1 Ruth Lane (on own behalf) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 December 2, 2010 Vancouver, B.C. (DAY 8) (PROCEEDINGS COMMENCED AT 10:00 A.M.

) THE CLERK: Order in court. In the Supreme Court of British Columbia at Vancouver on this 2nd day of December, 2010, recalling the matter of concerning the constitutionality of section 293 of the Criminal Code, My Lord. THE COURT: Madam Registrar, I understand we have Ms. Lane on the phone. THE CLERK: Yes, My Lord. THE COURT: So, Ms. Lane, can you hear me? MS. LANE: Yes, I can. THE COURT: It's Chief Justice Bauman speaking. And where are you calling from? MS. LANE: Hurricane, Utah. THE COURT: Thank you. We have an application before the court brought on by the Attorney General of British Columbia to ban the publication of the video affidavits filed by the Attorney General, one of which includes that of Ms. Lane. I have heard the media respondents including the CBC, the Vancouver Sun and others and Global TV, I believe, as well as others who are represented by Mr. Burnett, and I have heard the Attorney General of British Columbia on the application through Mr. Jones. I had reserved my judgment and was prepared to deliver it on Tuesday when we learned that Ms. Lane wished to address the court. Because I am anticipating that Ms. Lane will want to tell us things that are really in the nature of evidence on the application to ban the publication of the exhibit I'll ask her if she objects to being affirmed to tell the truth in the proceeding on the telephone. MS. LANE: No, I have no objection. THE COURT: Thank you. RUTH ANN LANE, a witness on her own behalf, affirmed. THE CLERK: Please state your full name and spell your

2 Ruth Lane (on own behalf) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 last name for the record. THE WITNESS: Ruth Ann Lane, L-a-n-e. THE COURT: Thank you, Ms. Lane. Now, you have an opportunity to tell us what you wish to tell the Court. I should say that normally I would ask Mr. Burnett who represents the media if he has any questions of you. Do you have any problem with that? MS. LANE: No, that's not a problem. THE COURT: Thank you. And indeed Mr. Jones could ask you questions as well. So what would you like to tell the Court? MS. LANE: Well, first off I don't share my story with anybody. I might have appeared on TV and told bits and pieces of what had been asked of me at that time. I've been very careful to not share my story because I realize that the media can make it sound what they want -- make it sound how they want it to sound, and so because of that I have chosen not to speak with anybody different times since I have left community. I chose to share my story under the understanding that, yes, it would be open for the public to see it in the court setting or under those circumstances, certainly not for media to take it and publish the bits and pieces that they chose, and that was very -- I can't even describe the shock that I saw when I saw their little clip and I actually learned of it from one of my sisters that are still in the polygamist community and I haven't heard from her since because she was so upset over it. So... THE COURT: Is that what you want to say? MS. LANE: I have no problem with media reporting on my affidavit as far as seeing it in court. I don't feel right about them being able to access it and especially I have no knowledge of it. It was no knowledge that that was going to be a part of my sharing of the story for the purpose of this case. So, yes, that is what I want to say. THE COURT: Thank you very much, Ms. Lane. Mr. Burnett, did you want -- or Mr. Jones, do you have any questions. MR. JONES: I have no questions. THE COURT: Did you have anything, Mr. Burnett? MR. BURNETT: Just briefly. Yes.

3 Ruth Lane (on own behalf) Cross-exam by Mr. Burnett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 THE COURT: Yes. Mr. Burnett is going to ask a few questions, Ms. Lane. THE WITNESS: Okay. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BURNETT: Q Ms. Lane, you have seen the video that's on the internet, the edited down version of your video affidavit? A Yes. I did. Q And what bit or piece of it do you say was there that you haven't previously shared with the world? A There are several -- lots of the details were edited that -- no, I didn't share the story of how I was married. No, I did not share my views on how I felt about what Winston has done. There's -- pretty much every bit of it. Q Well, let me just see here. You'll recall the video that's on the internet shows, it says that you were the 10th wife and you knew that was already public; right? A Absolutely. Q That he eventually married a total of 25 wives. That's public information, isn't it? A Absolutely. Q Two of the wives you said were 15 years old. That was already public? A Absolutely. Q You talked about how many children he had with the various wives and you know that's public? A And your point is? Q I'm just trying to figure out what wasn't public. A My point is not that these things were not public knowledge. That I had no knowledge, no warning that I was going to be posted online. That is what I am objecting to. MR. BURNETT: Okay. Thank you very much. THE COURT: Thank you. Do you have anything else you want to say, Ms. Lane? MS. LANE: I definitely don't think that I would have shared of myself in that manner had I known that the media would be able to take and manipulate the contents of that video affidavit to their liking. No, I would not have shared. So that's what I would like to say. THE COURT: Thank you. Thank you very much. Are there any further submissions from the lawyers involved on the application in light of this evidence?

4 Discussion re Ms. Lane's position 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 MR. BURNETT: I'd just say it doesn't meet the test. THE COURT: Okay. MR. JONES: My Lord, two points, and I'll describe the second one before I make it because I think I need your leave. The first point I would make, now, I'm not clear from Mr. Burnett and particularly from his question here whether he is asserting only the right to broadcast information that was not previously in the public's sphere. My understanding is that he considers it his right to put the entire video on the internet if he so choses, not simply the edited version. THE COURT: That's certainly the extent of the right that he's asserting as I understand it. MR. BURNETT: That's my position. The questions were designed to illustrate just what they did, and the bits and pieces position was -THE COURT: Thank you. MR. JONES: And the other thing that I think I should seek your leave on, My Lord, is you raised during our submissions the Ashley Smith case, the Ontario Court of Appeal, that I at the time had not read and that wasn't part of the submissions I believe of either myself or Mr. Burnett. THE COURT: I'm sorry. MR. JONES: I have read that case now and if I could just take one minute literally I would like to make a submission on that. MR. BURNETT: I don't object. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. JONES: My only submission on the Ashley Smith case, My Lord, is that the video in its entirety unaltered was played in court but that the order that went from the court for publication was that it would be publication with the faces of every living person on that tape digitally obscured. Only Ashley Smith was identifiable from the video tape release to the media in that case. And those are my submissions. THE COURT: Thank you, Ms. Lane, for taking the time to come to court in this virtual way. I will take into account what you have said when I give further consideration to the application and I will issue my reasons shortly with respect to that application. Thank you again. MS. LANE: Thank you. I appreciate your time. THE COURT: And we have a witness do we?

5 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 MS. HORSMAN: Yes, My Lord. The Attorney General of British Dr. Lawrence Beall. MR. BURNETT: While he is coming THE COURT: Yes. Thank you, Mr. MR. BURNETT: Should I come back time? THE COURT: I will let you know. first witness for the Columbia is up may I be excused? Burnett. at any particular

LAWRENCE BEALL, a witness, called by the AGBC, sworn. THE CLERK: Please state your full name and spell your last name for the record. THE WITNESS: Lawrence Dalton Beall B-e-a-l-l. MS. HORSMAN: My Lord, Dr. Beall has prepared two affidavits in this matter. One of them is marked as an exhibit. I believe it's Exhibit 1. It was the affidavit sworn July 16th, 2010. Dr. Beall more recently swore an affidavit by way of reply which was sworn on November 30th, 2010 and has been filed with the court but I don't think has yet been marked as an exhibit and I don't take any party to be objecting to the admission of those affidavits. THE COURT: Madam Registrar, next number? THE CLERK: Exhibit 106, My Lord. THE COURT: Thank you. EXHIBIT 106: Affidavit of Dr. Beall sworn on November 30, 2010 MS. HORSMAN: Now, My Lord, in the interests of trying to get through the direct exam of Dr. Beall as efficiently as I can I'll be sticking primarily with what I will call his main affidavit, the affidavit number 1. THE COURT: Yes. MS. HORSMAN: And ask him periodically to move to the reply affidavit just to comment on some evidence that was raised in other affidavits. THE COURT: Thank you. EXAMINATION IN CHIEF BY MS. HORSMAN: Q Dr. Beall, you have in front of you an affidavit sworn July 16th, 2010 and an affidavit sworn November 30th, 2010?

6 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 A Q A Q THE MR. Yes. And those are the two affidavits that you've sworn in this proceeding? Yes. Dr. Beall, if I can ask you to turn to Exhibit A of affidavit number 1. COURT: If I can just interject. I take it there are no issues with the doctor's expertise? WICKETT: No, My Lord, taking no position with respect to his expertise and no submission with respect to qualification and his qualifications to give an opinion evidence. COURT: Thank you. HORSMAN: Thank you, My Lord. I didn't propose to spend a long time on qualifications but there's some evidence on qualifications that will also be relevant to the issues raised by the other affidavits. Now, Dr. Beall at Exhibit A, that's your CV? Yes. And it indicates under the heading "Formal Education" that you have a bachelor of science with a major in psychology and that you obtained that in 1976? Yes. A master of education in 1979 and that you obtained a PhD in clinical psychology in 1987 from Brigham Young University; is that correct? That's correct. And you are currently, sir, a member of the American Psychological Association? Yes. And also the Utah Psychological Association? Correct. Now, Dr. Beall, can you explain to the court the significance of the clinical designation and the clinical psychologist degree that you received? Clinical psychology specializes in the diagnosis of mental health problems and creating treatment plans that correspond to the treatment of those problems, as opposed to many branches of psychology that don't deal specifically with diagnosis. Thank you. And in fact you've practised as a clinical psychologist since you obtained your PhD in 1987? Correct.

THE MS.

Q A Q

A Q A Q A Q A Q A

Q A

7 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q A Q A And since 1994 that has been as director of the Trauma Awareness and Treatment Center in Salt Lake City, Utah? Yes. Can you give us a brief explanation of what you did between the years 1987 and 1994. I did a post doctorate at a hospital, Utah Valley Regional Medical Center, in behavioural medicine which is basically working with internists and neurologists who have identified psychological problems being contributing to the medical problems. From there I went to Seattle, had a private practice with behaviour medicine-type problems. Anxiety disorders figured prominently in those medical problems, and when I discovered that psychological trauma was at the core of many anxiety disorders I shifted to the treatment of trauma and I've been in that field ever since. And again, that was in 1994 that you first established your clinic in Salt Lake City? Correct. Can you describe, Dr. Beall, the types of trauma that patients have experienced that would attend your clique? We work with adults, adolescents and children coming out of domestic violence, assault. I work with -- we work with vets from Iraq and Afghanistan, gang violence, refugee trauma. We also work with torture victims. The whole range of psychological trauma is treated at our clinic. And can you give the Court some sense of how you would be referred cases to the trauma clinic? We receive referrals primarily from agencies, governmental agencies such as Workforce Services who are trying to help people resolve psychological difficulties before they can become employed. Crime victims that are referred by the State. Many referrals come from Medicaid. We do a lot of work for the indigent. Doctors throughout the valley -- Utah valley refer to us. And then just the old word-of-mouth referrals. And you are, Dr. Beall, in addition to the director you're also a full-time clinical psychologist at the treatment centre with a full case load? I do have a full case load.

