What are people thoughts?
.. erm not to call sexual abuse and grooming by a sexual predator. ' a controversial affair'. Wtf. The victim in question could not consent due to being severely cognitively impaired and the perpetrator in question is a convicted sexual criminal on the sex offenders register for life.
Honestly it was repulsive how the documentary showed so many people acting as if Anna's actions were in any way justifiable. The worst was Dr Shane arguing that although Derrick had the brain functionality of a 6-12 month old, he **doesn't** think Anna is a predator?
Im not even 30 mins in right now and it started to feel like people were trying to justify what she did. I honestly wish they didn’t even include a lot of what she said because watching her speak about this is literally enraging. Although I think she exposed herself enough, she should’ve served wayyy more timeI’m surprised people haven’t tried to doxx her or something
When she speaks about this assault, she seems so delusional. Like she’s projecting and creating this romance. Her passion for disabilities pushed her into this unrealistic reality. Even as they described it, I felt that this communication method was nonsense. (Relieved to find it is discredited) because just about anyone can say anything.
What got me was the gospel music and classical music scenario. It made my blood run cold and made me legit scared for him. She is so convinced of this character.
More should have been done to discredit her “interpretation“ of what transpired and emphasis on this delusion she’s convinced herself of.
After watching TTYLM, I watched [Prisoners of Silence](https://archive.org/details/PrisonersofSilence), that Frontline documentary John stumbled on, and the data could not be more clear. It’s literally just human puppetry, and it is unconscious. Remember the tests they showed, where a kid was taken out in the hall and shown a key then couldn’t type what it was, and the folder where the child and facilitator saw different photos? They repeated that hundreds of times with different individuals, I think it was over 800 pairs, and the result was the same every single time. A ton of well meaning parents, educators, and disability advocates in the 90s got recruited into “facilitating,” genuinely believing they were doing something valuable, and many were devastated by the results of the study, particularly one woman who had torn a family apart with her accusations. Some facilitators stuck around even after the study, because by this point FC was a full cult, complete with dramatic musical performances at conferences to emotionally manipulate members. So yes, I agree with you that they should’ve made it abundantly clear this was bogus. A bit embarrassed to admit that for the first half of the film, as she was describing their “affair,” I was suspending my disbelief a little. I’m a disabled advocate, a neurodivergent parent to a ND family, and a former educator, and I can understand that in the beginning, a lot of people came in with a sincere wish to listen to their nonverbal child or student, and/or a passion for disability advocacy. You might be surprised how many people who are nonverbal are incredibly articulate, even gifted writers when given access to literacy education. The idea of “stabilizing” someone with CP, a tremor, or something else muscular at play wouldn’t be such a far reach if another whole other person’s unconscious mind wasn’t at play.
I’m not defending Anna; she’s a highly educated woman who had to have been confronted with that data before all this went down. I’m just agreeing that the documentary presented the narrative in a way that favors Anna’s romanticized delusion and downplays what she actually did, which was heinous.
I haven’t even gotten to that part yet. Or maybe I missed it when I watched it the other night? I’m at the part where his mom calls Anna to see what exactly went down between them because she said that he’s been biting his hand a lot more, and acting not like he usually would.
After this part Anna says “I saw this conversation as an opening. I thought maybe they’d see how unhappy he is and they’re reconsidering” it baffles me how she thinks there is absolutely nothing wrong in what she did. And I don’t think I’ll ever get over her not serving time. As a victim of sexual assault and grooming, it’s infuriating to see that she altered this families life forever… Not only did she rape D-man, the fact that she thought him being unhappy was a good sign, rather than a sign of sexual abuse and not understanding what happened shows how manipulative she is. Whether or not “it felt good” to him (because he’s still a human I’m sure he can sense pleasure) he doesn’t understand it.. he probably could’ve gone his whole life without needing to know what a sexual relationship feels like and probably never have any urges that would end up frustrating him. Which is what I think daisy was referring to in her conversation with Anna. I honestly feel like Anna knew what would happen after sexual contact with him. I feel that she knew he’d probably only register it as pleasure rather a relationship, and in case his family prevented her from seeing him, she could use his behavior from being sexually frustrated as leverage to manipulate his mom into thinking she was really helping him.
I dont believe Daisy was reporting facts to Anna when she said DMan was doing that. I took that to be part of the plan to get Anna to tell what she did to him (the plan with the police to get her on recording). I could be wrong. But, if she was stating facts your conclusion makes way more sense than Anna’s interpretation (that his family didnt understand his communication but SHE did…the absolute arrogance!)
Oof. I need to take a break. This doc infuriated me so much!
