Brief History Of Legal Actions Threatened By And Filed Against The Kinsey
Institute Related To Kinsey's Fraudulent Research
May 1983: Kinsey-co author, Dr. Wardell Pomeroy refuses to debate Dr. Reisman on
CNN TV "Crossfire" and instead threatens to sue Dr. Reisman should she discusses
Kinsey's Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the
Human Female (1953). On Crossfire Dr. Reisman describes her findings of child
sex atrocities conducted for Kinsey's studies. She is not sued.
May 25, 1983: News columnist Patrick Buchanan reports Dr. Reisman's child
sex abuse charges in the press. The Kinsey Institute threatens Buchanan with a
libel lawsuit. Buchanan responds with "Buchanan v Kinsey Round 2," documenting
all of Reisman's charges. He is not sued.
June 2, 1983: A Kinsey Institute press release defames Dr. Reisman and denies
all charges of crimes against children committed under cover of science and the
protection of Indiana University.
February 2, 1984: Press reports appear nationwide in concert with Playboy and
similar materials, protesting a U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention grant to Dr. Reisman to examine child
pornography and to revisit the Kinsey research. In 1993 Dr. Reisman finds
evidence of The Kinsey Institute's secret role in discrediting this research.
February 1984: Dr. Reisman is called before American University 's Institutional
Review Board several times. The board forbids her to study Kinsey's data.
Evidence in 1993 finds The Kinsey Institute secret role in censoring this
research.
April 1984: Dr. Reisman is called to testify for the first of three
congressional hearings to challenge the Department of Justice award for this
research. Evidence in 1993 finds The Kinsey Institute secretly involved in these
Congressional efforts to stop the investigations.
1985: Dr. Reisman completes her study, "Images of Children, Crime and Violence
in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler," over significant obstacles. The research is
successfully used at the US Supreme Court level as well as in lower courts.
1990: Kinsey Institute Director, June Reinisch threatens to sue a radio station
should Dr. Reisman be interviewed about her recent 1990 book, Kinsey, Sex &
Fraud. The radio station drops Dr. Reisman's planned interview.
1990 Dr. Reisman discovers that The Kinsey Institute is secretly circulating
"
confidential" defamatory materials about her, worldwide. The cover page of the
89 page tome states these "confidential" materials "are not to be attributed to
the Kinsey Institute".
1990: A nonprofit law firm offers to represent Dr. Reisman pro bono for
defamation against the Kinsey Institute and June Reinisch. Although her DOJ
peers approved Reisman's findings (
the past president of The American
Statistical Association concluded "This is a sound study") the secret Kinsey
Institute package mailed to numerous recipients injures Dr. Reisman by falsely
claiming the DOJ research is not peer approved.
December 1990, Dr. Reisman appears and handily exposes Kinsey's child abuse
culpability on "Phil Donahue." Later Dr. Reisman discovers Donahue was
threatened with a lawsuit if Dr. Reisman appears on air. He is not sued.
1991: A lawsuit for defamation is filed by Dr. Reisman against The Kinsey
Institute and its (then) Director, June Reinisch.
May 1993: In deposing June Reinisch at Indiana University , Dr. Reisman
discovered handwritten file notes. One note said, "sue Am. University for
sponsoring things she threatens to do." Another note said "had lengthy
conversation" … "Am. Univ. Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects."
Dr. Reisman believes this "lengthy conversation" explains why the AU
Institutional Review Board censored her legitimate study of Kinsey in her U.S.
Justice Department research.
March 22, 1994: Dr. Reisman's pro-bono law firm said they could not financially
continue the lawsuit. If plaintiff (Dr. Reisman) could pay $53,000 in court
costs the judge ruled that this would allow her to file the same lawsuit later
against the same defendants. Therefore, considering the non frivolous nature of
her complaint, the judge would dismiss her case
WITHOUT PREJUDICE, pending its
reopening.
Circa May 1994: Unable to obtain $53,000 to continue the case for a "without
prejudice" decision, the judge dismissed the case "with prejudice" meaning Dr. Reisman could not sue for this collection of "confidential" papers, but could
sue later on any other charge.
In sum, due to lack of money not lack of merit this defamation suit was
dismissed.
The judge did not absolve the Kinsey Institute or June Reinish of defamation.
This legal proceeding was not about the facts or fraud with respect to Kinsey's
research. The court NEVER ruled that Dr. Reisman's defamation charges have no
"merit." The defamation case NEVER even addressed Kinsey's crimes. [Note: It has
been brought to our attention that The Kinsey Institute claims otherwise, and
thus continues its history of trying to twist the facts. Just ask them for a
complete copy of the law suit briefs, motions and rulings should you have any
doubt.]
Dr. Judith Reisman has proven that the research conducted by A. Kinsey, his
associates and collaborators was fraudulent and has invited and continues to
invite the Kinsey Institute to debate her publicly about her research. The
Kinsey Institute has never taken Dr. Reisman up on her offer, neither has the
Kinsey Institute ever sued anyone who claimed that Kinsey's research was
fraudulent.
To date, the Kinsey Institute has failed to repudiate any of the facts Dr.
Reisman has brought to light against the Kinsey research. Rather than admitting
that Kinsey's research had no scientific merit, the Kinsey Institute has engaged
in secret cloak and dagger missions to destroy the reputation of those who seek
to uncover the truth.
The Kinsey Institute until today continues to deny access to its files to any
researcher critical of the "research" conducted by Alfred Kinsey.
The COPA2-Congressional Brief
of Members of Congress, Amici Curiae in Ashcroft
v. ACLU, No. 03-218 has used Dr. Reisman's "restructuring the human brain"
argument found on her White Pages on this website. Arguments will probably be in
late 2004. The South African pornography decision--relying upon the altered
brain evidence--may have helped move the data forward. Please check pages 6 and
7 for Dr. Reisman's brain précis, the first such thesis brought to the attention
of the US Supreme Court.
For document download, please
click here.