Scientist Held in Sex Case

[dan]

Source: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-anderson17feb17,1,4833647.story?coll=la-headlines-california&ctrack=2&cset=true




William French Anderson, the renowned geneticist indicted last month on charges of molesting the young daughter of a colleague at USC, was arrested Wednesday at his home in San Marino on suspicion of molesting a boy years ago in Maryland.

Douglas Friend Gansler, a state attorney in Montgomery County, Md., said Anderson had been charged with abusing the boy between September 1983, when the alleged victim was 12 years old, and September 1985.

Gansler said the molestations occurred at Anderson's home in Bethesda, where the Harvard-trained geneticist, then a top researcher at the National Institutes of Health and a martial arts expert, was instructing the boy in taekwondo.

"During the sessions, Anderson plied the boy with alcohol and showed him magazines with [pictures of] naked women," Gansler said.

The alleged victim's family recently contacted police in Maryland, Gansler said. He added that investigators then recorded a telephone conversation during which the purported victim confronted Anderson with his allegations. Officials did not disclose any details of the conversation.

Anderson, 68, was charged Tuesday in Maryland with child abuse, sexual assault and "unnatural and perverted sex practices." An arrest warrant was issued, and he was taken into custody by Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies Wednesday and booked at the Temple City sheriff's station.

In the California case, Anderson had been training the alleged victim in karate at his San Marino home. Founder of the Gene Therapy Laboratories at USC, he is accused of molesting the girl, now 17, from 1997 to 2001.

In that case, Anderson was indicted on one count of continuous sexual abuse of a child under 14 and five counts of a lewd act upon a child. He pleaded not guilty to all six counts. His preliminary hearing is today.

After that indictment, Anderson e-mailed friends at USC, saying, "I have not done the things I am charged with."

The university has placed him on administrative leave.

Anderson was dubbed the father of gene therapy after a team he led in 1990 cured a hereditary disease of the immune system in a 4-year-old girl. The child was infused with a missing gene and with white cells that had been removed from her blood. It was the first time that the therapy was successful in a human being.

Anderson's achievement guaranteed him a place in medical history, but it also made him a lightning rod in the controversy over the ethics of gene manipulation. He reportedly received several death threats because of his work.

[Crystal]

"During the sessions, Anderson plied the boy with alcohol and showed him magazines with [pictures of] naked women," Gansler said.

Sounds familiar.

Also, Why are all these cases old? Do people really wait 20 years before *speaking out*? I think there should be some type of time frame on how long you can accuse a person for raping you or whatever. Jesus.

[mb*]

there are a lot of reasons why it takes some people so long to come out with that kind of stuff.

they feel responsible, or embarrassed... and a lot of times the attacker threatens them not to say anything.

when you're a kid you dont realize that theres a way out, and that if you speak up, no one will hurt you.

then to save themselves, so to speak, they shut it out, like its not there. a mental block. certain things can trigger the flashbacks.

its sad, but true.

[Crystal]

I totally understand that but 20 years? Nah I really think there should be a time limit on it. We are sending old dudes to jail left and right to be killed in jail. I'd rather see them suffer at a young age. They have lived there life, now they get to live for free in jail. I just don't think it's right.

[snobord447]

I totally understand that but 20 years? Nah I really think there should be a time limit on it. We are sending old dudes to jail left and right to be killed in jail. I'd rather see them suffer at a young age. They have lived there life, now they get to live for free in jail. I just don't think it's right.

But some sort of justice does need to be served... we can't just put, say a 10 year limitation on it, and then let all these people live their lives and then run free in their retirement. I understand what you're saying, but I guess better late than never?

[Alter Eg0]

I totally understand that but 20 years? Nah I really think there should be a time limit on it. We are sending old dudes to jail left and right to be killed in jail. I'd rather see them suffer at a young age. They have lived there life, now they get to live for free in jail. I just don't think it's right.

But some sort of justice does need to be served... we can't just put, say a 10 year limitation on it, and then let all these people live their lives and then run free in their retirement. I understand what you're saying, but I guess better late than never?

Umm.
Some may sort of justice does need to be served, but not all.How?Good then you can explain it to me.

[Crystal]

But some sort of justice does need to be served... we can't just put, say a 10 year limitation on it, and then let all these people live their lives and then run free in their retirement. I understand what you're saying, but I guess better late than never?