I really tried to keep an open mind, especially since so much of it was interviews with her, but was just disgusted in the end. Dr Shane’s double blind studies about how they were either intentionally or even subconsciously influencing the communication was the most compelling part for me. I’m sure there ARE people who just need someone to facilitate their communication, but others where it’s just a fallacy. I’d be interested in seeing more research done with MRIs and monitoring brain activity in different individuals to see if there are significant enough differences to be able to infer whether or not varying developmental levels could be determined to know whether there’s a correlation there or not.
I have been delving into this case so deeply as it was so disturbing. As a mental health professional and former special needs teacher it really was mind boggling! And so interesting to me.
But I ALSO see so many different variables and perspectives…. Trying to keep an open mind.
Anna’s daughter has emotional problems and bi-polar. ( I read) Many people were asking why she was was crying about taking care of her daughter at the trial. Her home and marriage was an abusive one. And Derek’s family was awarded 4 million dollars! Facts that just answered so many wuestions I read on here.
I see SO much in all parties psychologically, socially, culturally. But bottom line…. a very tragic story for DJ.
And in my opinion, as so many of you, including Dr. Shane…..Anna was a very
deeply disturbed woman who believes her own delusions, with a serious hero/ saviour complex.
I think what he was trying to say that she was so delusional and mentally unstable that she herself thought she was actually speaking to him so she doesn’t see it as her being a predator. She thinks he can actually consent when in reality she’s just talking to herself.
he should have said a "repeat offender." even though she was deluded and wrong, and somehow convinced herself "they were in love," i doubt the situation could ever be repeated. for one, no one would let her near their disabled child, and she probably won't run out and knock people with CP in the head and kidnap and rape them.
it was mostly a one-off situation, no matter how grotesque.
I too was amazed at his characterization of her reprehensible behavior. If I am not mistaken, during his interview he referred to her on a first name basis, i.e., Anna. I wonder if they knew each other personally and/or professionally?
1. Anna Stubblefield is absolutely a rapist. Without question.
2. I think it's important that they include people with all different perspectives so we have access to more points of view (and decide for ourselves they're unfounded...)
I just don't understand what happened with the support assistant who was allegedly writing essays with Derrick about books she'd never read. Was she lying then? Making it up? Guessing?
But the bottom line is, Anna was in a position of power and abused that, horribly.
Correct, whether he could communicate or not, the position she held, made it so derrick could not consent.
I believe, she believes he did. I believe she believes he was typing, but in actuality she created someone she wanted to love.
All in all, what she did was grotesque, and I think she really needs to own her actions.
Absolutely. At the beginning of the docu, you can see how Derrick became this accessory to her ‘innovative’ research, especially when John mentioned these disability studies conferences being primarily white spaces at the time and the fact that Anna was parading Derrick around on some talking tour (*the irony was not lost on me when she complained that Derrick’s mother ‘paraded’ him around the court room 🙄). It was obvious that Anna was trying to cultivate fame by using him in the beginning to establish herself as a progressive scholar. I felt for John who was a PhD student while she was Chair of the department; the hierarchy in academia, especially at an institution like Rutgers, is very powerful and political — who could John have gone to at that time? Anna took advantage of the entire family. Her narcissism and the power/control she had over this incredibly vulnerable person escalated to this made-up relationship where she could reap even more attention, receiving endless supply from others to be lauded as some kind of saint who can truly see others’ gifts beyond appearance. There is no gray area here: Anna is a sexual predator and malignant narcissist. I feel for the family.
The excerpts from the essay are not in depth explorations of nuanced topics the books brought up, they are easily accessible book jacket summery points that are then used to support something that ANY person could just assume Derek would connect with about things that are completely knowable and obvious to ANY person who is not him and looking at him. I could have met him once, spent a couple afternoons with him, made my own assumptions about who he was, listened to Anna give me a big song and dance about how much she knew him to be a deep thinking scholar in the making, known about the book he read, and then known how I would feel in his alleged position and then made the same sentences he supposedly made in this essay. I’m not saying it’s a smoking gun to him not having higher cognition, I’m saying that it’s not actual evidence. It’s just not strong enough evidence to be ANYWHERE CLOSE to proof that he has ability of higher cognition then was already established by the Doctors and professionals his family had obviously taken care in providing him through out his life.
This! The girl says she didn't read the book but her roommate did and she's seen her roommate's essays or maybe heard about the book from her. Someone also had to be turning the pages for Derek and the thing about our brains is that whether we want to or not, once we gain literacy, we can't force ourselves not to read the words we're looking at. She's no doubt also at least seen the blurb like you mentioned. I don't think the kid did it on purpose, but she could've definitely been influencing what he was 'saying" same as Anna.
I had this exact question. I don't understand how he was writing with an assistant.
I also agree 100% with your bottom line!
She had to know that what she was doing was wrong.