Q A Q A

Q A

Q

A

8 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q A And what are your additional duties as director? I do a lot of interface work with the community. For example, part of our mission is increasing trauma awareness, so I present to agencies, state functions like family conferences and so forth to explain the role of trauma in our society. Now, your CV, Dr. Beall, under the heading "Experience" also refers to a satellite trauma clinic that you directed? Yes. Can you tell us if that's a clinic that is separate from the trauma treatment centre that you've just described? It is separate. We set up a satellite trauma centre at a homeless clinic -- homeless medical clinic because it was recognized by the medical doctors there that many of these people, these homeless people have psychological trauma issues. And so we had that clinic for two years before the money ran out. And in paragraph 3 of your July 2010 affidavit, Dr. Beall, you've estimated that you've provided clinical treatment to over 5,500 trauma patients since 1988? Our last count is 5,600 of -- 400 of which have been children. That was my next question. Sorry. No. Thank you. Your CV also indicates that your clinic, the trauma treatment centre, is a state approved domestic violence victim provider? Yes. Can you explain to us what that means? What that means is the State has standards of treatment proficiency for victims of domestic violence and that necessitates 15 hours of specialized training a year, and myself and staff have received that. Now, your CV also refers to your development of treatment protocols and training manuals for use in trauma resolution. Can you elaborate briefly on those, what sort of manuals we're talking about. Well, I discovered in 2003 that there wasn't sufficient material available for women coming out of domestic violence in particular and who have been assaulted. They didn't have sufficient life

Q A Q A

Q

A Q A Q A Q A

Q

A

9 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 skills. One of the reasons is many of them came from impoverished homes, and so I wrote a manual to teach them how to survive in our society. And if I can refer you, Dr. Beall, to Exhibit D to your -- what I've been calling your primary affidavit, affidavit number 1. That is an excerpt from one of the manuals you've been describing, a manual you authored entitled Life Skills for Trauma Survivors; is that right? Yes. And this is an example of the type of treatment protocol you've just been describing; is that correct? Yes. Many materials have been written basically to address needs in the trauma victim community, but I didn't feel sufficient material existed. Now, Dr. Beall, in the past several years your practice has also included the clinical treatment of a number of former residents of polygamous communities in the United States; is that correct? Yes. Can you explain, Dr. Beall, how you initially became involved in that work. The first referral of a polygamist survivor came from the division of Workforce Services. The caseworker there had made a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder and so she referred that patient to us, which is a common occurrence. And when I did the intake with her I discovered she had been a victim of violence but it had come from the polygamous community in the Colorado City/Hilldale area. There were two Workforce Service referrals, and then round the same time, this is 2004, an organization called Tapestry Against Polygamy became aware of the work we were doing to help trauma survivors coming out of polygamy. They had some women who did not have means and they wanted them treated and asked if I would do some pro bono work, which we did, because that's what one of the things we do. And from there it expanded. An organization, non-profit, called Diversity started referring young men who had left or actually were expelled from the polygamist community to us. And those have been the primary sources, Workforce Service, Tapestry against Polygamy and the Diversity organization

Q

A Q A Q

A Q A

10 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q A Q And in addition to the sources of referrals did we also have the word-of-mouth method that you discussed earlier? There was that, yes. Dr. Beall, if I could just go back for a moment, the initial referrals you received from the Department of Workplace Services. You have indicated that someone at that agency had already made a diagnosis of the individual who was referred to you? That's correct. And so I assume then, sir, that the department would have someone trained in diagnostics, that sort of diagnostic capabilities? These caseworkers were masters degree social workers for the most part, trained to make diagnoses. Their job was a form of triage, psychologically speaking, where they would make referrals based on the clinical symptoms they witnessed. And Dr. Beall, prior to the time that you received these early referrals you've indicated it was around, I believe, 2003? 2004. 2004. Did you have any knowledge or experience with the FLDS communities in the United States? I had not. Now, Dr. Beall, if I can refer you to paragraph 5 of your original affidavit. Affidavit number 1. That paragraph sets out what I might call the demographic breakdown of what you have called polygamy survivors that you provided trauma counselling to? Yes. And I won't take you through the paragraph in detail because the details are there, but I do note that the breakdown does seem to be roughly equal along gender lines. Do I have that correct? That's correct. So 14 women by my count and 16 men that you counselled? Yes. Now, you've made a comment in this paragraph, Dr. Beall, about having provided counselling within that group of 30 to 8 women which you've described as being from non-FLDS polygamist groups?

A Q A

Q A Q A Q

A Q

A Q A Q

11 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 A Q A Q A Q Yes. What groups were these individuals from? Those individuals were mainly from the Kingston polygamy group and I believe there were two from the Harmston polygamist group. And is it your understanding, Dr. Beall, that those two groups are, like the FLDS, offshoots of the Mormon religion? The chief elements are in common. And was there a distinction that you observed in the course of your clinical treatment of these individuals depending on whether they came from an FLDS or these non-FLDS groups? The doctrinal core of being saved through polygamy was there. There seemed to be a stronger or sterner enforcement within FLDS and it was more pervasive. I'm trying to put my finger on what I mean by that. Education, for example, there was a lot of indoctrination in the educational system. And there seemed to be a tighter network of control, prophet leader, husbands and wives over the children. Those differences you've observed in the sense that some groups might have been stricter than others, do they impact the opinions you've offered in the affidavit with respect to the group as a whole or can your observations be applied across these groups? The applications can be applied across. I'm making more of a subtle difference between them really. It's not a major difference. So can we agree that in the remainder of your evidence I'll refer to FLDS at times just for ease of reference as you've done in your affidavit, but you'll understand I'm encompassing all 30 of your treatment group? That would be accurate. COURT: Sorry, just to make sure I understand. The tighter network of control, you recognize that in the FLDS community? WITNESS: Yes, My Lord. COURT: Right. HORSMAN: Now, paragraph 5 also reports, Dr. Beall, that you oversaw the treatment of 11 more males from Hilldale and Colorado City? Yes.

A

Q

A Q

A THE THE THE MS. Q A

12 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q A Q A Q A Q A So that's in addition to the group of 30 that you were providing direct treatment to; is that correct? Correct. Can I ask you first, Dr. Beall, to explain how these individuals were referred to your clinic? Speaking of the ones I supervised the treatment of? Yes. They were referred by the Diversity organization. And can you explain what your supervisory role consisted of in relation to these 11? We had weekly staff meetings. The cases would be discussed in detail. Challenges and problems would be addressed and any obstacles to their progress therapeutically were dealt with. So in other words, if I can paraphrase, Dr. Beall, another psychologist or clinician within your clinic was providing the direct treatment? Yes. And you were involved in a kind of consulting role with respect to that treatment; is that right? That's correct. Now, how long in general did counselling last for the individuals you were treating, Dr. Beall? For the women it was 12 to 16 sessions and for the young men it was about -- it was 8 -- 6 to 10 sessions. Now, on the basis of this clinical experience you've just described, Dr. Beall, you also authored a paper entitled The Effects of Modern Day Polygamy on Women and Children; is that correct? Correct. And if I can just take you to Exhibit B of your affidavit and ask you to confirm that that's the paper you authored. That is it. And I understand this paper has been accepted for publication in an upcoming edition of a publication of the International Cultic Studies Association? Correct. And it will be in an edition that's devoted to the topic of polygamy? That's correct. Can you explain to the court what your objective

Q A Q A Q A Q

A Q A Q

A Q A Q

13 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 was in writing this paper. By 2005 I had treated a number of individuals that had come out of the different polygamist communities and because the pattern of symptoms and the pattern of conditions that gave rise to those symptoms was clear and unusual in my clinical experience, and I had talked with no other professional that had treated these people, I consider it a responsibility professionally to write a paper addressing what I had seen. Q When you say what you had seen, what you had seen in your clinical practice -A Clinically. Q -- since you began counselling these individuals as you described? A Yes. Q Now aside from the clinical experience that you've described, Dr. Beall, what if any other inquiries have you undertaken if any that inform the views that you set out in your affidavits? A Well, there has been considerable information that has come out of my expert witness work in Texas. The prosecuting attorney there recommended that I go to the Hilldale/Colorado City area which I did and I interviewed six women there, two of whom were still in the community and four who lived there but were not part of the community. I interviewed them. And I have had access to the archives for the Yearning for Zion ranch in Eldorado, Texas, and have read considerable material from those archives. Q Can you give us a brief understanding of what kind of material you're talking about that you might have reviewed as part of -MR. WICKETT: My Lord, I rise at this point. I'm prepared to give my friend wide latitude in these matters but she is moving rather far beyond the scope of explaining matters already detailed in the affidavit. And my understanding of the process we're in in this reference wide latitude -- some latitude is to be expected, but I fear that we're now moving into matters that are well beyond the scope of proper examination and explanation. THE COURT: Well, Mr. Wickett, were you here for the in chief of the Professor Campbell? MR. WICKETT: Pardon me? A

14 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 THE COURT: Were you here of the chief of Professor Campbell? MR. WICKETT: I was hear until noon on the first day, My Lord. THE COURT: Because we have given quite a bit of latitude. MR. WICKETT: All right. I apologize to the Court. THE COURT: Unless the doctor is being asked things beyond the opinion and they represent new information to you I'm going to let counsel pretty much go their own way. MR. WICKETT: I'm sorry, I missed the examination. THE COURT: Thank you. MS. HORSMAN: As I indicated, My Lord, these questions are relevant not just to qualifications but also to the substantive question. THE COURT: And you are within the four corners of the material that's before the Court. MS. HORSMAN: Yes, My Lord. I didn't take that to be my friend's objection. THE COURT: No, I understand that. MS. HORSMAN: Q So I think, Dr. Beall, what I'd asked you before the objection was made was to give the court a brief explanation of what material you reviewed as part of your preparations in Texas. A Birth certificates, priesthood records, marriage records, family records, letters to and from -from members to church leaders, considerable teachings from church leaders. Q Now, in addition to the clinical experience that you've described and your experience -- or the material you reviewed as part of your preparations for testifying in Texas, and I'll come back to Texas in a moment, you've additionally cited a number of articles in your two affidavits that contain cites to the professional literature, if I can call it that, and these are set out at appendix C of your first affidavit and Exhibit A of your second affidavit? A Yes. Q Can you explain to the Court what use you've made of professional literature in the course of preparing your affidavits. A I felt it was necessary to refer to the professional literature to see if there's consistency in correspondence between what the

15 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 professional literature discussed what I was finding in my work with these people. Q Now, again just before we get to Texas, Dr. Beall, can you summarize for the court your experience testifying as an expert in cases other than the Texas prosecutions. A I've been an expert witness in approximately 40 cases where I've testified in court. I have written about 100 assessments for the court regarding primarily fitness of parent issues. Q And in relation to Texas you were qualified as an expert witness in five criminal prosecutions; is that correct? A That's correct. Q Now, I note that paragraph 9 of your first affidavit lists four cases from Texas, and the fifth one I understand, Dr. Beall, and perhaps you could confirm this, is a case that the trial and conviction happened after you swore that affidavit; is that correct? A That's correct. Q Now, Dr. Beall, these were criminal charges that arose as a consequence of the raid in Texas; is that correct? A Yes. Q And can you summarize for the court what your experience was, what you were called for as an expert in those cases. A I testified to the mental and emotional impact of an underage girl marrying an older man. I discussed how these girls were not aware of the ramifications of their decision to marry, consent issues. I discussed sexual bringing in and out of polygamy. I also discussed each individual girl and her unique problems as it related to the man she was marrying and the conditions and circumstances around which that marriage happened. Q Now, Dr. Beall, in these proceedings you've agreed you've sworn the two affidavits that are in front of you. The second affidavit again is I think primarily by way of reply an affidavit filed on behalf of the FLDS by Dr. Matthew Davies. A Yes. MS. HORSMAN: I'm sorry, My Lord, I'm told it was filed by the amicus and not the FLDS. My Lord, I know no one is objecting to the affidavits going in. For the record the AGBC is

16 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 seeking to have Dr. Beall adduce written and viva voce evidence as a clinical psychologist entitled to provide opinion evidence on the psychological, emotional and social impacts of the practice of polygamy on individuals from FLDS communities. COURT: Any submissions? WICKETT: No, none, My Lord. COURT: Thank you. He's qualified then. So qualified. HORSMAN: Thank you, My Lord. Now, Dr. Beall, before you began treating the polygamy survivors, and I will adopt your language for the moment, you have indicated that you didn't have much exposure to these FLDS communities? I didn't have any. So you had no particular expertise or had done no particular research into polygamy before your first patients were referred to you; is that correct? They were treated as any other trauma patient. And you have indicated that the patients you've treated come from polygamist communities in Utah and Arizona. As a consequence of your clinical practice did you become familiar with the community of Bountiful? Yes. And in what context was that, Dr. Beall? I learned from my patients that most of them had travelled back and forth between what they call Short Creek, which means the Hilldale/Colorado City area, and Bountiful. There was a lot of travel back and forth especially as young girls, potential marriage partners, that kind of thing. And back at paragraph 5, Dr. Beall, you've indicated the age breakdown of the polygamy survivors that you counselled and you give an age range of women of 27 to 42 and age range of young men from 16 to 21. Do you see that? Yes. Can you explain to the court -- provide to the court whatever explanation you can for the age discrepancy between men and women? Well, the women were women who had left and had been away from it, except for the younger ones, for some time. The young men had been expelled from the community and they seem to kind of fall into two groups. One would be their fathers had

