In this post, I will share an entire chapter from my autobiography. In it, I explain how unjust the justice system is, however, I did not know why this is so when I wrote the book. I explain this below – it has to do with those who rule the world:

1/ They consider themselves to be superior to anyone who is not of their Tribe.

2/ This superiority means that they can oppress you via massive levels of deception without being held accountable. They created the system to serve and protect them only. They own everything that you think is yours: this is why you need to go to court to ask for ‘permission’ to get your property returned to you. Property includes your pets and children, not just material assets. The fact that you need to apply for licenses to do almost everything, and that you have to register the births of your children, proves that under their system whatever you think is yours, is really theirs: for more on this, I send you here.

3/ They make sure that for the most part, justice is not served because this leaves people unhealed, not whole, which traumatizes them, thus making it easier to control them. What I noticed as a law student, was that by and large, the more serious the offense committed against an individual(s), the less likely they were to get a fair outcome in a court hearing: this is deliberate.

At the end of the day, only God’s Cosmic Courtroom will do what is right for all concerned. However, if we return to the implementation of Natural Law, as was the way of our ancestors, we will get an almost perfect match to the righteousness that is meted out in God’s Courtroom.

Trigger Warning: The text below contains non-graphic references to sexual assault and abortion. Labels such as “Chester(s)”, “Dvo”, “Dva” and “Dvos”, are pseudonyms for some of the perpetrators.

“The connection between justice and healing was something I discovered years after I graduated from university with a major in law – it was when I became acquainted with Peacemaking (the Navajo form of justice) and Karma (the cosmic/spiritual form of justice). I believe that on a subconscious level, I knew about the relationship between these two concepts which is why I transferred to law from behavioral psychology two-thirds of the way into my degree (the latter had absolutely nothing to do with healing and I did not want to become a lawyer – I simply wanted to understand justice).

In this (and the next) chapter, I will share my philosophies about legal (and spiritual) theories and practices, how they relate to sexual abuse and life in general. In other words, I will be imparting the wisdom that has sustained me through such a difficult life journey. Let’s begin with a little Law 101: the meaning of the word ‘justice’…

Justice is derived from the Latin ‘jus’ which means ‘right’ – to make right, correct, rectify, amend, repair or redress. In relation to sex crimes, it is the criminal justice system that attempts to redress the wrongful act committed against a person by punishing the offender, usually via incarceration. Justice is not synonymous with healing from a psychological perspective, at least not in the Western legal system. However, if the punishment always fit the crime, this in itself could provide some form of emotional healing for the victim simply because it would acknowledge the extent of the damage perpetrated against their person. In sexual abuse cases, this is rarely the final result.

The disappointing outcomes of the very few cases which do get to court are usually due to the difficulty of gathering enough, if any, evidence to prove the case against the accused. Quite often it comes down to he-said (usually the offender), she-said (usually the victim) and this inevitably puts the latter on trial. Women are portrayed as whores who asked for it, if not, out and out liars. Children are similarly painted as fibbers or as having active imaginations. Dealing with repressed memories as evidence is also difficult when there aren’t any other victims (or witnesses) or when the others will not come forward to corroborate the allegations. It is also too late to gather any forensic material to demonstrate sexual assault. (These would have been issues for me to contend with if I had decided to take my abusers to court later in life.) By reducing or eliminating the credibility of the victim’s testimony the defense attorney is able to create enough ‘reasonable doubt’ to acquit the defendant. Reasonable doubt is the standard of proof required at any criminal trial – this means that the slightest plausible doubt about the facts in a case is sufficient grounds to acquit. The purpose of this is to protect the defendant from being punished for something that he did not do.

Alternatively, when there is adequate proof which leads to a ‘guilty’ verdict, the punishment is rarely commensurate with the crime. There are two cases that have remained indelibly impressed upon my psyche which illustrate this point. In a documentary about childhood sexual abuse, a woman described how her father had been raping her for years. After he was found guilty at trial, he was sentenced to three months imprisonment. Let me run that by you again – three months in prison for several years of rape. This woman was glad that her father was found to have committed the crimes (even though the sentence was an abomination) because it was an acknowledgement that it happened – the justice system actually brought about a healing for her. (If I was in her shoes, I may have gone on a shooting spree aiming only for those who deserved it, of course.)

In another case where the penalty did not fit the multiple transgressions of the perpetrator, a man was convicted of fifty-five counts of sexual assault on several children – he received a seven year prison term. This works out to a little over six weeks per violation, which in reality will be far less if his sentence is reduced due to ‘good behavior.’ Considering the untold harm inflicted upon these kids, the effects of which will continue well into adulthood, this really is no reparation whatsoever – it’s tantamount to a punch in the gut.

The aforementioned reasons are partly why I never pressed charges against any of my abusers. The main reason was the very strong likelihood that my parents would have taken justice into their own hands. My usually very placid father (who is now in heaven) would have put several bullets through each of their heads and my fiery Spartan mother would have sliced them up nicely before ‘feeding them to the fishes.’ How long they would have lived or remained free from incarceration after taking such action is anyone’s guess and I did not want to lose my parents prematurely. Even if they were not a consideration, I would have chosen not to prosecute based on what I discovered as a law student about the inherent disempowering experience for the victim within the criminal justice system.

