parents Universal Resource Experts, Inc. (PURE) and its founder, Sue Scheff of Weston, Florida won an $11.3 million dollar victory of hollow sorts over a single mom from New Orleans by alleging defamation over the Internet. Although it is doubtful the verdict will be collected, it may serve to chill free speech of those attempting to expose child abuse or untoward business practices.

The mom, Carey Bock, had publicly criticized the business practices of Scheff and PURE in referring children to allegedly abusive programs. Scheff met the mother’s complaints with a lawsuit reminiscent of one filed against Scheff in 2001.

The mom lacked the financial resources to defend herself or to attend her own trial in Florida. Before trial, Ms. Bock relocated her small family from the New Orleans area to Texas in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. This, however, did not stop Scheff and PURE from coming full-steam after the mom for alleged defamation and other claims. As a result, without the benefit of hearing the mom’s side of the story, a jury had little choice but to award the $11.3 million dollar verdict requested by the lawyer for Scheff and her company.

According to the Daily Business Review, Scheff also named Ginger Warbis as co-defendant. Warbis, who runs a web site critical of Scheff, obtained a well-known lawyer who successfully defeated Scheff’s claims of defamation: “Warbis’ lawyer, Philip Elberg, of Medvin & Elberg of Newark, New Jersey, sharply criticized Scheff and other people who refer parents to programs for troubled teens. ‘People in this industry have consistently used their money and their access to lawyers to silence critics of the industry and this may be one of those examples,’ Elberg said. ‘Sue Scheff is simply another person in the industry of people who make money from the plight of frightened parents.’”

The Daily Business Review, noting that Scheff won effectively only by default, paraphrased Scheff’s attorney, stating, “Bock was not present for the jury trial, which was held to determine damages only. . . .”

Ironically, a separate lawsuit had been filed in Utah against Scheff and PURE by the World Wide Association of Specialty Programs (WWASP), containing similar allegations as those raised by Scheff against the New Orleans mom. Scheff lost all counter-claims against WWASP but was not found liable for claims of damage allegedly caused when Scheff posted Internet statements asserting child abuse by WWASP. Scheff admitted she used false names to do so. While her case pended, Scheff removed representations from her web site which falsely stated Scheff holds a college degree.

The recent Florida verdict also ignored abuse allegations at children’s programs to which Scheff refers families because the jury never heard the opposing evidence. The owner of one such program to which Scheff made referrals, Whitmore Academy, was initially charged with multiple counts of child abuse and hazing in connection with four children at the boarding school. The owner recently pled no contest to four counts of hazing, and was ordered to pay fines and complete community service. The prosecuting attorney told the Deseret News, “I believe it effectively shuts them down in the state of Utah.” According to a September 2006 news article by the Deseret News, “The former operator of a therapeutic school [Whitmore Academy] for troubled youths, who has been kicked out of Mexico and accused of starving horses in Canada, has agreed not to run another rehabilitation school in Juab County.”

The allegations of child abuse did not deter Scheff from enrolling children for a profitable sum of money. In a separate case, the United States Court of Appeals found that defendants PURE and Sue Scheff, "[C]ompete with the schools associated with World Wide. PURE schools pay Ms. Scheff a substantial sum whenever a child enrolls in its program based on her recommendation."

According to the non-profit International Survivors Action Committee (ISAC), Scheff and her company are on the ISAC “watch list” for questionable practices that may place children at risk for abuse or neglect. ####

And then there's a whole lot of other weird stuff















http:// www.heal-online.org/news.htm

Anyone know what to make of all this?


Date: July 7th, 2007 2:40 PM
Author: Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
Subject: Court Transcript (wwasp vs. PURE)

Court Transcript of the defamation suit in which Sue Scheff was the defendant:


Decide for yourself. It is my opinion that Sue Scheff, is indeed, as Carey Bock alleged, a con, crook, and fraud. Carey Bock lost her case by default. She never had a chance to tell her side of the story (of which she would likely have supported much of with the above document).

Here is what one of Sue Scheff's satisfied customers, Joyce Harris, has to say:



Date: July 7th, 2007 2:53 PM
Author: odious charcoal brunch internal respiration


Date: July 7th, 2007 3:18 PM
Author: Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
Subject: Not just that

Not just that, they make it very difficult for those who are trying to expose the truth about Sue to get the message out. By increasing Sue's reputation in Google, they are knocking other information down. It isn't quite censorship, but it functions that way... massive amounts of propaganda drowning out the truth.