THE MR. THE MS. Q

A Q

A Q

A Q A

Q

A Q A

17 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 lost their families and these young men did not want a different father so they left. Or they were expelled usually under the umbrella term of "rebelliousness." Now, Dr. Beall, if I can talk you to paragraph 14 of your affidavit number 1. All right. Now, what you've given there is a five axis diagnosis that you would typically give to an adult woman who has left a polygamist group? I would change if I were allowed the word "typically" to "commonly." I see. I think that was a poor choice of words on my part. It was common, but typical is too strong a word. I will come back to that point in a minute, Dr. Beall, but what you were attempting to do here is provide a representative diagnosis; is that correct? Yes. Now, can you perhaps help counsel and the Court out here with the meaning of, first of all, what a five axis diagnosis is, and then what each of the axis means. Yes. That was developed from the diagnostic and statistical manual produced by the American Psychological Association. The original effort was to organize psychological information in clusters of symptoms that corresponded to psychological diagnoses. The axis 1 are the more common psychological problems like anxiety, depression that are -- and a term they use is "presented." Presenting symptoms. Axis 2 refers to personality disorders. Those are a more entrenched part of a person's character disorder such as anti-social personality disorder. Axis 3 are medical problems, and in this axis we refer especially to medical problems that may have an interface with the psychological problems. For instance in behaviour medicine it would be the gastrointestinal, chronic pain, migraine headache-type problems. Axis 4 refers to the stressors that contribute to the psychological problems, and axis 5 is level of functioning according to a scale that has been established.

Q

A Q A Q

A Q

A

18 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q And we see at paragraph 14 that the axis 1 diagnosis is post-traumatic stress disorder and particularly in light of your clarification, Dr. Beall, that you meant this to provide a common diagnosis, I wonder if you can tell us whether the PTSD, as I think it's been familiarly called -Yes. -- is a diagnosis you saw in all of your patients of polygamist survivors or a majority? What I mean by "common" is this: Many of them had had psychological traumatic experiences that impacted them significantly giving rise to intrusive symptoms, and what intrusive symptoms means is a past traumatic experience as being either relived in the present in the form of flashbacks, or it intrudes into the sleep state in the form of nightmares. And if there was intrusive experiences and it was a post-trauma condition I would refer to a post-traumatic stress disorder diagnosis or type diagnosis because -- I'm sorry if I'm getting too academic here, but well, this is my specialty. But the post-traumatic stress disorder is the only disorder that is based on an event and in which there are memories from that event intruding on the present functioning. So if -- you can correct me if I'm got this summary wrong, Dr. Beall, but what I take from that is that your patients who are polygamy survivors inevitably either had PTSD or showed signs of post-trauma? Post-trauma was common, yes? Now, you have indicated in your affidavit, Dr. Beall, that although you have given this axis 5 diagnosis as one typical to adult women, that the comments you've just made about PTSD in post-trauma, that axis 1 diagnosis was common between the women and men you treated? Yes. More common in the women but it was present in the men. Now, I want to stop at that point, Dr. Beall, in your main affidavit and move to one point that is a point of divergence between yourself and Dr. Davies. Yes. You have read the affidavit of Dr. Matthew Davies that was filed on behalf of the amicus in this

A Q A

Q

A Q

A Q

A Q

19 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 A Q A Q proceeding? I have. And you have provided affidavit number 2 which replies to some of the points that Dr. Davies has raised? I have. One of the points of divergence between the two affidavits is that Dr. Davies has suggested that you may have misdiagnosed your patients and that what polygamy survivors suffer is not PTSD but rather something that Dr. Davies calls cognitive dissonance? Yes. Is that what you understand Dr. Davies' affidavit to say? Yes. Now, you've responded to this point in your reply affidavit, the affidavit number 2 at paragraphs 10 to 17, and without going through that affidavit verbatim perhaps you could explain to the court in brief terms, first of all, what your understanding is of the term "cognitive dissonance"? Cognitive dissonance is a tension that arises when there's a discrepancy between one's beliefs and one's actions. And is this a clinically recognized diagnosis under the diagnostic and statistical manual? Cognitive dissonance is not a diagnosis. It's not a clinical pattern of symptoms. In fact, it's not even recognized as a contributing cause of psychological symptoms. And so what, Dr. Beall, is your response to Dr. Davies' suggestion that some or all of your patients who were polygamy survivors may have been suffering not from PTSD but rather from cognitive dissonance? The level of trauma and stressors that I have witnessed would far, far supercede emotional tension resulting from cognitive dissonance. And Dr. Davies in his affidavit, Dr. Beall, alternatively opines polygamy survivors may suffer from an adjustment disorder rather than from PTSD? Yes. And again you've responded in your reply affidavit, but perhaps you could just summarize for the court what your response to that point would be.

A Q A Q

A Q A

Q

A Q A Q

20 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 A Adjustment disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder both require stressors. For an adjustment disorder the stressors would be comparatively mild, such as a relationship loss, a job loss, that kind of thing. Whereas in post-traumatic stress disorder the stressor causes a sense of helplessness and terror and does cause the intrusive experiences. They're categorically different. In your mind at least there was no way you would have made a mistake between the two? No. If we can return to your main affidavit, Dr. Beall. We were talking at paragraph 14 about the axis 5 diagnosis and you indicated that the diagnosis of PTSD showed up in both your male and female populations. Your affidavit also comments on certain differences in the diagnoses between your male and female groups of patients and I wonder if you could just summarize what those differences are. With the females they tended to internalize their symptoms, creating primarily anxiety and depression. With the young men they externalized their symptoms, causing behavioural-type problems. The women also tended to have a lot more self blame, guilt and shame, whereas the young men didn't. Another thing the young women manifested that was peculiar to me was a robotic type of presentation, a shut down of their feelings, numbness. And I never saw anger manifested in the women but I did see anger manifested in the young men. And did your clinical practice give you an opportunity to become aware of some of the particular problems that are faced by young men in these communities? Yes. And can you describe for these for the court? First of all, it was difficult for them to feel like second class citizens, if I can use that term, because they weren't allowed to choose a wife and marry. And when they left they had to enter a world that they had been taught since birth is threatening and dangerous and they had to do so without the survival skills to deal with it. They also felt resentment and a sense of

Q A Q

A

Q

A Q A

21 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 unfairness that they had to so-called compete with older men who were more established, who had more money, who had families, status in the community, and they would be more attractive to these young women their age than they would be. They couldn't compete with them. And yet they were promised if they would be faithful and obedient they would be provided a wife, but even after strict obedience they would not be given a wife and they felt it was kind of a bait and switch. When they came to me it was difficult to provide an environment of treatment, if I can call it that, because they had been told their whole lives that mental health problems were a weakness. And it took some work to help them understand that I was simply trying to help them function better and we needed to remove mental, emotional obstacles for them to improve their function Thank you, Dr. Beall. Paragraphs 20 to 26 deal with what you term the impacts of polygamy on adolescent development? Yes. And you've gone through some of the research in that section. Can you summarize what is significant in your view as to what the research tells us about the development of adolescent brain? Referring to the actual, like that MRI studies that were referred to? Well, you don't need to get as specific I don't think, Dr. Beall, unless you feel you need to as referring to the specific studies that you've cited. I'm getting at more the science of -- the underlying science of what you've set out in these paragraphs of your affidavit. Okay. Pardon me. Adolescence is a time of identity formation. This is when the foundation of who the individual will become is established. And identity formation requires experimenting, exploring, discovering, learning, which is not encouraged in an environment where they are not encouraged to ask questions, in fact, questions can be interpreted as rebellion, and which it's difficult for them to exercise choice. Another problem has to do with they are taught that if you feel that anything is not right coming from a priesthood leader then what you feel is

Q A Q

A Q

A

22 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 wrong, therefore they come to not trust what they think and feel. Self esteem issues often arise because they feel who they are as an individual is not valued. You may have already covered this, but is there anything additional that you can say, Dr. Beall, about the significance of the points you've just made about the development of the adolescent brain in terms of your clinical treatment of the men and women who have left polygamist communities? Well, there was a difficult combination in that as, perhaps I will have a chance to discuss later, because of undeveloped prefrontal cortex and the tremendous indoctrination and conditioning that had been undergone, the ability to state straightforwardly what one thinks and feels and to make plans for the future, the ability to exercise judgment and those kinds of things were not there. Everything had to be taught. And there had to be kind of a dismantling of certain ways of thinking that interfered with therapeutic effort. Now, in the ensuing paragraphs of your affidavit, paragraphs 27 through 36 of affidavit number 1. I think you started from where we've just been talking about, the development of the adolescent brain, and you have gone on to comment on the impacts of polygamy on adolescence in terms of mental, emotional and social impacts and you have broken it out that way? Yes. I wonder if we can take those one at a time and get you to summarize, first of all, what the mental impacts are on an adolescent growing up in polygamy. Well, I think to avoid controversy we can stick to the hard science MRI studies that have been done in especially the last ten years with the prefrontal cortex. And what's been discovered is really important in my opinion in that the prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for what is called the executive functions of the brain, planning, self control, reasoning, is very plastic and remains in a developmental stage until the late 20s. Now, that has had a large impact on our thinking in most arenas as it relates to adolescence, because as one expert put it, it is

Q

A

Q

A Q

A

23 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 unfair to expect an adolescent to have adult levels of decision-making when their brain is still developing. The implication in this context is that these adolescent girls do not have sufficient cognitive capacity to make a decision like who to marry, when and how to marry. And in terms of the emotional consequences that -for adolescents in polygamist communities that flow from the science that you just talked about? Well, of course there's a connection between how the brain operates and the emotional functioning of these girls in particular. And because of what I just said about their being emotionally unprepared and mentally unprepared they cannot really give a knowing consent and they are more a passive participant in the process. Now, you've talked about these impacts in terms of the young girl in a polygamist community. Are there similar or other impacts on the adolescent male? Yes, there are. And can you explain those. Well, the same kinds of problems that pertain to the adolescent girl are with the young men except they have been given skills, mechanical skills, house building skills, which make it a little easier for them to find a way to survive in the outside world. But they still have the mental emotional deficits I referred to. All right. Now, Dr. Beall, beginning at paragraph 37 of your affidavit number 1 you talk about sexual grooming in polygamist communities, do you see that? Yes. Can you explain first what the concept sexual grooming means. Sexual grooming means gradual relationship building that leads to sexual content. And how is this concept of sexual grooming relevant in a general sense to the issue of consent to sexual activity? Well, it might be helpful to explain the basic stages of sexual grooming to answer that. If it would be helpful if you could do it, that would be great. If I may.

