The Bill and Kathy Swan Story

"The trial of this offense must not be conducted like other crimes. Whoever adheres to the ordinary course of justice perverts the spirit of the law, both divine and human."

--Jean Bodin, Esteemed French Lawyer, judge and witchhunter, The Demonomanie published circa 1580

When first charged in October, 1985, Bill Swan was 33 years old (born 3/23/52 in Fredericksburg, Virginia) and employed as a $50,000 per year senior computer design engineer for a small computer company near Seattle, Washington. He has master's degrees in engineering and computers from the University of California at Santa Barbara.

Kathy Swan, age 32 at the time (born 9/13/53 in New York City), was raised largely in Europe, primarily in Belgium where her father was employed as an executive with General Motors. She attended high school in Sweden until graduating in 1971. She graduated Phi Beta Kappa and Summa Cum Laude from the University of Connecticut in 1977, and met Bill Swan at UC Santa Barbara while working toward a Master's Degree in French literature. Kathy is an accomplished linguist who speaks twelve languages in addition to English.

In 1985, Beth Anne Swan was 3+-years-old and had been enrolled for over a year in a private day care run in a private home in Redmond, Washington. The day care center was operated by Cindi Bratvold, a young mother of two.

On the evening of October 1, 1985, Beth Anne was playing with crayons when she inserted a brown crayon stub into her left nostril where it stuck. Kathy took her to a hospital emergency room at 9:00 where it was removed by a physician in a highly traumatic procedure using sedatives and scissor-like forceps. Beth became more hysterical than Kathy had ever seen her, and broke out in a bright red rash from elevated blood pressure caused by her excitement. The rash remained for more than 24 hours. Her nose bled heavily. In her hysteria she vomited all over the nurse who was restraining her.

Less than twelve hours later, with the rash still prominent on her face, Beth was delivered to Cindi Bratvold's day care where she usually spent three days each week. Shortly after her arrival, Beth Anne, who had worn diapers until just a month earlier, returned from the bathroom with her skirt caught in her underwear. A new day care teacher cautioned Beth Anne to "keep her privates covered," and warned her that "no one should see your private parts." Accustomed to parental help with bathroom functions as well as bathing and dressing, Beth Anne remarked, "Mommy and Daddy do."

The teacher, Lisa Conradi, promptly took Beth Anne to a private room for further questioning. Adults have a duty, she felt, to uncover child abuse so that it can be reported and stopped. During the questioning that followed, Beth Anne mentioned scissors, blood, and Mommy in confused remarks no doubt referring to her experience in the emergency room. According to Conradi, however, the child's remarks described a shocking tale of oral and genital rape by both parents and by a third person named "Josh." These incidents, she said, had occurred the previous evening and numerous other times, and included another child of the same age, Rachel Thiel, who attended the same day care.

Together, Conradi and Bratvold called Washington's Child Protective Services agency to report an incident of suspected abuse. Soon a CPS representative arrived to question Beth Anne, but the child denied anything unusual. No notes were kept of the questions asked or exactly what responses Beth Anne made. No films were made of the interrogation. No one but Conradi EVER heard any incriminating remarks or description of abuse by Beth Anne. The next day, Beth Anne did not attend, but young Rachel Thiel did. This time Mrs. Bratvold questioned Rachel. Soon, according to their later testimony, the Thiel child described similar acts of oral and genital sex performed by Bill and Kathy Swan, including bizarre tales of marbles, candles and scissors inserted into her "bottom" by the Swans.

According to the Swan family, many of the statements attributed to Beth Anne use language alien to her. For instance, she is said to use the word "potty" for both male and female genitalia. Her family insists that, to Beth Anne, a "potty" was a "toilet." A reference to "icky milk" attributed to Beth Anne is commonly used in child abuse seminars attended by the accusers, where it is attributed to much older children. Children Beth Anne's age are thought to be incapable of such an abstract analogy. The questioning, however, continued.