What is even worse, is that reputation defender is helping to spread information about Sue Scheff that is contradicted not only by the sworn statements of parents, but also by her own testimony in the WWASP vs. PURE case. She did take money for referrals. In one year she made over 200k. She testified to this. Parents were lied to regarding whether or not Sue was taking money for referrals to programs. I hypothesize that the only reason she ever sued Carey Bock is becuase she knew Carey couldn't defend herself adequately with her financial situation.

In my opinion, Reputation Defender, being responsible for finding negative information about Sue Scheff, could not have possible been ignorant of all this. Sue is so well known in some circles that she has an entire forum dedicated to her, her organization, PURE, and her related "child advocate" Isabelle Zehnder:



Date: August 7th, 2007 6:55 PM
Author: Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
Subject: New site on the topic


Date: July 7th, 2007 3:02 PM
Author: odious charcoal brunch internal respiration


Date: July 7th, 2007 3:23 PM
Author: Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo

Liable? Especially if they knew they were propagating lies to cover up the truth of the matter, concerning the safety of a person who is supposed to help children.

Sue Scheff, herself is no stranger to online propoganda. According to the wwasp vs. pure transcripts (see page numbered 102, pdf page 103), she testified that she posted on discussion forums as multiple (as in many many) identities, even holding conversations with herself. She did this for the purpose of discrediting WWASP, but didn't forget to refer to her own referral service, PURE. It has been alleged that she is still doing this on certain forums pertaining to the troubled teen industry, although it is hard to know for certain... It could be reputation defender.


Date: July 7th, 2007 4:54 PM
Author: hateful hairless hell

"Basically they try to pervert the results of google searches so that anything detrimental to the client, including records of the client's bad deeds, is covered up by bullshit?"

Is this any worse than what xoxo does? That is, prevent the result of google searches from reaching anything beneficial about a person, so that, instead of a person's good deeds, their name is covered up by bullshit?

RD and xoxo have a lot more in common than many might think.


Date: July 8th, 2007 3:07 PM
Author: Mind-boggling mildly autistic hunting ground

xo discusses the guilty

RD whitewashes the guilty

ya, big similarity there


Date: July 7th, 2007 3:21 PM
Author: aromatic orchid rehab

Does Ellen Nakashima of the Washington Post know about this?


Date: July 7th, 2007 3:57 PM
Author: Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo

That I know of, the only people to publish Carey's side of this so far has been ISAC (International Survivor's Action Comittee)

See their press release here:


From tfa:

"According to the Daily Business Review, Scheff also named Ginger Warbis as co-defendant. Warbis, who runs a web site critical of Scheff, obtained a well-know lawyer who successfully defeated Scheff’s claims of defamation: “Warbis’ lawyer, Philip Elberg, of Medvin & Elberg of Newark, New Jersey, sharply criticized Scheff and other people who refer parents to programs for troubled teens. ‘People in this industry have consistently used their money and their access to lawyers to silence critics of the industry and this may be one of those examples,’ Elberg said. ‘Sue Scheff is simply another person in the industry of people who make money from the plight of frightened parents."


Date: July 7th, 2007 5:53 PM
Author: Seedy sweet tailpipe

This is scary, if true.


Date: July 16th, 2007 6:39 PM
Author: Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
Subject: Carey Bock's Blog

Carey Bock has recently posted her side of things on her blog:



Date: August 7th, 2007 6:56 PM
Author: Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
Subject: New site on the topic


includes an RSS feed


Date: August 7th, 2007 7:41 PM
Author: Dead base fat ankles

Looks like Sue Scheff really is being sued, no?



Date: August 7th, 2007 8:03 PM
Author: Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo

Correct. Here is another thread on the matter (there are a few):


This is the sort of information she most likely wished to supress by threatening fornits.com (although, it is hard to know for sure, exactly what she is upset with considering there is an entire forum on the subject):


This is a woman who only wins cases either by default, or against those who are as dirty or dirtier than she is (eg: WWASP). Even then, the WWASP vs. PURE case was more of a Phyrric victory for her considering the amount of information that came out about her little operation in the transcripts:



Date: August 11th, 2007 7:30 PM
Author: Elite Erotic Theater Water Buffalo
Subject: Lawsuit Update


The details of the Lawsuit against Sue Scheff and Focal Point Academy can be found there.


Date: August 13th, 2007 7:35 PM
Author: yellow adulterous trust fund indirect expression

text of complaint against Sue Scheff already posted




Date: August 9th, 2007 5:03 PM
Author: spectacular fishy property goyim



Date: August 11th, 2007 8:12 PM
Author: galvanic lilac twinkling uncleanness

"Sue Scheff is a Concerned Mother and so-called advocate for them and teenagers, but in reality is a greedy jew who sends them to some programs while bashing other programs, even though she herself sent her own child, and other children, to such programs herself!"