The underlying principle in criminal law is that any crime is first and foremost, an offense against the State (i.e. not the individual that the act was perpetrated upon). This implies that the victim is the property of the State, the institution that exists to ‘protect’ (or possess) its citizens much like parents protect (or own) their children. The victim becomes a passive observer – a witness – who must rely upon the police to investigate the crime, and the State’s prosecution to argue the case convincingly if it ever goes to trial. She cannot voice whether or not she is satisfied with the way that everything is handled. However, she can express how she has been affected by the transgression if the judge permits the use of a ‘victim impact statement’ before sentencing, if the accused is found guilty. The judge may take into consideration the sentiments expressed by the victim when considering the severity of the punishment. She may also exercise some control by dropping the charges or refusing to testify if she believes that it will do her more harm than good. Testifying is also tantamount to re-victimization because her character will be vilified by the defense lawyer as she recounts traumatic events in a (usually) public forum. For a child, there is more protection in this scenario as s/he may be questioned outside of the courtroom but even this is a daunting experience for a little one. It is basically a harrowing and disempowering experience for those who have already suffered.

This kind of disqualification of the victim is largely avoided in the civil law arena. Here one citizen may take legal action against another (which is in the first instance an empowered position to be in) usually for some breach of contract. However, this branch of law in the West also covers other areas such as family law, defamation/slander and damages for the harm caused to the victim (or plaintiff in civil cases) by the defendant’s actions. It is via a personal damages claim that a victim of a sex crime may seek redress. It is up to her (and the lawyer) to prove her case. Restitution is by way of monetary compensation which presupposes that the defendant has the funds or assets to be able to pay up if he is found liable.

The civil courts are the only (Western) legal arena where the role of judges is to make the plaintiff ‘whole’ – a word/concept that is synonymous with ‘healing.’ Granted that they are referring to material wholeness but even this is meaningful (if you watch ‘Judge Judy’ or ‘The People’s Court’ you have probably heard the judges say this at least once about their job). In relation to damages for a sex crime, there must still be evidence of physical and/or psychological harm by way of witnesses, medical and psychiatric reports and/or testimony. The same issues related to evidence in the criminal court apply in a civil procedure. However, the standard of proof here is far more lax (i.e. easier to prove) than for criminal cases – in Australia and Britain, it is “on the balance of probabilities”; in America, “by the preponderance of the evidence.” These statements basically mean: “Is it more likely than not that the plaintiff’s version of events is more accurate than the defendant’s?” So, even if there is doubt on the part of the judge or jury they can choose to give the plaintiff ‘the benefit of the doubt.’ A favorable outcome for the plaintiff means that at least she will be compensated for therapy, medication, loss of wages and so on as a result of the inevitable PTSD symptoms which would have already surfaced (or will at some point in the future) as a consequence of the assault. In other words, she will have access to resources that will help her heal.

Despite the more positive aspects of civil law in relation to sex crimes, there is still no room for expressing emotions at such trials – it is always about the facts. This kind of healing through the process of seeking justice is possible via Peacemaking.

Peacemaking: Navajo Justice

Peacemaking (and its Western counterpart Restorative Justice) is primarily about repairing the harm done to the victim by the offender specifically – he must take responsibility for his actions by doing whatever he can to make the individual he has wronged as whole as possible. This method of justice has to be voluntarily entered into by all parties concerned – this may include relatives of both the victim and the perpetrator as well as other professionals or community members who may be able to offer invaluable support and/or advice (e.g. police officers, neighbors, social workers and so on). This is comparable to a group mediation session that is facilitated by someone appropriately trained or experienced – in the Navajo community these individuals are referred to as “Peacemakers.” In this scenario the victim is in a far more empowered position because she can talk about the ways in which she was harmed and even state how she wants the transgression rectified – this is the essence of healing. This will inevitably involve the victim standing up to the perpetrator.

The confrontation of the offender by the victim (as well as any of the other people present) is also meant to rehabilitate the former. That is, if he is faced with the consequences of his actions he may not reoffend. In my opinion, this is not possible with sexual predators (especially those who prey on children) because there are too many layers of denial and depravity which will not be ‘healed’ by one confrontation. This is reflected in the minimal use of this type of justice to resolve sex crimes. However, what is most appealing about this method is that the person who has been harmed has a chance to heal that pain in a way that is not available via the Western legal system. For this reason, I have considered Peacemaking in relation to my situation and concluded that it would not be right for me. To begin with, none of the Chesters would admit to wrongdoing, let alone want to take part in this process. I, too, would not want to be in their presence for too long as this would make me ill. Nevertheless, confronting victimizers is a very important part of healing abuse – there are many and varied ways to do this.