On the third day, a Friday, both children and Conradi were present. A CPS representative attended the questioning, but Beth Anne said nothing incriminating. Finally, at around noon, Beth Anne nodded in response to a question. This was accepted as a positive affirmation of abuse and was judged to confirm that both girls were telling the same story. On that basis, CPS called the police and both children were taken away.

When Kathy Swan arrived a few minutes later, she was met outside the house by two policemen (who had hidden their car, apparently in the Bratvold's garage) and who blocked her passage to the house. Beth Anne was in custody, she was brusquely informed, due to an allegation of child abuse. She and her husband Bill were the suspects.

Rachel Thiel was returned to her mother a few hours later after the state gave Mrs. Thiel a detailed account of the sexual abuse the child was said to have suffered and after extracting a promise that Rachel would under no condition be allowed near Bill and Kathy Swan. Although Mrs. Thiel had been Kathy Swan's closest friend, she believed the report given her by CPS and roundly cursed Kathy and Bill by telephone a few hours later.

It was not until the following Tuesday that Bill and Kathy were able to learn more about the charges against them. Moments before a hearing in the King County Juvenile Court in Seattle they were handed a detailed account of the charges. According to the document, both children had described repeated incidents of "birthday games" in which marbles, lighted candles and scissors had been placed in their "bottoms," and "exercise games" where Bill, Kathy and "Josh" played touchie-feelie games with both children on Kat y's bed while naked.

"In all cases of witchcraft, the evidence of the child ought to be taken against the parent."

--Henri Boguet, Grand Judge of Witches, St. Claude, France, 1550-1619

According to an affidavit submitted to the court, a physician who examined Beth Anne at the request of the state reported that there was physical evidence supporting the rape charge. The judge remarked that the charge was "very serious" and that he gave great weight to the fact that the attack was documented by a physician. Following arguments by the opposing attorneys, the court agreed to allow the family doctor, Dr. Lawrence Parris, to examine Beth Anne. Over the Swan's protest, the judge agreed to allow the two physicians to discuss the case beforehand. To assure that the new examination was not tainted by the opinion of the first examiner, the court ruled that the Swan's attorney would arrange and monitor the conversation between the two physicians to assure that only observations were discussed (reddened tissue), not the first physician's conclusion that Beth Anne had been raped.

CPS circumvents the judge's order: When the Swan's attorney returned to his office 30 minutes later to arrange a telephone conference between the two physicians, he discovered that CPS had taken the matter out of his hands. Instead of waiting for him to arrange the call as ordered by the judge, CPS had conducted the call itself immediately following the hearing. Instead of discussing only observations as directed by the court, the physicians had discussed the first examiner's conclusion that the child had been raped. Further, the attorney for the Swans discovered that the first examination had not been conducted by a physician, as had been represented to the court, but by a registered male nurse who had no special training with child abuse or with gynecology. Bill and Kathy complained to the court that the court's orders were ignored and their rights violated. The court ignored their complaint. This would be just the first of a long series of events seemingly devised to frustrate their defense.

The Swans are arrested: Three weeks later, Bill and Kathy were awakened at 10:30 by loud knocking on their front door. Three policemen demanded that they come to the station to answer questions. It was too late, Bill told them. They were tired, needed their sleep, and would come down in the morning. The policemen persisted. When Bill and Kathy refused to come out, the policemen stood back from the house and yelled loudly for the benefit of the neighbors, "If you won't come out now, we will get an arrest warrant and come back and make things very difficult for you." Lights flicked on all over the neighborhood.

Bill and Kathy stepped out on the front porch to try to quiet the uproar when suddenly they were brusquely handcuffed behind their backs and led roughly down the gravel driveway in bathrobes and bare feet, leaving the lights on in the house, the door open, and the dog loose. After pleading for mercy, they were allowed to dress. Then the policemen took them to the local jail.