LOL for the greey jew crack.


Date: August 12th, 2007 12:32 PM
Author: spectacular fishy property goyim



Date: August 14th, 2007 12:09 PM
Author: spectacular fishy property goyim


Sue Scheff, PURE, and Others Accused of Fraud by Florida Parents: Horrific Acts of Child Abuse Alleged at Children's Academy

BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA (August 12, 2007): As the sun sets on one case after another involving Sue Scheff and her one-person company, PURE (Parents Universal Resource Experts), another case looms on the horizon.

The case filed by the Green family in late July 2007 alleges that Scheff, set up PURE based on the business model of a Utah entity known as WWASP [World Wide Association of Specialty Programs], an organization to which Scheff referred children and against whom Scheff later engaged in protracted litigation. The civil complaint alleges that Scheff lied about the money she received from private children's programs and, instead, pretended to be volunteer who used proceeds from a successful lawsuit and from a trust fund to support her work and her organization . . .

The complaint alleges that other defendants, Boyd Hooper followed Scheff's lead and likewise misrepresented that he was an “education specialist. In reality, Hooper was Scheff's public relations agent and fees were paid to Scheff and others, according to the complaint.

Focal Point Academy in Mesquite, Nevada is the place to which Scheff referred the Green family, according to the case. Focal Point was reportedly marketed by Scheff as a therapeutic boarding school. It was later discovered that Focal Point was not licensed as a school, but as a foster home, with no foster children present.

The Greens were willing to spend more than $5,000 a month for their son to receive the intensive psychiatric help they felt he needed. Instead, their son was reportedly not provided the specialized treatment promised by Scheff, Hooper, and Focal Point. They say their child was beaten and subjected to perverted sexual acts by other students that continued even after Focal Point Academy was notified. Focal Point reportedly refused to notify authorities.

The defendants answers to the allegations have not yet been filed. The defendants are expected to deny all assertions of fraud and breach of fiduciary duties.

Like her counterpart, WWASP, Scheff has been in litigation a number of times where others have made accusations of fraud and deceit. This time, however, it appears that trouble may be brewing for Scheff. ####

Crimson Borgue

San Antonio, Texas



Date: August 15th, 2007 8:08 PM
Author: brilliant contagious factory reset button plaza



Date: August 17th, 2007 12:22 PM
Author: brilliant contagious factory reset button plaza


Sue Scheff Lies About Being Sued

On August 14th, On one of her many blogs, Sue Scheff wrote the following:

“I have read claims, Blogs, and horrific postings about my

organization and myself being served a lawsuit - this is not

true. Neither myself nor the other defendants listed on

what they are posting have received any such lawsuit. If

there is a lawsuit, we certainly don’t know about it and you

would think the defendants should have it?

This is a further campaign to discredit me which has

recently escalated since I will be on 20/20 i-Caught this

evening” [hyperlinks added]

Original source here (which has now disappeared, which we archived here: http://www.sueschefftruth.com/uploads/2007/08/Sue%20Scheff%20-%20obsessed.pdf)

Sadly, Sue Scheff did appear on 20/20. Although the folks at ABC don’t appear to do that much research, we do. Even though viewing case detail is an expensive pay service on the Clerk of the Courts website, one of Sue’s many friends was willing to donate in order that we might see the details of what is going on. The results can be viewed in full here:


The date on that page is July 31st. The date sue wrote the blog denying the lawsuit was August 14th. Although she could claim the mail in Florida is simply exceptionally slow, a source close to the case assures us at sueschefftruth.com that Sue is “well aware of the suit”.


Date: August 22nd, 2007 1:12 PM
Author: spectacular fishy property goyim




Sue scheff fraud case


















Carey bock katrina














Troubled teens


Date: August 28th, 2007 2:11 PM
Author: Unhinged Stead

teh list appears to be getting longer



















































Date: August 27th, 2007 11:31 AM
Author: Dead base fat ankles



Tough Love and Free Speech

How a 'child advocate' gamed the media

Maia Szalavitz | August 24, 2007

Sue Scheff has some serious chutzpah. Portrayed by ABC News, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and Forbes as a beleaguered mom running a small business to help parents find treatment for troubled teens, Scheff's been telling reporters about a service called Reputation Defender, which she says allowed her to triumph over a bunch of rage-filled Internet cranks. Scheff says these vengeance-seeking wackos nearly destroyed her, an innocent businesswoman, with a series of libelous comments posted on online discussion boards. They had called her a “fraud” and “con artist,” she says, and claimed that she was referring teens to tough love programs that then abused them.