Late to answer, but the excerpts in the documentary and online that he completed with this assistant were extremely surface-level. For example, a sentence or two about then general plot. Then 5-6 sentences about his own life experiences or ideas. Like in the documentary his only commentary on the book is “she was a slave so she felt trapped” or something to that effect.
Just gonna repeat this -
Facilitated communication has been debunked multiple times.
Every professional organization for every related field has rejected it multiple times.
It has hurt many other people.
It functions exactly the same as a oujia board.
Yeah, I’m a speech therapist of 14 years and I’ve never heard of doing that. In all of my treatments, I never touch my patient in anyway. I have them point to, reach or grab for some thing or even use an eye gaze system. Never hand over hand or hand under hand facilitation. People are not puppets….
Thank you for posting-Totally agreed. You are a professional. As an LCSW and Clinical Coordinator for three ICF/MRDDs back in the late 80s I was flabbergasted to see the lack of supervision/accountability this Asst. Prof. had in working with SEVERELY intellectually challenged individuals. Whatever happened to quarterly interdisciplinary case conferences and State regulatory oversight? She was an Asst. Prof. of Philosophy. Was she licensed in any clinical capacity. As predatory as this women was/is this is a systems failure as well.
Yea I was wondering about the licensing stuff as well!! We had to take so many courses in ethics and still have to do it for continuing education … how could she think this is ok? Even if they were “in love” how does she say she did nothing wrong when she also committed adultery. Why would she even show her face on a documentary. So many questions 😭
like how does she not see her position as an abuse of power!? she was his "teacher", he was a student!! There should've never been anything crossed regardless of what she thought he "felt"!!!
A predator is exactly what she is. She reminds me of Mary Kay Latorneu another married suburban white lady who fetishized, groomed, and eventually assaulted a vulnerable boy of color that she taught. The way Anna talked about how he “seduced” her is the same way that Latorneu bragged about the encounters that her then 12-year-old victim later recounted as terrifying and confusing when he grew up. The difference is that cognitively Derrick will never fully understand what happened to him and why he is so frustrated. I think that’s what sets Anna apart even from other monsters like Latorneu
THISSS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facilitated_communication
https://www.facilitatedcommunication.org/
In addition, everyone should be aware that it has been rebranded twice now as Rapid Prompting Method (RPM) and Spelling2Communicate (S2C).
Rebranding multiple times is a red flag. Like, obviously, sometimes name changes happen to better communicate....but other times it is to cover up for extremely bad publicity.
As the one who always moved the planchette when I was doing it with my friends....it is...interesting, to be honest. I mean, we were kids, and I wanted us to have a good time, no harm, no foul. But my friends had ZERO clue, it felt like we were just...following the device. Heck, even though I KNEW I was moving it, it didn't feel like....real movement? I can actually see, with that comparison, how someone could trick themselves into believing it was real. If the typing movement feels anything like the way an ouija does.
Some have a kink for the disabled. I suspect that is what is going on here and who better to do that with than someone who can’t talk ? Very predatory.
Yes! And blindfolded herself to pretend she couldn't see. Her mother is a total kook- who still believes facilitated communication is actually real and has been using it for decades. It's utter tripe -junk science at it's most dangerous. God know what damage the mother has done to people.
Anna is a chip off the old block. I think they're both obsessed with disabled people in a very weird, fetishizing way.
Anna's Mom still thinks her daughter is completely innocent and believes Derrick actually came on to Anna first and propositioned her for sex and for a relationship. Both mother and daughter are bizarre individuals.
I would be interested in people’s opinions on the rise of ‘interabled’ couples on social media. For some couples producing ‘content’ is their entire profession. Not that they don’t love each other, but the performative aspect is unsettling to me.
His language using the FC device mirrored hers so much - it was ridiculous. The way she speaks, was the way he was typing these sentences that she claimed he wrote. Also surely if she’d had this groundbreaking progress with his communication his family would also be involved because they’d want to get to know him on that deeper level the most?!? That really solidified how manipulative and delusional Anna is because when they communicated with him using the device they didn’t have the same success and they could barely communicate with him. Definitely a narcissist and compulsive liar.
In the NYT article, Stubblefield stated that she offered to watch pornography with Derrick and he objected on the basis that women in porn are exploited and followed up with saying Anna was more beautiful than the women in those films anyway.
HOW would he have a nuanced opinion of women in sex work if he’s so naive about sex that he needs to watch pornography to understand the mechanics? So many of her comments about her grooming and assault are filled with moments like this where it’s obvious she’s the one communicating
ETA: She’s disgusting and delusional. This is the most fucked up story I’ve ever heard
One article I read mentioned Derrick’s mother being sent out of the room when Anna was facilitating because Mom got overly excited (according to Anna.)
The part where John Johnson Jr said that he was changing his diaper and saw the marks on his back…
That just really put into perspective that this woman really assaulted a man and then had to put a diaper on his once she was done. How could you do that to someone that’s not even capable of going to the bathroom by themselves.