"Hey, we got some lovebirds in this one," one of the men yelled to his buddies when Bill and Kathy held each other for comfort. Later they were transferred to the downtown Seattle lockup where they were held overnight. Bill's cell was so overcrowded that the only place to sit was on the floor next to the toilet. No calls to their attorney or to anyone else were permitted for several hours--for these were not ordinary criminals. These were "child molesters," undeserving of the ordinary protections.

"A mere suspicion of witchcraft justifies the immediate arrest and torture of the suspected person. If the prisoner mutters, looks on the ground, and does not shed any tears, all these are proofs positive of guilt."

--Jean Bodin, Esteemed French lawyer, judge and witchhunter, The Demonomanie, published circa 1580

In the morning, the arrest warrant was found to be faulty and had to be rewritten. Finally, later that afternoon, they were brought before a judge and formally charged with two counts of rape. Ordered released without bail on their own recognizance, they were set free at 7:00PM Halloween evening. They found themselves in downtown Seattle more than 20 miles from home with no transportation and no money for telephones or cab fare. Until this incident, they thought their problems were with the juvenile court system alone. From this point on they would be facing very serious charges of "child rape" and a judicial system specially organized to assure their conviction.

-------------------------

The Trial: Bill and Kathy Swan were tried before Judge Anne Ellington in King County Superior Court in April, 1986. The court, apparently upon the demand of the prosecution, required them to have separate lawyers, because a single lawyer, it was argued, might constitute a conflict of interest--apparently in case only one of them was actually guilty. (This requirement would seem to indicate that the prosecution was not quite certain of their guilt, since they seem to have wanted to assure that either Bill or Kathy could turn against the other. One wonders, too, what right the prosecution has to interfere in their choice of how to defend themselves.)

The requirement for two attorneys also essentially doubled their trial costs, since each attorney charged $50,000 for his trial work. Bill and Kathy sold their home to help cover the expense. Several relatives mortgaged their homes to help.

"While providing a living for those connected with the trials, the property of the condemned witches also yielded extensive booty for whatever local authority had jurisdiction. After paying the expenses, the property of the witch was confiscated. With such an easy source of funds, it is not strange that the leaders of Germany and France were for a long time content to let witch pe secutions continue."

--Rossell Hope Robbins, The Encyclopedia of Witchcraft Bonanza Books, 1959

Almost immediately the attorneys asked each of them to testify against the other. Each quickly refused. They were not guilty, they told the attorneys.

The prosecutor offered a plea bargain. If they would plead guilty to abusing Beth Anne, the state would drop the charges involving Rachel and agree to a sentence of no more than nine months. They immediately refused. They were not guilty, they told the prosecutors.

In trial, the children were called before Judge Ellington for a "competency hearing" to determine whether they were competent to testify. Beth Anne refused to speak at all, except to ask for her mommy. Rachel babbled freely. Asked by the judge whether she had ever been in court before, she replied, "Yes, forty times." Asked the color of her dress, she said it was blue. Asked what she would say if told it was pink, she agreed it was pink. Judge Ellington judged both children incompetent to testify.

Incredibly, however, although Judge Ellington decided that the children were not competent to have their statements heard and evaluated by the jury, she determined that Lisa Conradi and Cindi Bratvold would be allowed to present their accounts of what they said the children had told them. The children, then, were incompetent to talk before the jury, but were judged competent enough to have their words interpreted and reported second hand (hearsay) by two day care workers with no special training or experience with such things and who had clearly already decided that the Swans were guilty--and would thus interpret all the children's words in light of that belief.

By the time the case went to trial, Rachel's mother had decided that she was wrong about the Swan's guilt. She told Kathy so during the trial. Rachel Thiel's free-flowing remarks to the daycare workers, however, remained one of the most damaging elements of the case, despite her obvious propensity to fantasize. For instance, when asked by a policeman, "Who else plays these birthday games with you," Rachel answered, "Jerry does." Jerry was Rachel's father, yet no one bothered to question Jerry. Bill and Kathy Swan were the suspects, and the prosecution needed evidence to convict them. Anything that might exonerate them or shift the blame elsewhere was unwelcome.