What none of this media coverage mentions is that a few years back, Scheff was sued for the same types of comments now directed at her—highlighting the abuses of a "tough love" rehab center (in this case, one of Scheff's rivals). At the time, she framed the suit against her as an attempt to squelch her free speech.

The major news organizations also mention an $11 million libel judgment Scheff boasts about winning against one of her critics, a woman named Carey Bock. But none of these accounts actually looked into the details of that judgment. Bock’s home had been destroyed by Hurricane Katrina during the course of the legal action. Due to her address change, and the stress and depression brought on by the storm, she wasn't even present at her own trial, nor was she represented by counsel.

Bock's current lawyer, Tom McGowan, says he's seeking to have the judgment set aside, because Bock never received notice of the trial date. “They get pretty wacky on these sites, but it’s an outrage what’s going on,” says McGowan. If Bock had actually made it to court, the outcome may well have been quite different.

While all of this may seem like an installment of "News of the Weird," it has serious implications for free speech on the Internet—and highlights how the media often fails to get the whole story.

The saga begins in 2000, when Scheff sent her own daughter to a program affiliated with the World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools (WWASP, sometimes called WWASPS). Scheff was initially a booster of WWASP, and even referred other parents to its programs. For a referral, WWASP paid $1000 per child, or offered a month’s free treatment for the referrer's child. WWASP clients spend at least 18 months in treatment, at $3000-$5000 per month.

At some point, Sue Scheff became aware of online bulletin boards where teens who had been in WWASP programs were telling horrific stories of sexual, physical, and emotional abuse. Users also posted media accounts detailing how nine WWASP-affiliated programs were closed following police investigations, regulatory infractions and/or allegations of child abuse.

Scheff later wrote on her website that she had become uncomfortable with some of the organization's methods. She removed her daughter from the program, and began posting her own allegations against WWASP on online forums, under several different names. She also set up her own consultant business, called Parents Universal Resource Experts (PURE), and began taking referral payments for placing teens, just as WWASP does.

While this sort of practice isn't illegal, it's widely considered unethical. Conflicts of interest arise when consultants get higher referral fees from some programs than they get from others. The temptation arises to place kids in the programs that pay more, even though these may not be the programs best suited to a particular child. Once you're being regularly paid by a program, it’s hard to be objective about its quality. This is why codes of ethics in psychology and psychiatry typically bar such "dual relationships."

Under the Lanham Act, which bans business competitors from making false and inflammatory claims about rivals, WWASP sued Scheff over her critical online posts. Because the court was able to substantiate Scheff’s claims with vivid testimony from victims, WWASP lost.

Soon, however, the online boards buzzed again with yet more reports of abuse at new programs, and this time they included programs where Sue Scheff was referring children. It was around this time that Scheff launched her own lawsuit against Bock. Scheff had helped Bock remove her two sons from a WWASP program, but Bock eventually become outraged by what she considered to be Scheff’s unethical referrals. The $11 million judgment resulted only after Bock didn't show up in court to defend herself.

(Note: The original version of this article stated that the judgment against Bock was "default." Technically, this is incorrect. There was a trial and verdict. But Bock wasn't present, nor did she have counsel present to represent her.)

Meanwhile, child welfare investigators substantiated charges of abuse in 2005 at the Whitmore Academy in Utah, a program to which Scheff made referrals. Regulators shut the program down. Just last month, another complaint was filed against Scheff and another program where she places teens, the Focal Point Academy in Nevada. In that filing, a Florida couple alleges that Scheff failed to disclose that she was being paid by Focal Point, nor did she tell them that the business was licensed only as a foster home, not for residential treatment. The complaint describes these failures to disclose as “fraudulent misrepresentations” and “kickbacks.”

The complaint also details how the couple’s teenage son, R.G., was sexually abused by other boys at the program, who “would hold R.G. down in order to take out their penises, which they would rub on his face, while they threatened and beat him.” He was also allegedly repeatedly threatened with anal rape—and the complaint charges that he was beaten after reporting the bullies to school authorities, who neither reported the sexual abuse to the state as legally required, or made efforts to stop it.

Eventually, Scheff hired Reputation Defender to rehabilitate her image online. Reputation Defender sells itself as a service that removes reputation-damaging posts on the Internet, or at least attempts to make them less prominent on search engines. Scheff and Reputation Defender appear to have contacted the Internet service providers for the site that hosts the most popular discussion boards for victims of tough love programs, a site called fornits.com. According to fornits founder Ginger McNulty, two different service providers recently removed fornits.com from their servers after complaints. Both ISPs refused to divulge the source of the complaints. But the timing is awfully suggestive.