In therapy, I faced my abusers via spiritual exercises. That is, I was placed in a hypnotic state where I met with the spirits of those who had interfered with me. Here, I could communicate with them on that level, similar to the dream-time experience. The only abuser who did not want to take part in this way was Dva – her shame and denial was far too great to be faced even at the unconscious level. In spite of this, I was healed by this technique as I got to voice how I felt and – believe it or not – even heard apologies from some of them. What was important here was expressing my thoughts and feelings to those who hurt me regardless of their responses. It was about me making things right for my Self. In essence, it was a form of personal Peacemaking – making or bringing about peace from within. These exercises also provided further opportunities for me to take my power back from my abusers.

Alternatively, confronting abusers in the physical world happens all of the time in various scenarios. I have seen it on ‘Oprah’ and ‘Dr. Phil’ repeatedly in situations where people sexually violate their relatives. At times, the offenders readily admit what they have done. In other instances, they are fiercely confronted by family members, including the victims, or by Dr. Phil himself. This does not always lead to an admission of guilt or an apology but it is cathartic for the victims.

In ‘off-screen’ life, I have also heard about such encounters that had positive, healing outcomes for the victims. In one case, the woman was prepared by her therapist to go head-to-head with a relative who raped her during childhood. At first, he denied what he had done but later admitted it and apologized. She told me that she felt better after this. She added that it would not have mattered if he never confessed or showed remorse for his actions because what she needed was to express what she had to, to him specifically.

In another situation, a girl told her mother that their neighbor had touched her breasts. Her mother believed her and told him never to return to their home. Then, they moved away from that neighborhood so that the child was not reminded of this violation on a daily basis. The fact that the girl stood up for herself was empowering but the healing part came when her parent acted like the loving, protective nurturer that she was supposed to be by taking the steps that were necessary to help her daughter thrive in life. The girl in this story was an adult when I met her. Even though she cried when she recounted these events (which demonstrated that there was still some pain there) she did declare that things would have been far worse for her if such action had not been taken.

This type of healing was not available to me throughout my childhood, however, besides my experiences in therapy, the only times I have felt validated by seeing justice meted out to those who violated me was the kind that was brought about by the Creator Her/Himself.

Karma: Cosmic Justice

The popular notion of Karma is: “What goes around comes around.” There is more to it which I will elaborate on in the next chapter. However, in relation to justice it is all about punishment – the type that only a vast, omnipotent, omniscient presence can carry out. It is because human beings are aspects of this energy (due to their inherent spirituality, as is all of Creation) that they/we are automatically subjected to its laws. It is the ultimate form of justice.

During my teens I was (inadvertently) placed in situations where I did bear witness to the suffering of some of the abusers even though I had no conscious awareness of what they had done at those times. One incident, involved seeing a Chester in great pain in hospital as the nurse changed his bandages and drip after surgery. I recall visiting this man with my family and a cousin. My parents remained outside of his room while my brother and cousin, who couldn’t handle the gore, shot out of there as fast as humanly possible. The Chester called me over then told me to hold his hand. He squeezed it so hard that I thought I would scream but I held it together while watching him in pain. I did not flinch. I did not feel sorry for him nor was I glad to see him in agony. I observed in a detached manner, one that I was not familiar with. It seemed as though I was enveloped in light, cocooned by a spiritual blanket of some sort so that I would not be overwhelmed by what I was witnessing. Justice was happening before me. Karma wanted me there so that I would know for sure that my pain did not go unnoticed. (Incidentally, I do not think that every illness is a form of Karmic punishment. However, in this scenario I believe that this was exactly what was going on.) When this man died several years later (I still had no memory of his crimes) I happened to be overseas – he did not deserve my presence at his funeral.

On another occasion I watched as those who took my unborn son lost a child of their own via miscarriage (I was fifteen years of age at the time so this was only four years after they performed the abortion on me). I could hear Dva screaming in the bathroom as they gathered up the fetus in a towel. I balled my eyes out as I heard the wails emanating from that room, not because I felt sorry for her – unbeknownst to me, I was tapping into my own pain in a way that I could not do when they murdered my child.

When Dvo arrived, he ran to his equally deviant partner. As she blurted out that their child died he bent over as if he had been punched in the gut. What I did not comprehend as I witnessed this was the look they gave each other when Dva told him what happened – it was as if they were not surprised by it, like they knew they deserved it considering what they had done only a few years earlier. It was revealed later on that the fetus was male – Perfect Justice Incarnate.

After this, Dva began having suicidal and homicidal thoughts. She was medicated and almost hospitalized. Years later when I was studying psychology, she came to me for help as she still had unresolved guilt and depression about the child she had lost. (By the way, I still had no awareness of what she had perpetrated upon me years earlier.) Looking back on it now, I wonder if she felt any remorse whatsoever for what she did to me. Either way, I know she has suffered, so I feel validated by the Almighty.

This Karmic lawfulness seems to work in ingenious ways. When I began writing this chapter I discovered that the hands of one of the Chester’s were burnt in a household accident. This person abused me primarily via digital penetration so injury to those parts of the body was only fitting.

The incidences of infinite justice mentioned here demonstrate that God does not forgive such transgressions. If this were true, there would be no need for such a cosmic court room where punishment is meted out without the conscious awareness of all parties involved, in most instances. This knowledge brings me closer to the experience of the limitless Love that can only come from the Creator.”

Helen