-------------------------

Before the trial, Bill and Kathy decided that someone must be abusing the children, as otherwise how could they be making such charges? So they hired a detective to try to learn more. The detective tried to identify "Josh," but got nowhere. When they tried to see the rolls of the day school to learn of perhaps another child in the school was named "Josh," the state obtained a "privacy order" blocking their access to those records.

The detective, Linda Montgomery, started with the presumption that the Swans were guilty. Her job was to gather information, not to assess their guilt or innocence. She was soon forced to the conclusion, however, that Bill and Kathy Swan were not guilty at all. She become so thoroughly convinced that for more than five years she has devoted her professional efforts to helping prove their innocence. Despite two children in college and other family obligations, Mrs. Montgomery refuses to accept payment for her work.

CPS records reveal that Lisa Conradi had filed at least nine complaints prior to the Swan complaint, none of which were acted upon. This information, which would have helped discredit Conradi at trial, was withheld from the defense, possibly also in violation of rules of "discovery" which apply to such cases. (In an interview after the conviction, Conradi claimed to have filed 22 complaints, some of which she says were prosecuted.)

During the trial, Dr. Ralph Underwager was called by the defense to help explain why children can make reports which are not true. Dr. Underwager has testified in over 200 trials and may be the leading expert on this subject, yet his testimony was blocked by the trial judge on the basis that he lacks adequate expertise and is not adequately regarded by his peers (known as "The Frye Rule"). Others, with far less experience, however, such as Dr. Carol Jenny who worked for the sexual assault unit at a local hospital, was accepted as an expert and gave testimony (now known to have been faulty) which was severely damaging to the Swans.

Conradi and Bratvold testified to their interpretation of what the girls had said under questioning. Lisa Conradi was presented as a concerned and conscientious child care worker. Because of the prosecution's actions blocking questions about her back ground, the defense was unable to discredit her.

The nurse, Ted Ritter, supported the hearsay with his report of physical evidence. He described Beth Anne's vaginal walls as red and roughened in a manner consistent with abuse. Under questioning, he estimated that her vaginal opening was stretched to triple its normal size. He described a mucous discharge.

He also reported that Beth Anne seemed fearful, which he attributed to probable sexual abuse, and that she drew her knees to her chest during the examination, thus exposing her genitals. Nurse Ritter reported that he had never seen a child behave in this manner. Most parents, however, recall exactly such behavior in children accustomed to diaper changing--and Beth Anne had been out of diapers for barely a month when this examination took place.

In highly damaging testimony, Dr. Carol Jenny, who did not examine the child, told the court that the nurse's ability to examine the vaginal walls indicated that her hymen was missing. That, and the extreme stretching of the opening, indicated a high probability of sexual abuse, she told the court. The mucous discharge noted by Nurse Ritter was also said to be highly unusual in a child and could be a result of venereal disease.

The family doctor, Lawrence Parris, reported that he, too, had examined Beth Anne. He noted a slight redness and a slight discharge, but noted nothing unusual and saw no evidence of abuse or injury. Nor did he notice any unusual behavior by Beth Anne. His report was overcome by the more damaging earlier reports.

------------------------

Dr. Parris recommended that Beth Anne be examined at Harborview Medical Center which specializes in post-rape examinations. CPS argued that no further examination was necessary, and that in any case Beth Anne was so uncooperative that she would need to be totally anesthetized. To avoid further trauma to Beth Anne, they agreed. Yet during trial their "failure" to assure that Beth Anne was examined by appropriate experts at Harborview was cited as evidence of their guilt--for, it was argued, if they were truly innocent they would have insisted (even though the child was out of their hands and they had no way to insist upon any thing).

When the prosecution presented testimony that Beth Anne was forced to perform fellatio upon her father, the defense attempted to show that Bill Swan routinely administered antibiotics with a large medicine dropper due to recurrent ear infections. This, said the defense, might have been misinterpreted by the child care workers. The court, however, ruled that testimony inadmissible.