(Disclosure: McNulty did some paid web design work for my book Help at Any Cost.)

The Electronic Frontier Foundation—a premier defender of free speech on the net—was quoted in Forbes as supportive of Reputation Defender. But its spokesperson, staff attorney Kevin Bankston, said that the group was described to him as using positive articles to defend against negative ones, not suppressing speech. “To the extent that Reputation Defender is using baseless legal threats to get speech critical of its clients taken taken down—that is something we’d have serious problems with,” he said.

Fornits is a mostly unmoderated forum, and, as a result, can sometimes include obscene, angry, and off-color rants and slurs. But it's also one of the best sources parents and journalists have for finding out about abuse in residential teen tough-love programs, often straight from the mouths of abused teens and their parents.

Before the Internet existed, thousands of teens who felt they had been harmed by tough love had few ways of complaining, or finding out if others had endured similar experiences. Without places like fornits, they can't be heard, in part because journalists have few other ways to find them.

“It’s unfortunate that nuts and angry people have chosen to attack Sue Scheff in obscene terms,” says attorney Phil Elberg, who represented fornits when it was sued along with Bock by Scheff (the fornits case was dropped). Elberg's one of the few lawyers to have won multimillion dollar judgments against tough love programs. He adds, “This has allowed the focus to shift away from the tactics that Scheff has used and the fact that she describes herself on the net as a child advocate and a critic of the industry, when in reality, she symbolizes so much of what is wrong with it.”

Also unfortunate is the reporting by ABC News investigative reporter Martin Bashir on the new show, I-Caught, as well as coverage in the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and Forbes. All told only half the story. Both McNulty and McGowan say they tried to contact these reporters to set the record straight, but were ignored.

The whole sordid story reveals the flaws in both unmoderated online media and in what passes these days for journalism. One way Reputation Defender has managed to move positive stories about Scheff up the ranks on Google is by posting “news stories” she has written on citizen journalism sites like NowPublic. But the mainstream media is not supposed to be as easy to game.

They could start correcting the record by reporting on Reputation Defender’s attempts at censorship and obfuscation, instead of cheering on efforts to silence websites that, for all their flaws, have a history of exposing real incidents of child abuse.

Maia Szalavitz is author of Help At Any Cost: How the Troubled-Teen Industry Cons Parents and Hurts Kids (Riverhead, 2006) and a senior fellow at stats.org. Her latest book, co-written with Dr. Bruce D. Perry is The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog and Other Stories from a Child Psychiatrist's Notebook. (Basic Books, 2007).


Date: August 28th, 2007 2:43 PM
Author: diverse chocolate piazza wrinkle

Has she ever been a sous chef?


Date: September 4th, 2007 12:12 PM
Author: Unhinged Stead



Date: January 19th, 2008 4:43 PM
Author: fantasy-prone gas station generalized bond

















http://www.careybock.com http://www.fornits.com


http:// rollyo.com/suescheffretort/sue_scheff_truth http://www.purerebuttal.com


http:// teenadvocatesusa.homestead.com/SUE_SCHEFF_LAWSUIT.html

http://www.careybock.com/?feed=rss2 http://www.careybockappeal.blogspot.com/

http://www.cyroxos.net/articles/Sue.php http://www.paulareeves.blogspot.com

http://es.corank.com/tech/story/sue-Scheff-Una-Muchacha-Muy-Lulza http://teenadvocatesusa.homestead.com/SUE_SCHEFF_LAWSUIT.html











Date: January 15th, 2008 7:19 PM
Author: fantasy-prone gas station generalized bond

Now Sue Scheff's gonna try to change her name to "Susan Scheff" to avoid her google hits about Susan Scheff's FRAUD and Susan Scheff's affiliation with CHILD ABUSERS

















Date: January 18th, 2008 8:25 PM
Author: Unhinged Stead


Date: April 6th, 2008 7:14 PM
Author: disgusting aphrodisiac meetinghouse

Sue Scheff seems to be Reputation Defender's most satisfied client/media shill

She spent $10K for that POS of theirs, MyEdge.

Translation: she spent $10K for them to spam the net with 100 blogspot blogs


Even so, the ED page, as well as these, are on pages 1-3 of the google rankings for "Sue Scheff"







Great work, Reputation Defender! lol


Date: April 6th, 2008 7:53 PM
Author: Avocado goal in life pozpig