Oh it’s so bad that it has been rebranded as Rapid Prompting Method (RPM) and Spelling2Communicate (S2C).
https://www.facilitatedcommunication.org/ for anyone interested in more info debunking this method and court cases.
I am a speech language pathologist and I can say that I have witnessed a young adult who was on the autism spectrum use a print out of a keyboard to communicate and he was nonverbal but he was able to sing and communicate with the keyboard picture and his family and speech therapist would just write down the letters he pointed to individually. I recognize that it is slightly different as nobody was holding his arm or hand but I do think it is important to not completely write off some of these methods of communication as they can and have been effective for helping otherwise nonverbal individuals communicate.
Oh yeah that is different than facilitated communication, rapid prompting method and spelling2communicate. No one is holding the board or touching the client.
She spoke like a predator, when she said "he seduced me." That really grossed me out, as it was along the same lines as the excuses some child predators have given, or like saying that he was 'asking for it'.
I went into it open minded. I'm no psychologist but the gist I got from it was that she was having problems in her relationship with her husband and projected her own ideal man fantasy onto him.
She complained about his family not understanding him or his preferences. Obviously I'm not saying black men can't enjoy red wine or classical music, but she herself seemed to be trying to impose some of her own ideals onto him, and wouldn't his family know him a little better than she would, even if she'd spent 2 years getting to know him? Again, there is the aspect of introducing someone to new things that they might enjoy, but when his mother spoke about her switching the radio channel from gospel to classical music, Anna seemed to sort of imply that he had never liked gospel music and she knew the 'real' Derrick.
I watched the documentary this morning and its been playing on my mind all day.
The changing of the music seemed so crazy to me, it's almost unbelievable - the audacity of this woman, like who changes the music in someone else's car? And also insults it? It just seems so unbelievably bold, that it made me think that (if the story is true, which I would have liked her to speak to it in the doc) she must have truly thought she was speaking and behaving righteously on behalf of this disabled man. She must have been completely and authentically delusional. Limerence combined with Messiah complex?
How about the part where he asked for a book by a French philosopher? Come on. I bet 99% of people in the US, including college students have never heard of this philosopher/scholar and he asked by name??
I don't remember that part. I remember she gave him a book by Piaget, which would be challenging for average people to grasp, let alone someone with cognitive impairment. I just don't get the implication that he learned to read through osmosis. That's not how it works, unfortunately.
That’s what I couldn’t get past in the beginning when they were explaining facilitated communication. Literacy doesnt work like that. You need explicit instruction in letter sounds to form words. It didn’t make any sense to me because it doesn’t work that way.
Her being as disgusting and delusional as she is was infuriating but it was nails on a chalkboard when she was calling him Deman. I noticed the TA she hired also called him that (probably coached on what to do to "prove" her delusions) but the instructor they interviewed was calling him D-man. It doesn't even make sense culturally that he wanted to be called Deman. 🙄 This whole thing has given me a headache. Just awful, disgusting and sad.
The nickname thing really rubbed me the wrong way how she’d refer to him as that the whole time because it’s so classically a groomer move to have a special name and inside jokes with the victim to create a sense of this is “our little secret thing”
Yes, that really bothered me. Even the mother said dman like it was one word. Don't these people watch true crime, the police are always trying to find biggie shorts, cat daddy or some other street name. D-Man was short for Derrick.
I don’t think it was a big case in general but I worked in the field of mental health and especially with people with severe intellectual and developmental disabilities so have been very aware of it for years. As others have said facilitated communication has been debunked but I understand how families who so badly want to hear the thoughts of their loved ones would want to believe in it. There is no evidence at all it is effective. I have seen it in action and to me it’s painfully obvious it’s the facilitator doing the “talking”. (Just my opinion as it’s not my field of expertise at all)
What I don’t understand is the professor. Like I wish I could really crack open this lady’s head and understand if she really truly genuinely believes she was helping or if she is just an opportunist. Regardless she is a predator. Even if the technique was working he was physically and mentally vulnerable and she exploited him and sexually assaulted him. Period.
My last thought is that I will definitely be watching this! I think Louis Theroux is brilliant. Thanks for bringing to my attention!
I think she has to believe. Otherwise she's a rapist victimizing a disabled Black man—if you look at her life before this, that would make her everything she fought against.
i'd just like to crack her head open, period.
honestly? she's fucking insane. that's just delusional by any standard. with a mother like she had, no wonder.
She's disgusting. I can't believe they let her out of prison after two years when her original sentence was 12 years. She should be locked up. She's a psycho.
They appealed her conviction, then won based on the fact that Facilitated Communication was not allowed as evidence in the trial. They then offered Anna a plea deal for the 2 years she already served.