Many other examples can be found in the trial record of testimony or actions important for the defense which were withheld, blocked or prevented by the court and prosecutor. Individually, many of the decisions seem reasonable; together they present a consistent pattern of unfavorable decisions which made it almost impossible for the Swans to defend themselves.

Predictably, considering the evidence presented in court and their crippled ability to defend themselves, Bill and Kathy Swan were convicted of two charges of first degree rape of two children and were sentenced to 50 months confinement.

"Risk to the community" evaluated: In order to remain free on bail during the appeal, the Swans were required to submit to psychological examinations to determine whether their continued freedom constituted "a risk to the community."

The examinations, at $600 each, were conducted by Frederick Wise, Ph.D., of Seattle, a clinical psychologist who previously directed a child abuse prevention program for the State of Alaska.

This experienced psychologist was clearly perplexed by the contrast between what he saw of the Swans and the fact that they stood convicted of this crime. His report went far beyond merely assessing the risk they presented to the community and in fact stopped just short of saying that these people could not have committed this crime.

"Neither Bill nor Kathleen Swan", he wrote, "pose a threat to the community in regards to their sexual abuse allegations or for that matter, any other type of threat. [Testing suggests] individuals who are morally rigid and conservative in their value systems. Neither has a history of acting-out behavior, difficulties with the law, drugs/alcohol abuse or any other activities which could be considered sociopathic in nature.

"Although I am unwilling," Dr. Wise concludes, "to offer an opinion regarding the veracity of the charges based on the information made available to me, it is my clinical judgment that the allegations would be very inconsistent with individuals representing the psychological makeup of Mr. and Mrs. Swan. In addition, the nature of the activities alleged involving group sex and female to female contact are uncommon and raise doubts even further given my clinical impressions of Mr. and Mrs. Swan."

Confess, Witch, or burn: Soon the Swans were presented with a dilemma. If they confessed to the crime, they could receive "treatment" for their "disorder," and probably be free and regain custody of Beth Anne in a matter of a few months. If they persisted in asserting their innocence, they would be considered unremorseful and would serve their full sentences, less any reductions for good behavior. In that case they would be barred forever from seeing their child.

-------------------------

"A prisoner may be promised immunity or reduced punishment if he accuses his accomplices."

--Jean Bodin, Esteemed French Lawyer, judge and witchhunter The Demonomanie published circa 1580

"Treatment" consists largely of watching pornographic films, including bestiality, pedophilia, necrophilia, sadism, and other degrading sights while hooked up to an untested device called a "penile plethysmograph" which purports to measure sexual arousal. Appropriate responses are encouraged; inappropriate responses bring various degrees of electric shock, ala Clockwork Orange. Feeling no need for "treatment" and regarding the procedure as demeaning as well as insulting and emotionally damaging, they refused to participate. Their refusal guaranteed that they would serve their full sentences unless the conviction could be reversed.

Following the Swan's conviction, the defense suddenly learned much more about their primary accuser, Lisa Conradi. Dean Huber, an award-winning reporter with 35 year experience with the Sacramento Bee in California, conducted a recorded interview with Lisa Conradi. Mrs. Huber, who was conducting research for a book on child abuse, also happens to be investigator Linda Montgomery's mother. In the interview, Mrs. Conradi readily answered questions the prosecutor had prevented her from answering before the trial, and revealed herself as a strikingly unstable person.

During the recorded interview, Mrs. Conradi claimed that she had previously reported at least 20 other cases of child abuse. That she had personally been abused on an almost daily basis by from 300 to 400 men, women and boys for 17 years starting at age five. That she has knocked on almost every door in her neighborhood "for miles in every direction" accusing the occupants of abusing their children. She says she follows children into the bushes in local parks to scold them for what she is sure they are doing there. She admits to heavy use of drugs from the age of eight and to having twice undergone treatment for drug abuse. She admits to having been treated for emotional problems until she could no longer afford the cost. All of this, however, was withheld from the defense before the trial.