Q A

Q

A Q A

Q

A Q A Q A Q A

24 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Sexual grooming involves gradual relationship building in the form of increasing trust, affection and dependence and a relationship perceived as unique and special. There is secrecy and isolation that separates the victim from her support system and attaches her to the abuser, and there's a breaking down of the victim's defences and the manipulation of her feelings, especially fear and guilt. And perhaps we can go back to the question I posed to you that you thought it would be helpful to first have that explanation, which is how is the concept of sexual grooming relevant to the issue of consent to sexual activity? Yes, because what happens is because of the affection and closeness that the victim desires, when the relationship becomes sexualized it's very difficult for her to say no and so this illusion is created that she consented, that this sexual relationship is consensual and that she has responsibility in it. And what is the relevance for this, Dr. Beall, in terms of your treatment of the polygamy survivors we've discussed? Well, the professional research recognizes that when an older man sexually grooms a younger girl that there are problems, of course, but when the older man is a recognized church leader it's much more problematic because of the beliefs she has about him. She believes he would never harm her because he's close to God. She believes he represents her connection to God and should be trusted. She believes to deny him what he wants is the equivalent of denying God. If there's something wrong in her response it's her fault, and to use the language, she needs to exercise more faith, repent of her sins and align her views with that of the person, you know, that is having this relationship with her. And so the way you've just described, Dr. Beall, is that the way that your clinical experience suggested to you that sexual grooming occurred within the polygamist communities you were dealing with? What became apparent to me is that, and this is something I wasn't quite -- hadn't quite seen before although I had worked with many

Q

A

Q A

Q

A

25 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 fundamentalist religions' victims, this one had what I would call a structured sexual grooming because it was endorsed by the doctrines and teachings there was no support system for her to go to, and her parents condoned this -- this sexual submissiveness to the priesthood head. Now, Dr. Beall, the very last portion of your affidavit which begins at paragraph 46 you speak to treatment models for polygamy survivors who have come through your clinic; do you see that? Yes. And how, if at all, Dr. Beall, did the treatment models differ for polygamy survivors than some other trauma victims? There's much overlap, as I mentioned, but the areas that require special emphasis are first of all safety, because these women often still are not safe. There's often a pursuit of them after they leave polygamy. Trauma resolution is basically the same. Connection is difficult because they have been taught to keep separate and keep themselves walled away from outside community people. Cognitive restructuring is the principle area of difference. Because of the amount of indoctrination and conditioning there is a need to dismantle those mental structures and replace them with more -- a reasonable or realistic ways of thinking. I don't have listed here life skills training which is part of the cognitive restructuring, but they also lack life skills as I mentioned and that's part -- a special emphasis on that is more necessary than most trauma survivors. And so I think what you've just told us, Dr. Beall, is that polygamy survivors share much in common with other trauma victims that you've counselled, but they have some additional barriers that you've noticed in your clinical practice? Correct. Now, you've alluded to it, Dr. Beall, but perhaps you could give the Court a more expansive idea of what your clinical experience has taught you about the types of hurdles that a polygamy survivor faces in moving out of the community into ours, I suppose. Well, there are some very -- what I would call

Q

A Q A

Q

A Q

A

26 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 logistical problems. We could call the process of leaving the polygamist community accomplished in stages. The first stage is just leaving the geography of the community and that requires the mother of children to always be prepared to leave so that when an opportunity presents itself, and that opportunity would be -- would consist of the husband not being there and enough of his wives not being observant for her to slip away and with a little bit of time to get out. The second obstacle in leaving is she has to have a place to go, a transition place and this requires some kind of support person to help her and her children until she figures out how to survive out there. The second group of obstacles have to do with making a life in this new community, which of course she has been taught to fear, but she has to make sure if there's any medical problems that her children have medical services. She has to find work and she has to find a way to have enough financial support in that transition. The third group of problems have to do with legal issues and that she will have to deal with custody issues with her husband. He will have money; she will not. And she has to figure out a way for her children to have visitation with him and for her to feel safe about that that he won't leave with them, and that emotionally is quite difficult. Now, I noticed Dr. Beall that you used "she" through that answer. Are there different barriers faced by the men who have left polygamy that you have counselled? Of course the main difference has to do with children. The problems of leaving with children are immense. The problems for the young men are significant but -- especially if there's an organization like Diversity to help the young men have a place to stay until they can get their feet on the ground, it's easier. And again I think you testified earlier that these young men came out of the community in a variety of circumstances. Some were expelled on the grounds of rebelliousness is I think how you put it?

Q

A

Q

27 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 A Q Yes. You indicated that others had -- the fathers had lost their families was I think how you put it? A Yes. Q And perhaps you could explain what that means to the Court. A What that means is the church leader determined that the man was no longer worthy to have a family and so by a reassignment of families this family would be given to another man and the man would be expelled from the community. Q Now, I want to move away again from your affidavit number 1, Dr. Beall, and My Lord, I only have about three questions remaining. THE COURT: Yes, thank you. MS. HORSMAN: Q Dr. Beall, one of Dr. Davies' criticisms of you in his affidavit is that your report indicates some level of what Dr. Davies has characterized as bias and failing to meet APA guidelines which require cultural and religious sensitivity. Do you remember that part of Dr. Davies' affidavit? A Yes, I do. Q And just for clarity's sake, Dr. Beall, the APA guidelines, that's your professional association at a national level? A It is. Q And, Dr. Beall, what is your response to that comment by Dr. Davies? A Well, there was a complaint by Dr. Davies that I had not done more research into polygamy per se, but that was beyond the scope of the assignment given me, if you will. But as far as it relates to the APA there's two forces to balance here. One is that psychologists are aware of special needs that may grow out of the people they work with. They might be vulnerable, for example, and there's a need for special care to their welfare. That's on the one hand. And on the other hand they want to eliminate from their work any bias. So those two have to be kept in a check and balance. Now, I had not been aware of FLDS abuses and trauma prior to the referrals I had received. But when they came through our clinic doors I treated them like any other trauma victim, which required me to follow

28 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 the principle of safeguards and special protections for them. And I don't want to put words in your mouth on this point, Dr. Beall, but is your point that if you have observed on the basis of your clinical experience that these people have suffered harm as a consequence of certain practices you interpret your ethical obligations to include to protect their interests in that clinical process? That's correct. Now, Dr. Beall, one of the examples that Dr. Davies cites in his affidavit as evidence of, again, bias as Dr. Davies calls it, is your use of the term "polygamy survivor"? Yes. Could you explain to the Court what you mean by use of that term. By that I mean there's several aspects that in my opinion make them a survivor to actually get out of the community. The first one are the conditions within the community. When they leave they are working against indoctrination and conditioning since birth. They had witnessed significant enough violence and abuses to want to leave. In fact, dangers of staying, the costs of staying have come to outweigh the risks of leaving. And there's many other emotional issues we can elaborate on as it relates to what it means to stay in the community versus leaving. But they also have to deal with the outside world and to survive the outside world they have to go against the conditioning they have been taught that this outside world is threatening and dangerous. That is a very difficult obstacle. One thing that is very difficult for me to explain adequately, My Lord, is that these people have been taught that if they don't have complete compliance they will lose their salvation, and that is the most important thing. For them to leave they are going to lose their salvation, and there's probably none of us that can appreciate the magnitude of that. It means they are losing everything. That's basically what I meant by survivor. All right. Thank you, Dr. Beall. Now, finally Dr. Beall, you've been provided with a number of affidavits filed by individuals

Q

A Q

A Q A

Q

29 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) In chief by Ms. Horsman Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 in this reference who either currently reside in FLDS communities or have left FLDS communities? I have. And that includes, I think, something like 13 video affidavits that were filed by the Attorney General for British Columbia? That's correct. Have you had an opportunity to review some or all of those? I read -- I read seven affidavits and I viewed 13, and it was striking to me that those affidavits had close correspondence with the patients with whom I've worked and the six that I interviewed in Hilldale. Well, you've answered my final question, Dr. Beall, which was just to ask if whether that evidence had any impact on the opinions you expressed in your affidavit. So I take it you consider it to be consistent? It is consistent. HORSMAN: Thank you, Dr. Beall. I am sure other parties will have questions for you. Those are my questions, My Lord. COURT: Thank you. Before we break can I have the order of cross-examination, please? WICKETT: My Lord, I believe that I have the privilege of going first and my learned friend Ms. Pongracic-Speier is going to go next, and I don't know that there is anyone else. TRASK: Ten minutes. COURT: Thank you. We'll take a break. CLERK: Order in court. Court is adjourned for the morning recess. (MORNING RECESS) THE CLERK: Order in court. THE COURT: Mr. Wickett. MR. WICKETT: Thank you, My Lord. for coming here today. THE WITNESS: Thank you.

A Q A Q A

Q

A MS. THE MR.

MS. THE THE

Dr. Beall, thank you

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. WICKETT: Q I should introduce myself. We have not met. My name is Robert Wicket and I am counsel for the FLDS in this reference. A Thank you.

30 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q And you understand, Dr. Beall, that this reference is concerned with the constitutionality in Canada of the criminal prohibition on polygamy? A Yes. Q And you have used the phrase "polygamy" throughout your reports? A Yes. Q Survivors of polygamy, et cetera. What is the definition of polygamy that you've used? In other words, how have you defined it in your reports? A I defined it as more than one wife with a man. Q In other words, polygyny? A Yes. Q Is that fair to say? A That would be fair. Q And were you told to -- by anybody to use that particular definition or is that just something you came up with on your own? A I've had to use many terms such as, in respect for FLDS, plural marriage. Q Right. A But in the literature I have seen polygamy as much as polygyny, and I think in Utah I hear polygamy more than other terms and it just seemed considerable and appropriate. MR. WICKETT: Now, My Lord, I pause just for a moment. A matter arose the other day that gave me some pause for concern with respect to the doctor's file and cross-examination and it led me to consider whether there was going to be objections. I have decided not to do that, but rather than deal with this particular issue in respect to the file and in cross-examination I raise that to you now, My Lord, and also for the witness, so these questions may bear relevance to something. Q Doctor, you're familiar with the statute -- the federal statute in the United States called the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act 1996? A I am. Q And that's commonly referred to as HIPA? A Yes. Q Common name for it. And I appreciate, Doctor, that you're not a lawyer and I'm not going to be asking you any legal opinions, so to speak, but I'm going to suggest to you that HIPA has application to your practice as a clinical

31 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 A Q psychologist; is that correct? Significant. Yes. And I want to ask you some questions about your understanding of the applicability of that statute, as you understand it, in your clinical practice. Firstly HIPA is a federal statute to your understanding, in part -- part of it provides for privacy and confidentiality rights to patients -Yes. -- who receive treatment from doctors? Yes. And it applies to psychologists? It does. And, in fact, there are particular provisions in the statute that deal with confidentiality and privacy of psychoanalyst's notes? Yes. Correct? Yes. And your understanding is, Doctor, that absent a fairly detailed patient authorization or a court order, I suppose, for our purposes that you as a clinician, psychological clinician, cannot use or disclose psychotherapy notes or tests of the persons you've treated. Is that your understanding? That's correct, yes. Now your opinions in this case as you have said in your report are based upon the clinical treatment of in total 30 people? Yes. Of those 22 were formerly members of the FLDS? Correct. And of the 22, to that subset for a moment, 6 were women and the balance were men, which would be 16? Yes. The other 8 that make up the 30 were eight women from non-FLDS, Mormon to use -- to coin the term Mormon fundamentalist groups? Correct. And the '05 paper, 2005 paper that you attached to -- as Exhibit A to your affidavit number 1 was based upon your treatment of the 22 people from the FLDS, that is the five women and the 16 men largely? Largely.

A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q

A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q

A

32 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q At that time -- the point I'm making, Doctor, is at that time you hadn't treated -- as of 2005 when you wrote the paper you hadn't treated yet the 8 people from the non-FLDS group? Actually, that would not be accurate. I had also treated some who were not from FLDS. Okay. And you took their clinical experiences into account in writing the 2005 paper? Yes. Now, the -- if you have your first report in front of you, paragraph 5, my learned friend took you to that paragraph and I won't read it of course but it summarizes -I'm sorry, which paragraph. My apologies, Doctor. Paragraph 5. Paragraph 5. Okay. And that's the paragraph that summarizes what you've just told me. Yes. And your observations of those particular people, what they told you and your observations with respect to their disorders and your treatment form the foundation of the opinion that you've provided in this reference? Yes. Is that fair to say? In drafting this report and in preparing your opinion, and I'm sorry, I refer to it as report but your affidavit to be more accurate? Yes. In preparing your two affidavits and your opinion for this court did you use or rely upon your clinical notes of your 30 patients? Actually, no, I didn't. Okay. So in -- the answer to the next question will be obvious. You didn't obtain authorizations from those people to use or disclose their personal information? No. And their notes per se were not used. And so as we go through the report, and I'll come to some specifics perhaps in a moment, but as we go through the report is it your evidence that the factual statements you've made about what people have told you? M'mm-hmm. Et cetera? M'mm-hmm.