They have lived there life. That's what I'm saying. IF someone rapes you wouldn't you want them to be punished for it when there young and healthy and able to keep abusing people, instead of old and more than likely half dead? Seriously I don't think that it should take someone 20years to *finally resolve* the situation.

[mb*]

of course it would be ideal to have the punishment be served while they're in their prime... but id rather have some sort of justice, then none at all.

and believe me, if i get raped and the mother fucker gets killed in jail, (thats if i dont kill him myself...) the thought of it wouldnt be keeping me up at night.

has anyone seen that movie Sleepers?

[snobord447]

Crystal what I'm saying is that if these people don't get nailed before the alloted time limit that you allow, they are just free to run free. But at least if there is no limit, there's a chance that they'll finally be caught. I don't think imposing a time limit would make people come to the police with charges any sooner. It's not like they're sitting there being like, "well, at least there's no limitation... so I'll go to the police... next year." ya know? I dunno -- it's a complicated one.

[Crystal]

Crystal what I'm saying is that if these people don't get nailed before the alloted time limit that you allow, they are just free to run free. But at least if there is no limit, there's a chance that they'll finally be caught. I don't think imposing a time limit would make people come to the police with charges any sooner. It's not like they're sitting there being like, "well, at least there's no limitation... so I'll go to the police... next year." ya know? I dunno -- it's a complicated one.


All I'm saying is that if it bothers you that much you should do it before TWENTY years. Seriously that is a long time. And they are free to run free when they are young and healthy and able to do it again, so if it does happen again they can blame thereself for that because they didn't turn him in or whatever. That would put alot more stress on me.

[mb*]

i get what you're saying about it being a long time... no ones disagreeing with that. but thats a really hard thing to come to terms with. you have to be ready, especially if you have to testify... they are going to make you tell the story over and over and over... some people couldnt handle that kind of thing. it takes a long time to get over something so traumatic.

i've never been in that situation, but someone extremely close to me has. i will never fully understand how horrible something like that can be. but ive gotten a glimpse, and thats enough.

[dan]

I think there should be a time limit on it. It's impossible to get a fair trial 20 years later, all evidence except witness testimonial is long gone.

I'm not defending these guys, if they did it, they did it. But blah, it's retarded.

Stop being a pussy and step forward kiddos.

[mb*]

I think there should be a time limit on it. It's impossible to get a fair trial 20 years later, all evidence except witness testimonial is long gone.

I'm not defending these guys, if they did it, they did it. But blah, it's retarded.

Stop being a pussy and step forward kiddos.
i disagree. how can you put a time limit on a crime?

sure... kill your mother... if you hide out long enough, there will be no reprocussion.

thats retarded.

[dan]

i disagree. how can you put a time limit on a crime?

sure... kill your mother... if you hide out long enough, there will be no reprocussion.

thats retarded.

They already have time limits on crime. It's called the statutes of limitations. I just don't think they have one on sexual abuse.

The reason it's in place is exactly for what I said, all evidence that could lead to a fair trial is long gone, witnesses if there were any would have to remember something from umpteen years ago.

You're assuming that everyone is guilty, we're innocent until proven guilty in this country, and unless you have a fair trial, justice has not been served.

Just because this guy is a fucking scumbag and raped a kid, doesn't mean we can just give up our rights. In this case the guy is guitly, obviously, but that doesn't mean that every person ever accused of it is, and unless we have some kind of time limit, I could go back and say anyone raped me 20 years ago, if I'm convincing enough on the witness stand.

edit: This only applies however if there was no crime reported or you weren't a suspect. Which means, if you killed your mother and they knew it was you and you hid out for however many years, you can still be arrested for it. Retard.

[snobord447]

Dan, I do agree with you about the evidence part.... that it's going to be hard to convict someone 20 years later.

But I also understand the guilt, embarassment and trauma that goes along with rape/sexual abuse, etc. That's something that you can't fully understand til it happens to you. I didn't have a problem coming forward, but I can certaintly see how others would. Rape is a truly terrible crime that people know the terror of, but can't really comprehend; I don't know. Maybe it's because I'm speaking from personal experience, but I just think that we can't arbitrarilly close the door on a case like that.

[mb*]

i see what you're saying... it is difficult especially with cases like this... because the accused is alwayz guilty, whether they actually did it or not. once the label is there, its there for life.

but i still dont think that after a while it just shouldnt matter anymore.

[dan]

Dan, I do agree with you about the evidence part.... that it's going to be hard to convict someone 20 years later.