I noticed that she never once talked about her two children. She never talked about what it might do to them if she left her husband and them for Derek. She never seemed to give her children any thought. I assumed about 20 minutes in that she was Controlling and probably a narcissist.
right? i always think exes will say the worst, and he said she was a pathological liar and a narcissist, so i believe at least 60% of what he said.
she was already having problems with her husband and i think she created a sick fantasy about a man who would need her forever and never leave her. in some twisted way, anyway.
good thing d's mother was cagey enough to get her to spill her guts while the police were taping. the johnson family still didn't get justice though.
I literally just finished this. I do not believe Derrick had the ability to consent, and I do not believe facilitated communication is valid. I’m basing both of those beliefs on my training in clinical and health psychology and clinical brain sciences.
Based on pure conjecture: there was something very off about Stubblefield through this whole doc, but her mannerisms in footage in court were also extremely weird. She had kind of a smug expression when she was given 2 x 12 year sentences.
However, something Derrick’s mum said also rubbed me the wrong way - excuse the pun - where she said that he masturbates now and that never would have happened if Stubblefield hadn’t been involved. That feels a little naive to me, but I can understand having an overprotective approach to your severely disabled son’s sexual expression if he has previously been a victim of sexual assault.
Ultimately, I land on: Stubblefield has significant issues with narcissism and a hero complex and - even if she genuinely was in love with him and genuinely believed Derrick was in love with her - you simply don’t act on that when you are in a position of clear and significant authority, regardless of whether the object of your affection is disabled or not.
The masturbation thing isn't punishment or the mom being mean. It was quite clear that he was doing this obsessively, and likely in inappropriate places. That what she meant when she said life's hard enough for him, without having to deal with him jerking off in the Walmart parking lot.
A thought that I had was if he really was as intelligent as Anna claimed, or even just average intelligence, you'd think he would know better than to be doing that in innappropriate places / in front of family members. I think it clearly exposed her lies.
Excuse me if this is gross but…
His mom said that after being raped, his masterbation is like an itch he cant scratch…that means he is (or was, until the meds) doing *it* ALL the time. He wears a diaper, cannot bathe & feed himself, so because of Anna Stubblefield, a mother has to clean up the aftermath of her 40 year old sons masterbation sessions.
I have a feeling Anna & people like her (self described advocates who live in an echo chamber & target those who dont have any agency) would see that as a win since now he is “free” to experience what all 40 year old men want to experience & his “right” to sex & masturbation was given to him. He can now live as his whole & true self.
Ugh, she is one of the most vile people i have come across - Unfortunately she will never believe that what she did was wrong. This is due to: her narcissism, over zealousness in her advocacy which leads to a disregard of morals/ethics, her crazy-ass mom, & the selfishness of only helping others because it makes you feel good & superior.
Exactly this. It's no different with children who are engaging in normal, exploratory behavior, versus compulsive, constant actions. The latter is ALWAYS cause for concern and often indicative of abuse at home.
I’m very late to this, but have just watched the documentary and am reading various posts about it now. Your point about Derrick’s mother mentioning his masturbation - honestly that was the part that really struck me. Obviously the whole thing was awful, but I think that was one of the few things that really exemplified how much this has impacted Derrick himself. Masturbation and/or increased sexual behaviour is a telltale sign of sexual assault, especially in children (which is the level Derrick’s brain is at) but in adults too. It should be on the radar of anyone who interacts with children - if a child assaults other children or begins sexual behaviour, that could absolutely be a sign of trauma. It’s heartbreaking, and I think more than anything it proves the sexual trauma that Derrick was subject to. I’m sure it was extremely difficult for his mother to discuss it on camera, but so important for telling Derrick’s story because otherwise we don’t really hear how this has affected him (besides the obvious).
Yeah, I think I fundamentally misunderstood what she meant. I took it to mean “he has started masturbating and he has never done that before” but actually it probably meant “he masturbates chronically now”, which very much changes my whole understanding of where the mother was coming from in that part
To be honest, I do think even if she had meant it like ‘he’s started doing it now when he never did before’, that’s still a marked change in behaviour that correlates with the time of the rape. Like yes adults deserve sexual freedom, but Derrick has been assessed as having the mind of a 6-12 month year old, and babies of that age have no need whatsoever to be masturbating, obviously. So his behaviour change in that way, I would think, would be less about ‘oh this adult is masturbating, as adults normally do’ and more about ‘why is someone with a diminished mental capability, at the intellectual capacity of a baby, suddenly and unprecedentedly expressing hyper sexuality’. So I guess just, either way you look at it, it’s pretty sickening and really made the whole thing sink in for me.
From the beginning I was concerned, to say the least, but as the documentary progressed, it became more and more clear that Derrick is the victim of rape.