A Q A Q

A Q A Q A Q

A Q

A Q A Q

A Q

A Q A

33 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q A You weren't relying in any way on the notes that you'd made of what those people actually told you? No, everything I have in here as far as it relates to the observations of these organizations are retained in my mind. I have them. That may seem odd to you, but there's so much repetition, there is so much in common between them that major themes have emerged that are easily to discriminate between. So it's not a tremendous body of information to know because of the repetition of themes. Right. And it creates something of an issue for me, and I'll give you an example of the problem in just a moment, but were I to drill down by questions, by asking questions into the specifics of what some of those people have told you to test what you've said in your report, you're not able to specifically refer to individuals or answer questions that relate to specific things you've been told. Would that be fair to say? That's accurate. And likewise, obviously you haven't produced the clinical notes here. That would be a problem with HIPA. And the notes -- those notes would contain the statements I suppose that you say you've remembered and that form the foundation of your report? Yes. Okay. Now, as an example of what I am driving at, Doctor, if you could turn to paragraph 20 of your report. You have that in front of you, paragraph 20? Oh, Pardon me. I went to page 20. Excuse me. No, my apologies to you. Page 6? Yes. Excuse me. Yes. And in the third line there -- well, I'll read the whole paragraph just to lead into my question: It's important to consider the impacts of polygamy on adolescent development. About 30 percent of the women I have treated who have fled polygamy had been married before the age of 17. A Q Yes. The majority of women also stated that they

Q

A Q

A Q

A Q A Q

34 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 had fled polygamy to protect their children. A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q You see that statement? Yes. Now, did -- when you use "the majority of women" you are referring presumably not just to the five from the FLDS but rather the entire group? Yes. Okay. How many of the women said that they had fled polygamy to protect their children? I don't know an exact number. But when you say "majority" you mean more than half? More than half. And that's based, as you said, on your recollection of your treatment? Yes. And did any particular woman of that majority use -- actually say to you that she had fled polygamy to protect her children? No, they did not use that language, no. Right. If we were to -- if we were to look at the language they actually used -- I'm asking because I have no way of telling because I don't have your notes. Yes. But did some of the women say what they were fleeing was physically abusive relationships? Yes. All of them? No, not all of them. A majority were leaving some form of abusive relationship or conditions they felt were intolerable that may have been based on childhood conditions as well. And so it would be fair to say or more accurate to say -- this sentence, my apologies, would be more accurate if it simply said that the majority of the women said that they were fleeing abuse to protect their children. Would that be fair to say? I'm afraid that would be too narrow because it wasn't just the abuse per se, it was the conditions of control and feeling that every moment they made was somehow being observed or scrutinized, not only by a husband or other sister wives, but also by the leadership of the church because in a number of cases they had been vocal

A Q A Q A

Q

A

35 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 about their disagreement about something and they had become more increasingly observed and scrutinized because of that. So it was this -the general condition of feeling unsafe and insecure in that environment. All right. Now, that's a good answer. Thank you. The difficulty is that in answering the question you've summarized again just using your recollection of what a large group of people have told you. Yes. Is that fair to say? Yes. They didn't all say that? No. Or is it fair to say that no particular one said that? The individuals said things of course in different ways and I cannot be precise on the words, but the content was of that nature, yes. And if I was to continue asking questions throughout this report with respect to the comments you've made similar to this one, women have told me this or women have -- men have told me that, I would be getting the same kinds of answers, I take it, that your recitation of what you've been told is a synthesis in your own mind and a recollection without reference to notes of what you've been told by 30 people over six or seven years? The notes have been referred to frequently over the years but in preparation for this I felt I had sufficient grasp that I did not need to go into each case and dig out the information, that's correct. And the only way that we could dig into those notes to determine, to test the accuracy of what you've told us would of course be to either get those patients' consent to release them; right? Yes. Or presumably a court order. The five women in particular, and I'm addressing myself to them for the moment, that were from the FLDS. Excuse me, do you mean six? My apologies, Doctor. Six. I don't know why I have written five down here. Six women. Thank

Q

A Q A Q A Q A Q

A

Q

A Q

A Q

36 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 you. I take it based on -- you can tell me based on your knowledge of them and treatment of them that they would not want their privileged notes disclosed in court? That is correct. And one of the problems if such an order were made, it's not being sought but if it were made, is that because there are so few of them the notes, that is to say six, that the notes if revealed would, because of the nature of the questions that you were posing and the answers that you were receiving, would be likely or possible to identify them? Yes, among other issues. Yes, and that would be a great concern for them, would it not? They would consider it a life-or-death concern. Correct. And in preparing this report that you have today did you consider the possibility that there was going to be a disclosure -- a request for disclosure of those notes? It wasn't considered. You just didn't think it could happen? Well, knowing HIPA as I do and having worked in forensics and in the court system for many years I knew that that would not be allowed. Did you take some advice about what the rules are in Canada? I had talked with counsel about that and felt the position was a safe one that those notes should not be brought. Okay. So you've received some advice then that had such an order been brought that there was not likely that anyone was going to order that those notes redacted or otherwise be produced for cross-examination? No, if those were requested they would not be produced. Even if ordered by the Court? If I may, when these women came to work with me they were very afraid. Some of them feared for their lives. I had to guarantee to them I would protect their privacy and under no conditions would I disclose them and I will keep that promise. Okay. Thank you. That's a very straightforward

A Q

A Q A Q

A Q A Q A Q

A Q A

Q

37 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 and honest answer. Could you please turn in your report to paragraph 63 and I'll find the -- page 21. Thank you. I want to focus on your conclusion and then perhaps work our way backward as little bit. The last sentence of paragraph 63 of your report says: There is strong evidence that the conditions faced by members of polygamist communities prevent the natural unfolding of their minds and personality and lock them into a life that is beneath their potential. A Q Yes. Would it be a better statement, or would you agree that a more fair statement would be that the evidence -- excuse me, there is strong evidence that the conditions faced by the people you examined prevent the natural unfolding of their minds? The problem with limiting the statement is this: it must be granted that the information given to me by my patients could be subject to distortion to some extent because my position on this was not only based on what they told me about themselves but about their siblings and about other family members who had experienced similar things to themselves. And because of the tremendous convergence from all these different sources of information in my experience I have made this conclusion. Well, and I take it from that answer what you're saying is that your treatment of the -- and I'll focus just on the FLDS for the time being if you don't mind, but based on your clinical treatment of the 22 people from the FLDS that conclusions could be drawn as you've given here with respect to the entire FLDS community. Is that what you've done? No, that's not accurate either. Okay. And I appreciate you giving me opportunity to explain. Here's part of the problem. The FLDS community is not a unified community in this respect. It is a caste system. There is an inner

A Q

A

Q

A Q A

38 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 circle of those who have privileges and what they call blessings because of families they belong to. Those I have worked with except for one exception were not in that inner circle and they were more indigent. They had less resources. Life was very harsh for them. So I cannot generalize to the whole FLDS community but I can make some generalizations concerning those outside that inner circle, and that's what I've done. I could have been more precise here but it seemed to be pedantic to make that discrimination here, but there are two FLDS communities if you will. Do you consider the 22 people that you examined from the FLDS community to be representative, if I can use that word, of -- and this is your word, you say there were two castes within the FLDS? That's your view? That's my experience of the patients, yes. Right. But the 22 people that you treated were from the, using your words, the less privileged class; is that right? Yes. And I had made a generalization into that class, yes. And those persons that came to you for treatment, the 22 people, began with a referral from -forgive me if I get the name wrong, but Health and Services in Utah? Actually it's a division of Workforce Services under that large organization, so, yes, you're correct. I just guessed. Good job. A number of the -- as you've said in your evidence in chief, a number of the patients that you've received that comprise the 22 came from the Diversity Foundation? Yes. And how many of the 22? Give me just a minute. All but two. And the Diversity Foundation is an organization run by a fellow by the name of Dan Fisher? Correct. And he is to your knowledge -- you tell me if you know this or don't know it, in charge of or responsible for some of the litigation, in fact, a great deal of litigation brought in the United

Q

A Q A Q

A Q A Q

A Q A Q A Q

39 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 A Q A Q A Q States against the FLDS? I am not aware of that. Okay. Were you aware of the participation of the Diversity Foundation in what's known as the "lost boys" litigation? I am not. Okay. You said that some of the people that were referred to you came to you from Tapestry against Polygamy? Yes. I got to do the arithmetic but we've been talking about FLDS. You said all but two -- I just want to get the numbers right. How many came from Tapestry of your clients? None of the males. The primary referral base for the males was Diversity. The females -- some of females came from Tapestry. And you're speaking of, just so we're speaking apples and apples, and you're speaking of the entire group of 30? Yes. The Diversity Foundation, in fact, has paid for the treatment of some of your patients; is that right? That is correct. And how much have you been paid by Diversity? That's not a number I can give with accuracy. I can assist you perhaps. I have read some of the transcripts of your testimony in Texas and I recall from one of those transcripts that you mentioned a number of $19,000. Now, that was awhile ago. Does that refresh you in any way? That number was taken from the books so that would be accurate. I just don't remember that far back. So it would be $19,000 and perhaps a bit more if there's been treatment since your testimony in the Texas cases? Yes. Now, with respect again to the 22 persons formerly in the FLDS that you treated obviously all of them left FLDS. It's obvious, isn't it? Yes. You've not performed any psychological evaluations on persons that are still members of the FLDS, have you? I have not. And in relying on the narratives that you received

A Q A Q A Q A Q

A Q A Q A Q A Q

40 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 from the 22 people were you concerned in any way that there would be some exaggeration or bias or you would not necessarily be receiving the full story? Was that an issue for you? It was an issue and that's why in the paper I stated that, as a disqualifier or qualifier, depending on which way you want to look at it, that I suspected that the information I gleaned from these people did not represent those were happy with the FLDS, which I deduced would largely be from the inner circle. Okay. And I would add that there must be an allowance made that even those who I did work with had some differences with those that stayed even that were on the outer circle, or not in the elite group. You've satisfied yourself though that the stories you were receiving or the evidence, if I can put it that way, you were receiving from your patients was truthful? Yes, and I had been trained in malingering and had -Right. -- and looked at the different aspects of potential malingering as I work with them, as I must in my field, and I was satisfied because of those factors and because of the consistency that the weight was in favour of, yes, these are truthful accounts. And as a clinician it's not your job of course to be cross-examining your patients, you're there to treat their psychological issues; correct? That's correct. Of the 16 men, and again I'm referring to the FLDS group that you examined, as I understand it you made a diagnosis of 11 of those 16 of post-traumatic stress disorder; is that right? Please rephrase the question. I'm not sure I understood. Absolutely. You treated 16 men from the FLDS? Yes. And of those 16 you diagnosed 11 of them with post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD? You have the best of me. Please help me understand how you came up with the number 11. Well, I'll get to that perhaps in a moment, but do you recall that 11 of 16 were diagnosed with PTSD

A

Q A

Q

A Q A

Q A Q

A Q A Q A Q

41 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 by you? Is that something you recall now or you just don't remember? A Well, I don't remember 11 with post-traumatic stress disorder per se. I recall the majority of them had post-trauma conditions but I don't recall 11 exactly with post-traumatic stress disorder. Q All right. A I would appreciate the information. Q Yeah. I mean, to answer your question, Doctor, although I'm supposed to be the one asking the questions, I took that from one of the transcripts and perhaps we can have a look at that for the moment if it would be of assistance to you. A Please. MR. WICKETT: My Lord, I will pass to you a binder I've put together of transcripts and this contains all of them, and would you please pass one, Madam Clerk, to the -- and I can give the big one here -- and to the others I apologize, but I was photocopying a lot of paper here. Q The transcript I'm interested in, Doctor, is the last one in the tab. It is an appearance -A Are we looking at -- is it number 4? Q Yes, it's number 4, and the date -- just a moment I'm working from my copies here -- is March 20th of 2010. Excuse me, 18th of March, 2010. It's the fourth tab. Do you have that? A I have it. Q And just to set the formalities you were appearing as a witness in a case known as the State of Texas versus Merril Leroy Jessop? A Yes. Q And that appearance was in district court, Schleicher County, Texas, on the 18th of March 2010? A Yes. Q And on that day and in that place you were sworn to tell the truth? A Yes. Q Okay. So the references I'm referring to, and let me just find them. If you go to page 14, please, Doctor. A Yes. Q Do you have that? A Yes. Q I'm just going to read some of the questions and answers and we'll see if that can refresh your

42 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 A Q A Q A Q memory, Doctor. Thank you. I'll begin at line 13 where Mr. Hudson -- and Mr. Hudson was counsel for the accused in that case? Correct. You were being cross-examined? I was. And he said this: Q A What are the effects that did that have on men in that community? My findings, counsel, were the following, these men presented with anxiety and the post-trauma intrusive symptoms of flashbacks and nightmares like the FLDS women victims. There was one area that was different than the women and that was the prevalence of anger. The young men had anger symptoms and the women did not. Is that it? Yes, sir. And did you diagnose all 15 of those with PTSD? No. How many? 11.