But I also understand the guilt, embarassment and trauma that goes along with rape/sexual abuse, etc. That's something that you can't fully understand til it happens to you. I didn't have a problem coming forward, but I can certaintly see how others would. Rape is a truly terrible crime that people know the terror of, but can't really comprehend; I don't know. Maybe it's because I'm speaking from personal experience, but I just think that we can't arbitrarilly close the door on a case like that.

It did happen to me, and I do understand. I didn't report it then because I didn't give a shit then and I don't give a shit now. If I did, I would have done it then. I'm not close the case and forget about sexual abuse, I'm saying they should limit it so every kid who didn't like his 3rd grade teacher can't wait 30 years then decide they want to pull a case out their ass.

For those that it really happened to, you should report it, if you're a kid then once you reach the age of understanding and you realize what happened to you, you should tell someone.

Saying they're too emabaressment is just an excuse for weakness, and if you're too much of a whining fucking pussy to say something even if you think people may think less of you for it, then it's too fucking bad.

Walk it off.

[dan]

i see what you're saying... it is difficult especially with cases like this... because the accused is alwayz guilty, whether they actually did it or not. once the label is there, its there for life.

but i still dont think that after a while it just shouldnt matter anymore.

It's not that it doesn't matter. It always matters, especially to those involved, but there has to be some guidelines. And you're right, the stigma ruins peoples lives, whether they did it or not.

[snobord447]

They already have time limits on crime. It's called the statutes of limitations. I just don't think they have one on sexual abuse.

The reason it's in place is exactly for what I said, all evidence that could lead to a fair trial is long gone, witnesses if there were any would have to remember something from umpteen years ago.

You're assuming that everyone is guilty, we're innocent until proven guilty in this country, and unless you have a fair trial, justice has not been served.

Just because this guy is a fucking scumbag and raped a kid, doesn't mean we can just give up our rights. In this case the guy is guitly, obviously, but that doesn't mean that every person ever accused of it is, and unless we have some kind of time limit, I could go back and say anyone raped me 20 years ago, if I'm convincing enough on the witness stand.

edit: This only applies however if there was no crime reported or you weren't a suspect. Which means, if you killed your mother and they knew it was you and you hid out for however many years, you can still be arrested for it. Retard.


As always, Dan makes a good point.

We ARE innocent until proven guilty. However, I think that this dillema of not being able to have a fair trail is changing. I believe that they are taking DNA samples of all rape victims and keeping them for that exact reason. Not sure though.

[mb*]

edit: This only applies however if there was no crime reported or you weren't a suspect. Which means, if you killed your mother and they knew it was you and you hid out for however many years, you can still be arrested for it. Retard.
i dont appreciate that tone, daniel. :sad:

[Josie]

I think there should be a statute of limitations on heresy. However, if DNA is involved, it should stick regardless ,DNA transcends time.
I agree with Dan in the comment that kids should come forward when they acknowledge and understand what happened,however, every kid who throws up allegations of sexual assault, isn't telling the truth. alot are products of fucked up families,bad parenting and mental issues .
JMHO

[dan]

As always, Dan makes a good point.

We ARE innocent until proven guilty. However, I think that this dillema of not being able to have a fair trail is changing. I believe that they are taking DNA samples of all rape victims and keeping them for that exact reason. Not sure though.

That's very true. Unfortunately in a case like this, there would be no DNA evidence to go off, because they would have to take it from the boy getting abused. If he doesn't come forward, then there's no DNA to take.

Also, this only solves on problem. there still waits the problem of someone giving testimony about something that happened 20 years ago. Which hurts things specifically in cases like this where witness testimony is one of the most important factors.

[dan]

i dont appreciate that tone, daniel. :sad:

You started it.

[Alter Eg0]

i dont appreciate that tone, daniel. :sad:

You started it.

Only because you asked me to.

[mb*]

Only because you asked me to.
ROFL.

i like tom. :biglaff:

[Rob - banned]

There is a time frame to come forward I believe. I thought the same upon reading the story. Plus, It really depends on the state. Don't quote me but I believe NY has this -- Think it's 8 years -- I'll have to check

[Crystal]

It would be a good idea, considering lack of evidence and what not 20 years later. Not to mention I personally would think that a person would be less likely to be charged 20 years later. If you want punishment you should go to the authorites after the whole shock of the incident is over with.

I've never been in the predicament though so my opinion really means nothing.