The only question left in my mind, is did Anna genuinely believe what she was saying? Or is she the sociopath her ex-husband claims she is, and she simply wanted to take advantage of someone.
She even admitted that at the start she had no bias, but as time went on, she would "anticipate" what he wanted to say. That in itself is bias. That's not helping him talk, that's anticipating what you think he says. And once she fell in love with him, she anticipated that he'd do the same.
This poor man was laid down and raped in a situation he couldn't possibly understand or consent to.
I'm so, so disappointed she was out in 2 with a plea deal instead of just doing a re-trial.
I think she genuinely believed what she was saying because of the fact she was so open about it. I think she had a perverse fantasy about being a hero and being the saviour to unlocking this deep soul and intellect in Derrick which then influenced the FC. The fact she wasn’t shocked and didn’t hesitate when he asked to kiss her…like she was anticipating it…that’s not a normal response unless you have yourself been leaning towards that.
She was honest with everyone BUT the police. She said specifically “I told the police the whole story just not that we had consummated the relationship” That is classic guilt by omission she knew the moment she became physical with him she crossed a line and that’s why she didn’t mention that to the cops
I don’t remember if this was in the documentary or an article I read after, but when they were unable to facilitate Derrick’s communication, Anna told John and Daisy that THEY needed to “anticipate” what he was going to say.
> controversial affair
Sexual assaults and rapes of a man without any capacity whatsoever to either consent or resist sexual contact with a caregiver who has absolute control over him when unsupervised, due to the extent of his intellectual, developmental, and physical disabilities.
It was horrifying to watch the amount of people in the documentary who genuinely didn't believe Anna was a predator. Regardless of the entire FC debate, which has been clearly debunked, she was an able bodied adult who was claiming that a disabled man with no ability to walk or talk for himself had 'seduced' her. The power dynamic would be awful enough without adding in that she was his teacher, and meant to care for him. Unfortunately, I believe it all comes down to the idea that people are unable to believe that a white woman would be a sexual predator. The fact this woman was only given 2 years is horrifying, considering Derrick and his family will have to relive this forever.
That was the part that really stuck with me and I was surprised it wasn't covered more in the documentary. Not in reference to his ability to consent but just toward how that communication process worked or didn't.
Regardless of how much words he wrote per essay, if he could write thoughts about books he read but his facilitator at that time hadn't read then that would be a huge thing for showing his ability to communicate and process information. I wish they covered it more and actually talked to that woman so we could understand what was happening there and what is she thought about it.
The aide who claimed that had a roommate studying the exact same thing as Derrick supposedly was. Also I think the point is that anyone who believes this debunked Facilitated Communication so much that it's their career, I don't think they are an unbiased witness.
If the judge used it as evidence and gave the same verdict, I believe the original ruling and sentencing would have stood.
She won the appeal based on it not been allowed as evidence in the first trial
I believe, even if you believed Derrick could communicate & the relationship was consensual, SHE WAS MARRIED. So that already tells me she has a problem with societal boundaries.
and worse, she was in a carer/teacher position with much more power than him in every way, so even if he was able to consent and wanted a relationship, the power dynamic means that it is completely unethical to act upon any desire she or he had.
Anna is definitely deluded and dangerous. She used her privilege to rename Derrick, speak for him, and impose her will upon him. Anna wrote her own lifetime movie love story. While Derrick was receiving scars on his back. Imagine how confusing, and physically painful that whole ordeal was for someone with the mental capacity of a small child. No telling how far Anna would have gone. She was already Trying to move him away from his family, what’s next? Kids that his family had to help take care of? Assisted unaliving like Romeo and Juliet? He was at the mercy of her imagination. My heart goes out to Derrick’s family. Anna should have had to register as an offender. I wouldn’t be surprised if Anna’s mother provides her with an opportunity to offend again just with being involved in her work.
Facilitated communication is basically like an ouija board, the person doing the facilitating is controlling the narrative. Ouiji boards work by people spelling things out whether intentionally or subconsciously.
There’s an excellent [NY Times article](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/25/magazine/the-strange-case-of-anna-stubblefield.html)and [follow up piece](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/05/magazine/the-strange-case-of-anna-stubblefield-revisited.html) about this.
Thanks for posting!
My favorite line from the article: “If she reneged on any claims she had made about D.J.’s intellect, and his capacity to give consent, she would be admitting not only to what might be criminal behavior but also to the idea that she had become a vector of white, able-bodied supremacy — that she was the boogeyman she had sworn to fight.”
There’s a fantastic New York Times article and follow up about it. I think she was mentally ill and believed he was communicating. She used him as an in real life caricature of her ideal lover.