Q A Q A Q A A Q A Q

A Q A Q A Q

Do you recall being asked those questions? I don't remember that -- I don't. Okay. But ... Sorry, let me just ask. These are again formalities for court here, Doctor, so let me just ask a series of questions to you and I'll give you a chance to explain. Okay. And do you recall being asked those questions? I don't. Therefore you can't answer the next question, is you don't know if you gave those answers? If it's in the record I presume I did, but at this moment in time I don't remember giving that answer. Okay. The question that you were being asked at the time though was obviously something you knew at that time; correct?

43 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 A Q A Q A Q A Q A Yes. And you were sworn to tell the truth at that time? Yes. And you did so? I did. Now, in looking at that now are you not refreshed at all in your recollection in any way as to how many of the 15 or 16 men were diagnosed with PTSD? The part of the problem I'm having is there have been five cases. Right. And there's a fairly significant amount of information involved in each one so it's hard for me to make a distinction between the five. What apparently happened is that I did review the records upon the recommendation of the prosecuting attorney to have more specific information for this particular case, which I did, and which preceded this answer. But at this moment today I can't remember giving that number of 11. And it bespeaks a larger issue. You of course can't recall what all of your 30 patients have told you over 5 or 6 years of clinical treatment sitting here in court today? That's correct. Returning to the issue of the 16 men and the 11 diagnosed with PTSD, and I appreciate you say now you don't recall whether 11 were diagnosed with PTSD, but is it fair to say that most or all of the men had been physically or sexually abused? I don't think that's a fair statement. No. If I may. Of course. Part of the problem -- and I respected Dr. Davies' struggle with this -- post-traumatic stress disorder is usually found in situations where a clear identifiable trauma can be made such as in war trauma. In the vets I work with there's usually an incident where a friend or someone he has known has been killed. Or in an assault there is an identifiable perpetrator of the assault and so forth. The problem I have had with FLDS is that it's not possible to identify a single incident trauma, but there is a climate and that climate is made up of a sense of danger that one is not safe, a sense that it is necessary to suppress or push under consciousness traumatic

Q

A Q

A Q A

44 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 experiences because the expression of emotions is not allowed, a lack of support and so forth. And the research shows in PTSD that these conditions contribute significantly to post-trauma conditions. So one of the reasons I haven't felt it was necessary to glean through all of these files is that all of these people explained a climate or an environment where the conditions existed that were conducive to post-trauma conditions. Witnessing violence of others for example, can cause as much or more trauma as violence against oneself. And so this -- these conditions in this environment contributes to these post-trauma conditions of sufficient magnitude to make a diagnosis of PTSD. Okay. But returning to my question, which was to the issue of physical or sexual abuse of these men, perhaps we could return to the transcript if you don't mind, Doctor. Sure. And we can pick up just where I left off. Back to tab 4. I'm sorry, the page number? 15. Do you have that, Doctor? I do. I'm just going to pick up where I left off at line 4. At the top. Page 15. Excuse me. Yes. I'm just going to do what I did before which is read some questions and answers and then I'll have a question for you. Beginning at line 4: Q A Q A Q A Q A Of those 15 men were any of them sexually abused? I cannot recall with exactness so I hesitate to say. To my knowledge, counsel, I believe several of them were. But not all? No, sir. Physical abuse? Yes, sir. All 15 or less, like you said, with the sexual abuse? I would say the 11 who had post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms had a history of physical abuse.

Q

A Q A Q A Q A Q

45 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Do you recall being asked those questions? Yes. And did you give those answers? Yes. And were those answers true? Yes. Does that refresh your memory then? It does. I appreciate your patience with me. Absolutely fine. So just in summary then, 11 of the 16 men were diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and those 11 who had been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress had suffered physical and sexual abuse, or sexual abuse? Physical abuse primarily. And turning to the five women again focussing on the FLDS group, excuse me, six women. I've done that throughout my notes and I apologize. They also had suffered physical and sexual abuse -- or sexual abuse; is that fair to say? Each of the six women did suffer different forms of abuse. The reason I'm pausing on this is it's blurry between physical and sexual abuse because unwanted sex felt abusive but it would not be defined as such by the Courts. But it felt abusive if it was unwanted sex. But it also felt like physical abuse if there was insistence that there be sex. So it was a blurry area. Give me just a moment. Unwanted sex was a common feature in these relationships. At least some of the time. Yes. Sexual assault? Yes. And apart from sexual assault, physical abuse, spousal abuse more commonly defined? Yes. And, in fact, of the six women three were diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder? Post trauma conditions, yes. I think part of something I could have been better at, to be honest, is be more precise in the diagnosis of PTSD versus post-trauma conditions, because it was close in PTSD that it may not have had sufficient number of -- see, each area of post-traumatic stress disorder has criteria and if there were intrusive experiences like I described and if there was a high enough level of anxiety it was

A Q A Q A Q A Q

A Q

A

Q A Q A Q A

46 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 considered sufficient post-trauma to me to be PTSD and I called it such. And of the six women, so I can get an answer to my question, three were diagnosed by you with PTSD? Yes. Okay. I'm sorry, I'm trying to think through some of these things I haven't thought of for a long time. Now, in the treatment that you gave your patients you interviewed them and used interview techniques that you were trained as a psychologist to use, to elicit the information you needed to make a diagnosis? Yes. You would have asked for a history, et cetera? The way I usually do it is I have written an intake assessment form that is as non-threatening as possible. So I would ask them about some symptoms that would not be -- not feel self-incriminating to discuss and then the other parts where they would identify traumas they would simply read it and check them off. Right. Did you use -- did you utilize hypnosis on any of your patients? No. And I'll come back to this in just a moment, but the recover of memory through hypnosis is a very controversial area; correct? I don't even consider it controversial; I think it's unethical. And it's your evidence that you didn't hypnotize any of your patients? No, I do not -- I'm adamantly against and I've even taught on the unethical nature of retrieving memories through hypnosis. I do not do that. Okay. The reason I ask that question, Doctor, is I've just picked up something from one of the books that's in the -- I think it's in our library, My Lord, written by Brent Jeffs. Yes. Called Lost Boy. Yeah, I saw his video. Yes. He's a witness in this case and in his book he speaks about his treatment by you. You know what, Doctor, I'm not even going to ask you because I expect you're going to tell me even if it's in the book you don't want to be talking

Q A Q A Q

A Q A

Q A Q A Q A Q

A Q A Q

47 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 about one of your patients because the prohibitions inhibit -A No, that's not my answer. Q Okay, I'm sorry. A I did not treat him. Q You did not treat? A I did not. Q Okay. I'm going to read -- have you read his book? A I haven't. Q And this is a question perhaps for him and not for you, but I would like to read this to you and maybe you can tell me that this is -- I expect you're going to tell me that this is wrong. MS. HORSMAN: My Lord, he's just said he didn't treat Brent Jeffs, so I don't see -THE COURT: But let's let the doctor have an opportunity to -MR. WICKETT: Well, in fairness, because this is going to come up later, I think in fairness the doctor ought to be given a chance to see what Brent Jeffs has said and to respond to it. And my apologies, My Lord, my learned friend Ms. Herbst very, very kindly went to the library and got me -- to the bookstore and I only have a copy of it. THE COURT: That's fine. MR WICKETT: It's in the library as part of the Brandeis Brief, I do believe. Q So Doctor, I'm just going read this to you and then I'll let you see it, but I only have the one copy and it will come to His Lordship. And I will read two paragraphs which begin at page 195 of the book, and he's talking about his treatment by you. He says I was treated by Dr. Larry Beall in downtown Salt Lake and he says this, referring to his first day of treatment. The first time we didn't do much. I lay down on the couch and tried a brief period of hypnosis to see if I can relax enough to enter that state. Although I wasn't able to stay in it very long or go very deep I was able to begin the process. It wasn't that different from being in very calm, focussed frame of mind. It wasn't scary or mysterious, in fact, it felt a lot like the Buddhist meditation I had done a few times

48 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 with my brother Dave. And then over the page he says, at beginning of the first -- second section on page 196 of the book: In our second session Dr. Beall hypnotized me again, first bringing me to my safe place in the mountains as he counted backwards from ten. Then came the hard part, he had me recall -And he goes on from there. Now, I completely understand, Doctor, this is his recollections not yours. Yes. That's not right though? It is not. Okay. Would you like to look at this, Doctor? I said I would give you -No, I trust your reading of it. WICKETT: Thank you. My Lord, do you want me to pass this up to you? COURT: No, that's fine. I understand the extract. Thank you. WICKETT: Thank you. Turning to another issue, Doctor, could I ask you to turn to paragraph 45 of your -COURT: I'm just wondering, Mr. Wickett, obviously we're not going to mark the transcripts as evidence. WICKETT: No, correct. COURT: Is there -- should we mark them for identification? WICKETT: I don't believe that's necessary, My Lord. They're previous statements under oath. There's no need to mark them anyway, in my submission. COURT: You used what you needed to use? WICKETT: Yes. COURT: Thank you. WICKETT: We may -- I've got some more cross-examination -- we may come back to them so I'll ask you to hold on to it just for a moment and then I promise to take it away. COURT: That's sort of what I was getting at. WICKETT: No, I promise I'll do that.

A Q A Q A MR. THE MR. Q THE MR. THE MR.

THE MR. THE MR.

THE MR.