The Swans presented evidence that Lisa Conradi had been fired from a number of child care jobs for seeming to see child abuse everywhere and was therefore an unreliable person to interpret Beth Anne's words. The court rejected the appeal, calling Conradi's remarks "mere puffery for the press."

In 1991, when an independent physician was able to examine Beth Anne, he determined that the nurse's testimony was wrong: Beth Anne's hymen was fully intact, unstretched, unscarred, unherniated, and undamaged in any way. Trial testimony was that Bill had actually inserted his penis into the children's vaginas on several occasions to the point of pain, and that Bill and Kathy together had inserted marbles, candles and scissors. The physician testified in an appeal for retrial that any such activities would certainly have left marks, or at the least destroyed, stretched or scarred the hymen, and that those marks would be seen today. The offense, he testified for the Court of Appeals, could not have occurred.

The prosecutor argued in rebuttal that the "testimony and behaviors of the two children" were sufficient proof without the physical evidence. The appeals court agreed. This leaves intact the charge that Bill raped both girls vaginally to the point of pain and to the point of having stretched Beth Anne's vagina to triple its normal size, but without damaging her hymen in any way. The logic behind such conclusions seems quite impossible to comprehend. The prosecutor also makes the astounding argument that the presence of unscarred hymens in 3-year-old rape victims is no evidence that rape did not occur because hymens routinely regenerate within seven to ten days!

-------------------------

Further insults: While in prison awaiting the decision of the Court of Appeals, the Swans were hit with still more attacks by the state. First, the State asked them to pay $25 per month toward Beth Anne's support. They replied that they had no income and could not pay. The State responded by filing an action against them to collect $800 per month, possibly retroactively to 1985. This action could cost them their only remaining asset, the heavily mortgaged smaller home they bought after selling their previous home to pay legal expenses. That action is still in the courts. Bill feels it is really intended to assure that they are too impoverished to appeal the case any further.

Next, the state filed an action in court to make Beth Anne available for adoption, thus barring any hope of return even if they are eventually vindicated. That action is now being appealed. Family members are not eligible, apparently because no family member regards the parents as guilty. (People who fail to believe in witches cannot be expected to participate properly in exorcisms.) A hearing is now scheduled for July 15 in which the judge will make his final ruling on whether Beth may be adopted by any of the several family members seeking custody, or must be adopted by strangers.

Just this month the Guardian Ad Litum assigned by the state to "represent" Beth Anne's interest has filed suit in Beth's name against her parents seeking monetary damages for the "abuse" supposedly suffered at their hands. At this point there have been at least four appeals and numerous rebuttals, counterrebuttals and decisions. The Swans won the first and have lost ever since. Now they are appealing to the Ninth Circuit Court in San Francisco.

Following the recent report on their case by the CBS NEWS show 60 MINUTES, Harvard Law School Professor Charles Nesson reviewed the records in the case expecting to find that 60 MINUTES had overlooked important evidence against the Swans. Instead, he found what he describes as "the most extreme example of erosion of the confrontation clause of which I am aware." He was so moved by the injustices and improper interpretation and application of law in the case that he has come forward to file a "friend of the court" brief before the Ninth Circuit Court in San Francisco in which he finds at least six serious errors in a single ruling of the next lower court, and argues that the previous decisions if allowed to stand "completely reverses the thrust of [Idaho vs Wright] . . . [and] allows a defendant to be convicted of a crime totally on the basis of uncross-examined hearsay, uncorroborated, and shown to be unreliable by other evidence, a result which diminishes the constitutional protection of the Confrontation Clause to the vanishing point."

Unfortunately, it may be up to two years before a decision is handed down.

More information on the case, including videos and a complete media packet, can be obtained by writing to the Swan Defense Fund, 621 NE 155th, Seattle, Washington 98155, phone 206 364- 2826.

Swan Defense Fund
P.O. Box 25026
Seattle, WA 98125-1926

Include Check for $25 donation to Fund & request Video.

Return to:   Home Page  or  Across The Nation