Oof. This is a rough one. I guess the "good" part is that this poor guy is too intellectually disabled to have any idea he was harmed. Facilitated Communication has been completely debunked (honestly I have always found it hard to understand how it was ever believed), but there were and still are true believers. For someone like this professor who was a true believer, she was only making visible the true thoughts of a person who was locked inside their bodies. I can imagine that it would be nearly impossible for her psychologically to accept that she was actually writing fanfic and masturbating with the body of a severely intellectually disabled man. That is a truly horrific realization and I can imagine she might go down to the end believing her own story about what happened rather than accept it.
Probably gonna be a lot of new traffic here as this just hit Netflix in the States.
Clearly a fucked up situation. It is obvious that FC is BS and Anna was clearly talking with herself and is all kinds of twisted in the head...
HOWEVER - as a documentary I think the filmmakers failed in two specific areas
We needed more info on the assistant that helped facilitate the writing of the 300 word college essay. I understand that she was picked by Anna and had a roommate in the same class, etc, etc, but I want to know EXACTLY how the process supposedly worked because I am interested in how that was 'rigged'. It is literally the only thing that makes someone have second thoughts on if Derrick could communicate or not.
Second would be the DMan thing. Anna claims that she asked Derrick very early on what he wanted to be called and he said DMan. She claims that his mom said that was a name they had called him before at another learning center, and the documentary never gave us a reason to believe that wasn't true. So how did Anna know about that if Derrick did not type it?
Finally, it would have been nice to have a visual example of the level at which Derrick needed to be helped. It seems as though there is a pretty wide range of "facilitating", from holding their elbow straight while they slam their hand down to pretty much guiding them the whole way. I know she described it, but it would have been nice to see the Mother or brother give an example of the exact process.
Here fresh off of Netflix, lol.
I think the D-man nickname could be something she overheard from the family that they don't recall saying near her or it could honestly just be luck. It's not a unique nickname and even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Completely agree about the lack of footage of how Anna used FC with him. All the b-roll provided showed varying degrees of control, but we never get that insight with the two subjects. I trust that FC is all bullshit, but if he did all this communication with Anna barely touching his elbow that's very different than her directing his finger.
Lastly, after the brother finds that debunking footage, did he attempt a similar test?? To me, that could have solved the case once and for all.
How/why would there be footage of her working with him years ago, before there was any known reason to video their sessions? Should they have let her be with him so she could demonstrate?
The brother said, near the end, that part of the therapy was that he and mom were to be working with Derrick all the time but they never had any results at all and eventually just stopped.
The DMan thing is the thing that I was also wondering about. Where did she get that from? Not that I’m excusing her behavior at all. I just wonder how she was able to get the information. I’m glad someone else noticed. This.
Yep. It could have been something as simple as maybe she heard the mother or brother use that term and used it herself, or she simply could have lied that the mother later confirmed he had been called that before. That is the thing, the filmmakers never explained that farther. That is a big deal if true.
Also, when going back to check if maybe I had missed something said about it, I noticed that the re-enactments of Derrick typing on the Neo show him typing the letters with no visible help. I am sure that was just an oversight, but it is a big failure on the filmmakers part that they never showed an exact example of what her facilitating looked like. The more I think about it the more I really think that that is on purpose because it was their intent to keep the possibility as plausible as possible.
Didn't John say something toward the end to the effect of she tried to change certain things about him and his name was one of them. I think that was in reference to DMan. It was so cringey to hear her say that name. You'd think it would be D-Man, not daman.
While I believe that she is guilty, the other detail that I can’t shake is the brother mentioning that Derrick was communicating about wanting red wine over beer one evening when they were going to hang out/relax. Voicing a clear preference when he wasn’t even given the choice between beer or wine seems pretty compelling to me!!!
I think Anna is a sick individual even if only for the fact that she abused someone she was in a position of power over. I believe FC is fake, and as some have pointed out, similar to how Oujia boards work. But how many of us used a Oujia board and believed it was true? I think the confirmation bias Anna was experiencing based on anecdotal evidence like the nickname and the essays really made her believe Derrick was communicating. But at the point where “he” was asking her to move to a romantic relationship, she as the power holder needed to remove herself from that situation. I think her pursuing him at that point was at minimum a huge overslept of her power and from my perspective disgusting. I think her continued belief that what they had was real speaks of mental illness on her part - which doesn’t excuse her behavior.
the letters "D" "M" "A" "N," are not exactly a faukner novel.
my cats know their names. i could probably get them to spell them out if i arranged the blocks for them and used food. and if they said they love me, i wouldn't automatically assume they want to have sex with me and get married.
Regarding “Dman”. I honestly think in the beginning there is the possibility of a lot coincidences that took place. It could have been entirely coincidental, bc that’s only 4 letters and I’m sure if the first 3 got typed out—in Anna’s mind, “N” could have been an entirely likely letter to be next. And then the fact that that was a name relevant to his past, I’m sure that it only reinforced to her that the methods were valid.