49 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q A Q Doctor, paragraph 45? Are we back in my affidavit? Sorry? Yes. Back to your affidavit, please, paragraph 45. And I just want to read paragraph 45 to you and then I'll have a question about it? Yes. You say this: Under the conditions of the FLDS community the adolescent girl or boy cannot give voluntary consent. This is due to the physical development of their brain. And I pause there to say that that conclusion is something that you've taken from someone else, you're not a neurologist with an expertise in development of the brain? That's correct. But you read about this and incorporated it into your opinion? Correct. Right. This is due to the physical development of their brain, their physical, emotional and financial dependence, their inexperience making complex decisions and the fact that they cannot adequately weigh consequences, risks and the alternatives. The issues that surround adolescent consent also apply to adults over the age of 18. The paths of thoughts and feelings regimented and established in childhood and adolescence continue into adulthood with little deviation producing adults that could be expected to fulfil what is required of them by their leaders. A Q Yes. Now, in looking at that paragraph do I take it that it is your opinion that adults in the FLDS cannot consent to marriage? Leaving aside the adolescence issue; I'm focussing on adults. No, I'm not saying that. Okay. So perhaps we can narrow this down a little bit. What do you mean when you say "the issues

A Q

A Q A Q

A Q

50 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 that surround adolescent consent also apply to adults over the age of 18"? I'm speaking of the conditioning and indoctrination that shapes how they think. Yes. But although those are influential I could not say that they're not able to make consent. Because it reaches a point absent mental illness or other issues when people become adults capable of making decisions for themselves. As a general proposition you would agree with that? Yes. And the process by which adults make these decisions is of course a function of this society that they have been brought up in including their religious beliefs. Would you agree with that? It's a factor, yes. And the fact that someone was brought up in a particular religious faith or belief doesn't as a general proposition affect their ability to make adult decisions and to consent to marriage, sex, et cetera? I think there are factors to be weighed there. And the reason I say that I've had patients who were more or less vulnerable to conditioning and indoctrination, not just in the FLDS community but in various communities, and there's a kind of vulnerability that can make them more or less able to make responsible decisions. But I guess what I'm driving at, Doctor, is that when you say "conditioning," every religious faith teaches its adherents to believe certain things? Yes. And some of the things taught by religious leaders are not things that are empirically provable; correct, they're matters of faith? Yes. By definition? Yes, that's correct. And in matters of faith people can be and commonly are proscribed to behave in a particular way? Yes. And different faiths have different behaviours and standards expected; correct? Yes. And that's true for all the major faiths? It is true.

A Q A Q

A Q

A Q

A

Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A

51 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A Yes. And the FLDS faith, for example, is an offshoot of the LDS -- what's known as the LDS or the Mormon church? Yes. I understand you are a member of that faith? I am. And in a leadership position I understand; is that right? I wouldn't consider it a leadership position. And I don't mean to make this personal to you, but by way of example in your faith and in your religion you hold certain religious convictions? Correct. And ironically some of the convictions and teachings of the Mormon church bear some similarities to the FLDS faith? Oh, they do. Indeed the FLDS, for example, has -- when I say LDS I mean the Mormon church, My Lord, the LDS has a prophet? Yes. And he is the one that is able to -- the only person in the church able to receive revelations from God; is that right? That would be incorrect. All right. Please correct it. Please correct me. One of the differences between LDS and FLDS, and I presume you want me to discuss this. Well -Because as it relates to revelation obviously. FLDS has a very centralized belief in revelation coming from their prophet to everyone, whereas in the LDS church it's considered -- revelation is considered more decentralized. While the revelation can come to a prophet revelation is also the province of every member of that church. So there is more openness for everyone to receive revelation as needed to conduct their affairs. Excuse me just for a moment. I want to take you back to the transcript because I took that question, sir, from something you had been asked previously. Can we go back to the same transcript for a moment? Yes. Is that number 4? It is. And I believe I'm going to read some questions and answers to you again and I believe it leads into what you've just said. I'm going to

Q

A Q

52 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 begin on page 62. Do you have page 62 in front of you? I do. All right. I'm going to read some questions and answers again. Yes. This is beginning at the top line 1, and I believe that you were under cross-examination also by Mr. Hudson. Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A A Q A Q A Q And you in your church also have prophet; correct? Correct. And you call them the prophet; right? He's called the prophet. And mainstream LDS churches believe that the prophet is the only one who can receive revelations from God. For the body of the church, correct. Correct. For the rest of the people in the church? Yes. And that is the only conduit the members of your church have to God is through that prophet, their prophet? Incorrect. Okay. He's the one that receives revelations from God. For the entire church, yes.

A Q A Q

A Q A

You were asked those questions? Yes. And you gave those answers? Yes. And they were true? Yes. Okay. And I wanted to give you a chance to see that, Doctor, because it -- the answer given here that I've just read to you is slightly different than what you just told me. And I'm not cross-examining you about LDS theology. I know. If I may. Yes. When I say he's the prophet for the church that's correct, but he doesn't give revelations for the members of the church in their private lives, he gives revelation to govern the whole church as an

53 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 entirety. But the individual members are supposed to be able to receive their own guidance in the individual lives they have. Right. And just continuing with the discussion, the concept of priesthood which arises in FLDS theology and is something that's referred to in your material is also a concept that exists in the LDS church? That is correct. And the concept of the priesthood is a person in leadership; is that right? Again, I don't -- you tell me? The priesthood is given to worthy male members, so it's not necessary to be a leader to have it. It is restricted though to men? It is. Can we turn to paragraph 58, please. I'm sorry, Doctor, 58 of your affidavit. I'm flipping back and forth. Do you have that? I do. And I think my learned friend Ms. Horsman took you to this or to the general subject matter, but in paragraph 58 and then continuing on over the next page you -- I'll just read paragraph 58: The threats and fears and hurts and emotional impact on women fleeing polygamy are comparable to those experienced by women fleeing domestic violence. And the differences, you say, can be placed in two categories. One is prior conditions and the two is resources to leave; right? Yes. And then in the following paragraphs you've gone on to explain how the trauma suffered by your FLDS patients differs from the trauma suffered by other patients who have suffered domestic abuse but are not members of the FLDS? Yes. And you set two main differences, being prior conditions and the resources to leave. And I wonder without reading through all of the-- what you've said here about prior conditioning, which in summary is simply that women in the FLDS have been taught a set of beliefs that makes it very difficult to separate themselves in summary, and

Q

A Q A Q A Q A Q

A Q

A Q

54 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 secondly -- let me get the question and then you can respond. Oh, please, yes. And then secondly they differ from other women in domestic abuse situations because they have fewer resources, financial resources, et cetera to be able to leave the abusive situation? In part. Okay. And do you accept that if -- that if the women in the FLDS were fleeing abuse had access to -- more access to outside agencies, medical care, police, family support et cetera that that would be a positive development for them? Yes. And do you have any thought on whether the removal of the criminal prohibition on polygamy might have some positive impact on these women and their ability to access outside agencies medical care, police and family support? Is that a matter you've given some thought to? It's outside the scope of my knowledge. Yes. Indeed. I have no opinion. I guess we can look at it a different way. I mean, polygamy has been outlawed in Utah since 1890 to your knowledge? Yes. But the FLDS is still there? Yes. The problems that exist within that community that you've identified -- well, two things. One is the community has survived all those years? Yes. In spite of the prohibition on polygamy, and the problems that exist within that community that you have identified have existed within a framework of illegality? That would be correct. And the criminal prohibition on polygamy in Utah, based on your knowledge and your analysis of your patients, has served to further separate these people from mainstream society, and when I say "these people" I mean your patients? I believe it's a bit of an oversimplification to attribute the factors I have had to deal with with these people to it being a criminal -- criminal practices are in their community. And one of the

A Q

A Q

A Q

A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q

A Q

A

55 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Mr. Wickett 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 main factors would be the ability to exercise choice. That's one -- when I say conditioning I think the limits on being able to make choices is one of the major components of that conditioning. Q Right. And one of the issues that affects choice is access to knowledge. In other words, knowledge of rights, other legal rights? A Correct. Q Social rights? A Yes. Q And one of the things that you've said in your report is that persons within the FLDS in your opinion are separated from those. They don't know about their legal rights? A That's true. Q Or their social rights, and that's part of the problem? A It is. Q That's what you said. And you're aware that in the past there have been attempts made by legal authorities to break up, if I can put it that way, the FLDS. For example, you're aware that in the 1950s there was a raid by the police in Utah, you're aware of that? A I am. Q And you're aware that what happened in that case was that the authorities went into the communities in Short Creek, took the women and children away and put all of them in prison. Generalizing? A Yes. Q And the community survived that. It's still here today? A They did survive it. Q And in 2007 the authorities in Texas went into the FLDS community near San Antonio Texas and took all of the women and children away, and I don't know they put all of the men in prison, but they certainly went in and took all of women and children away. You're aware of that? A Yes. Q And the effect of that was overturned by the Texas courts and the community down there continues to exist. You're aware of that? A Yes. MR. WICKETT: Thank you, Doctor, for being so patient with my questions. THE WITNESS: Thank you.

56 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Ms. Pongracic-Speier 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 MR. WICKETT: Thank you, My Lord. THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Wickett. We'll take the lunch break. Dr. Beall, in our jurisdiction when you're under cross-examination we ask that you not discussion your evidence with anyone. THE WITNESS: Yes, My Lord. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. WICKETT: Perhaps, My Lord, just before you go, we'll leave that. I don't know if any of the other parts will refer to it. THE COURT: Thank you. THE CLERK: Court is adjourned until 2:00 p.m. (STOOD DOWN) (NOON RECESS) THE CLERK: Order in court. LAWRENCE BEALL, a witness for the AGBC, recalled. THE COURT: Ms. Pongracic-Speier. MS. PONGRACIC-SPEIER: Thank you, Chief Justice. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. PONGRACIC-SPEIER: Q Dr. Beall, my name is Monique Pongracic-Speier. I'm counsel for the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association in these proceedings and I have some questions for you about your evidence. Now, you've outlined at paragraph 11 of your affidavit that your opinion is based mostly on your clinical experience and that's been covered earlier; yes? A Correct. Q And you also say at paragraph 5 of your affidavit that you have worked with 30 people who have left polygamist communities and 22 of these of course were members of the FLDS. Now, when you say "worked with" does that mean that you've been providing clinical counselling to them? A Yes. Q Okay. So would I be correct in assuming then that the six people that you spoke with in Colorado City in preparation for your testimony in Texas are not among that group? A Correct. Q And the six women that you spoke to in Colorado

57 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Ms. Pongracic-Speier 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 City, do they -- does information that you took from them form part of the basis of this opinion? Not in a primary sense. It was consistent with what I had found but it wasn't the substance of this at all. Okay. And when you communicated with those six women how did you do so? Meaning when I was with them how did I talk with them? Yes. It was open-ended. I wanted them to talk freely without me directing it, so I pretty much said I'm here to learn from you, your experience. So they talked and I took notes. Okay. Would you say it was conversation-like? Yes. Did you have these conversations with them individually? In three cases I did and three other women were together. All right. And there was no formal psychological assessment, I guess, then? There was not. In any case. Thank you. Now, when you testified in Texas and the five cases you've alluded to, my appreciation of those is that they are essentially cases involving child sex abuse? Correct. And so your evidence was aimed at that? Yes. And these were not cases where the conduct in issue was between consenting adults? That is correct. Now, I would like to take you back to your affidavit at paragraphs 12 to 14 and specifically to the multi-axial diagnosis at paragraph 14 which you've already gone through in some respects in your evidence. And under axis 1 the first diagnosis of course you put down as post-traumatic stress disorder? Yes. Is that the principal diagnosis? I would say it's not principal in the sense that it was primary. It was in connection with anxiety to the degree I would say it shared principal position with anxiety.

A Q A Q A

Q A Q A Q A Q

A Q A Q A Q

A Q A

58 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Ms. Pongracic-Speier 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q And as a practising psychologist and a clinician who is making diagnoses I would assume on a daily basis -Yes. -- I would -- would you say it's fair that you are very familiar with the DSM IV? Yes, more in the trauma-related disorders. I don't have much occasion for example to deal with personality disorders or drug-related disorders. Are you familiar with the scheme that is used to articulate a diagnosis for a patient in terms of how the clinician sets out the diagnosis? I am. And so would you agree with me that the primary diagnosis is the diagnosis that is put first under axis 1? Yes. And that is the diagnosis that is considered most responsible for the symptoms? Correct. Now, you earlier took us through some of the events that your patients have suffered and as I understand PTSD, or post-traumatic stress disorder, its essential feature is an extreme stressor. Would you agree with that? Yes. And this extreme stressor occasions symptoms that manifest as a clinical problem? Correct. And they would include intense fear, helplessness or horror, for example; yes? Yes. Yes. And then there are some other diagnostic criteria, as I understand it. One is that there will be symptoms such as re-experiencing or intrusive memories? Correct. And these persist over a period of time of a month or more? Yes. Yes. And would you agree that under the diagnostic scheme of the DSM IV that identifying the traumatic event or events is significant for treatment? I don't believe I would agree with that entirely. Okay. Well, no, I wouldn't agree with that entirely.

A Q A Q A Q

A Q A Q

A Q A

59 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Ms. Pongracic-Speier 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q A Q Would you say that the traumatic event is causally significant to the symptoms? The use of the singular is part of the problem. In complex PTSD there are multiple traumas and it's hard to give weight to any particular trauma. Sure. Okay. And I think it would be fair to say that the PTSD diagnostic criteria in the DSM IV do contemplate situations of traumatic events or stressors in the plural; yes? That's my understanding. Yes. So once those have been identified are they identified as having causal significance to the symptoms? Yes. And as a clinician would I be correct in saying that it is important to identify those so that you can address the hurt the person has experienced? If I may? Yes. That can become problematic and that's one of the reasons I disagree with the use of hypnosis to identify trauma sources. For example, someone may come in with reliving a somatic symptom, a tissue memory. Yes. But they have no memory of an event per se. It's just that periodically they have a tissue memory that is so emphatic and undeniable they come for treatment. Right. I do not try to find the source of that somatic memory. My focus is to use methods that will resolve the symptom, and that may or may not give rise to an identification of the cause. All right. And in the particular group of patients that you've discussed, I guess is the way to put it, in general terms in your affidavit you've identified a number of causes nonetheless? True. There's been sexual abuse? Yes. There's been physical abuse and violence? Correct. Domestic abuse; yes? Yes. Have your clients also reported threats to the person, i.e. their own person, threats of death or

A Q A Q A Q A

Q A

Q A

Q

A Q A Q A Q A Q

60 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Ms. Pongracic-Speier 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 A Q A Q A Q A Q serious physical harm? They have. And what about threats to children? Yes. Or other loved ones? Yes. Now, I would like to take you now to paragraph 15 of your affidavit and in paragraph 15, which is at page 5 -- do you have it? I do. Thank you. You talk about comparing young men's diagnoses to that of the girls in term of PTSD. Now, isn't it the case you haven't treated any girls amongst this population used for this affidavit? The affidavit says, I believe, starting with age 27. M'mm-hmm. And I don't know if that's -- how that -- it's actually the first one was age 17. M'mm-hmm. So that is a typo or something I didn't catch in time. All right. So I did have one that was 17 and we have treated at our clinic a number of children who have been children of adults who have come for treatment. Yes. And they also receive treatment, though not by me, so I did not include them in my numbers. Right. So they're not part of your sample population for the purposes -No. -- for providing these opinions? They're not, but they're part of my awareness because I would work with my colleagues and they would report to me their observations and findings because it had bearing on my work with their parent. PONGRACIC-SPEIER: All right. Thank you, Dr. Beall, those are my questions. COURT: Thank you. PONGRACIC-SPEIER: Thank you Chief Justice. COURT: Ms. Trask.

A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A Q A

MS. THE MS. THE

61 Lawrence Beall (for AGBC) Cross-exam by Ms. Trask 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. TRASK: Q Good afternoon, Dr. Beall. My name is Robin Trask and I'm counsel for the BC Teachers Federation which is the union that represents teachers who work in public schools in British Columbia. And we are an interested person in this proceeding and our interest is around education in polygamist communities. A Yes. Q So I only have a couple of questions. I'm going to focus on that. A Yes. Q If you could turn to paragraph 62 of your affidavit. And in your affidavit you've made a couple of comments about children's education and this one in particular at sub-paragraph C. It's on page 21. Maybe I'll just read that here. And you've said: Children's education. In my observation education within the polygamist community is inferior due to the narrow scope of approved education and the lack of resources and teacher training. Work needs to be done with these children to help them catch up with their peers. And my question for you around this is in your experience with children's education had these children -- what type of education had they received? Were they in a private school setting or public school or home schooled? The ones that I worked with primarily were in the FLDS school in Salt Lake City, ALTA, and that was a church school with heavy emphasis on church-related instruction. And an hour every morning was dedicated to instruction about priesthood history, instructions from leaders and so forth. In the public school it was also, if you will, run by FLDS people who were school teachers and so a similar pattern was there. There was education about church-related matters in the public school also. It was less obvious but nonetheless occurred. So I think I answered your question as far as what was the nature of religious instruction that

A

62 Discussion re 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

Schedule

Q

A Q A Q A MS. THE MS. THE MR. THE MS. THE MR.

THE MR. THE MR.

was in those schools. Yes. Thank you for that explanation. And in addition to your degrees in psychology I noticed in your CV you also have a masters in education? Yes. And are you familiar with critical thinking skills as being an important component of public education? Yes. And in your -- was it your understanding that the individuals you worked with had acquired critical thinking skills through their education? They had not. TRASK: Thank you. Those are all of my questions. WITNESS: Thank you. TRASK: Thank you, Chief Justice. COURT: Thank you very much, Ms. Trask. Does that conclude the cross? Redirect? Or Mr. Dickson, do you have anything? DICKSON: No, I don't. COURT: Okay. Any redirect? HORSMAN: No, I don't. COURT: Dr. Beall, thank you very much for coming to British Columbia and giving evidence. You're excused. Are we witness-less less? JONES: We are -- we have no other witnesses scheduled for today, My Lord. I was hoping that we could use the -- perhaps a little bit of the time to have a preliminary discussion with respect to scheduling of a subsequent hearing for closing submissions. We've been having some preliminary conversations among counsel and it appears that there are two windows. One of them is the last two weeks of February and the other is two weeks beginning March 21st. COURT: So that would be the 14th of February? JONES: Yes, My Lord. COURT: That's fine. On March 21st. JONES: Yes, and you may recall my friends from Canada indicated that they would like as much as six weeks perhaps between the close of evidence and that period. I will let my friend Ms. Strachan speak to that. Strachan. I should know that by now. But from the Attorney General's point of view we would like to proceed as expeditiously as possible.

63 Discussion re 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

Schedule

THE COURT: Ms. Strachan. MS. STRACHAN: My Lord, anticipating that by the end of January we'll conclude the evidence. THE COURT: And that's reasonable, is it? MS. STRACHAN: Yes. THE COURT: As this early date. MS. STRACHAN: I believe it is. We seem to be on track and so forth and able to schedule everybody in who needs to be thanks to the effort of Ms. Zaltz for the Attorney General of British Columbia. It is my request on behalf of Canada that we be given, I'm afraid, a minimum of four weeks to prepare our closing submissions. I anticipate needing that time to be able to incorporate all of the evidence which will have been tendered before the court, viva voce testimony and so forth that we are only hearing now, and that time is going to be necessary for us. Now, I have spoken with a couple of other of my friends who have also expressed a desire for a bit of extra time. Just quite frankly starting in the middle of February would be extremely difficult for us THE COURT: Okay. MS. STRACHAN: And so -THE COURT: Our people -- people are easy either way but the preference of the AGBC was sooner than later, but everybody else is available March 21st, are they? MR. DICKSON: We are, My Lord. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Wickett? Any other? MR. WICKETT: I'm available, My Lord. I'm just concerned about spring break and others may be as well who have kids. I don't know what those days are. THE COURT: I never know now. My kids are well beyond that. So when is that this year? Who knows? MS. GAFFAR: I believe it is March 21st. THE COURT: Would that be a problem for some of you? MR. WICKETT: Well, I'm hoping to remain married throughout this process, My Lord. THE COURT: So that's a problem for you. MR. WICKETT: I'm afraid that it might be. THE COURT: What about -- any chance for March 7th for two weeks? MS. STRACHAN: That is agreeable to us, My Lord. MR. DICKSON: Our senior counsel is away at that time.

64 Discussion re 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

Schedule

THE COURT: Right. Okay. MR. JONES: If it would assist, My Lord, and perhaps it might assist my friend Ms. Strachan, but the way the witnesses are shaping up it would appear that the last two weeks of January are going to be almost entirely viva voce testimony where the evidence of course is already in in affidavit form, and we are under discussions to even further pare down that list. So if the earlier date were chosen it might -- there might be some relief on the front end of that four weeks that Ms. Strachan is concerned about. But at any rate it would appear that one could start one's written submissions if not today than at least in January. MS. STRACHAN: Well, Mr. Jones will be pleased to know that, in fact, we are starting our closing submissions. We are. But of course there's the viva voce testimony. In any event I'm looking at my calendar and looking at possibly the 28 of January being the last day of evidence and if that's the case is it possible for us to book the weeks commencing February 28th and March 7th. I don't want anybody to miss spring break. THE COURT: Mr. Macintosh is away. MR. DICKSON: Yes, he's away from Monday February 28th until the middle of March. THE COURT: Well, do you want to leave it for Monday because maybe there's some more discussion. I'm available either date and the only thing that I can recall I have planned is I'm in Ottawa the 7th and 8th of April. When is Easter this year? MS. STRACHAN: It is -THE COURT: I think it's probably the 22nd of April. MS. STRACHAN: I think that's -- I think that's right. THE COURT: So I'm -- my schedule is I've blocked out quite a bit of time for this so I won't be the problem. Do you want to spend a little more time talking about it? MS. STRACHAN: Well, perhaps not. Everyone can -- we can find out when spring break is and what people's commitments are and if that's agreeable speak to this at our next session. THE COURT: Yes. Let's do that. MS. STRACHAN: And speaking of our next session it looks like, and we can pass on the schedule to Your Lordship, it looks like we have no one booked for Monday the 6th.

65 Discussion re 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

Schedule

THE COURT: Yes. MS. STRACHAN: And we have two witnesses booked for Tuesday, Dr. Grossbard and Professor Wu. Wednesday the 8th Mr. Kendall. THE COURT: Right. MS. STRACHAN: And Thursday and Friday the 9th and 10th Professor Heinrich. THE COURT: Right. So we'd sit Friday not Monday. MS. STRACHAN: That's the proposal. THE COURT: Yes. Thank you, that's fine. Thank you. MR. JONES: My Lord, just one other thing with respect to scheduling and Professor Heinrich. I have sent an e-mail to all of my friends, at least the parties. Professor Heinrich would prefer to go through his report in chief with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation. We've made the technical arrangements with the court and we're going to have everything in place but I wanted to make sure that suited Your Lordship as well. THE COURT: That's fine with me. And he'll make a copy of the PowerPoint available to counsel. MR. JONES: Absolutely, and we'll probably mark it as an exhibit. MS. HERBST: And I'm sorry, My Lord, to engage in conversation like this on the fly but is it proposed that that PowerPoint presentation, if I may ask, be provided in advance, because that is something we would like to see. MR. JONES: I will forward it to everyone as soon as I have it, My Lord, which I expect to be in the next couple of days. MS. HERBST: Thank you, My Lord. THE COURT: Anything else we should do today? Then we're not sitting again until next Tuesday. Thank you.

66 Certification 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 THE CLERK: Order in court. Court is adjourned to Tuesday, December 7th, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED AT 2:27 P.M.) I, SPENCER J. CHAREST, OFFICIAL REPORTER. IN THE PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, CANADA, DO HEREBY CERTIFY: THAT THE PROCEEDINGS WERE TAKEN DOWN BY ME IN SHORTHAND AT THE TIME AND PLACE HEREIN SET FORTH AND THEREAFTER TRANSCRIBED, AND THE SAME IS A TRUE AND CORRECT AND COMPLETE TRANSCRIPT OF SAID PROCEEDINGS TO THE BEST OF MY SKILL AND ABILITY. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SUBSCRIBED MY NAME THIS 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2010.

______________________ SPENCER J. CHAREST OFFICIAL REPORTER

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.