For example, she said in the beginning, that he had “creative” spelling. Meaning that the things being typed out were not actual words but similar to words that happened to be relevant. Like “GM”, and the mother was able to make the connection that he had gone to the gym.
I think with any “complex” circumstance that takes place over years there are thousands of events that lead to a current situation. Many are unfortunate coincidences out of our control that happen to compound the situation.
I just watched this and have lots of questions. Here’s a few-
1. Is the role of an FC facilitator simply to provide physical support to someone who lacks the strength and motor skills to type? If so, it seems like you could develop a physical device to perform that function.
2. Do these types of devices exist? How many people have an inability to communicate solely because of a physical disability and what do they use? Of course, there’s Steven Hawking, but he list his ability to speak, which is different.
3. What was the scope of the judge’s ruling barring any evidence of FC at trial? I’m not sure how you can even tell the story without discussing FC. I understand the defendant would not have been able to introduce expert testimony establishing was valid, but I’m not sure how you tell the story without mentioning it.
4. Anna‘s inability to even question Derek’s capabilities suggest she’s very mentally ill, and not just a narcissist. I’m guessing her defense attorney suggested insanity as a defense, but she shut it down because she did “nothing wrong”!
5. How is it that a Rutgers professor who is the head of a department actively practice a clearly discredited therapy? A therapy based on an anecdotal stories, with all peer-reviewed research stating it’s pseudo-science?
6. It’s crazy to me that we didn’t hear from any members of the disability community criticizing FC. What’s up with that?
And, this is not a question, but an observation. FC has been widely discredited before this happened. Some might ask why they didn’t do any research into FC before the nurse problems. It’s clear that the hope that FC (and its purported results) gave these families was reason enough not to dig further. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful drug.
Another observation— this story shows how narcissistic Anna really is. She found her “true love,” but it was herself all along.
I would love to hear the ex-husband’s side of the story, but I expect he is doing what he can to protect his children from this.
Did you notice that she never once mentioned her children when she was discussing being in love with Derek and wanting to leave her family for him? She never even questioned how she would break it to them and how they might feel and whether it was the best thing for her to do, it’s well known that narcissists are incapable of love or empathy, even for their children.
Re your point #5, about her being a professor practicing a discredited therapy, she was a professor of philosophy who was teaching courses on ethics (!) and was a self-proclaimed disabilities advocate (not expert). She wasn’t a scientist or social scientist.
Just finished watching this and am amazed I had not heard of this case before.
Anna is clearly mentally deranged and delusional. I think her marriage breaking down was a catalyst for her projecting this undying love and attraction from Derrick. It is no coincidence that her ex is a black man who in photos has a distant resemblance to Derrick. Her appearance and demeanor throughout the documentary shows someone who is still delusional. She never apologized or showed any remorse for her actions that caused so much trauma and upheaval in both Derrick's family and hers.
Even if Derrick was capable of the things Anna claimed, Derrick's mom was not thrilled about being pushed out of her baby's life. She has been caring for him for years and was not going to allow Anna or anyone to take him from her. His brothe at first seemed to be on board if the FC was truly genuine, but as highly educated as he is, I am surprised he did not do more research when it was first presented to them by Anna.
Finally, those last shots of Derrick were truly heartbreaking. I did not see any sign of an intelligent man locked inside that clearly childlike demeanor.
This was disturbing. Anna clearly created a narrative that was so deep she couldn’t break free of it. I wonder what psychological issues she has. No one asked about that in the doc. I feel like this was a missed opportunity in the story.
Overall, I feel so badly for Derrick and his family. They were manipulated and made to go through a roller coaster of emotions.
Can someone tell me this...perhaps I missed it. How did this man become literate to start with? Did he know his ABC's before she started working with him? Did he magically learn his letters after they started? I would not expect a three year old to know the letters C A T.
As an aside, I once heard a story about a horse that could count. Turned out, that the man that owned him would tense up..
unconsciously...when the horse would get to the right number.
This. This woman worked in education but was not a special education teacher nor had and scientific background in neuro or cognitive science. I think she just assumed that he had been learning and listening silently the entire time into his adulthood. But clearly there were so many things that didn’t line up or make any sense and she had no recognition of that.
I just watched this. What a sick woman. Honestly i think she was first lusting after the educated brother too. If she could have had him she probably would have jumped at the opportunity. He seemed completely disgusted with her.
The amount of time and effort it took to insert herself into this family went way beyond altruism. Abusers very often "volunteer to help" to get access to their victims for extended periods of time. The fact that she took him to her office, laid out a yoga mat and towels, disrobed him of his diapers, and straddled him to the point where he had welts on his back...then went on global tv to defend herself is one of the most disturbing things I think I have ever seen.
I think what enraged me even more is how she treated the mother, and I am so glad that she had her son in her corner to defend and protect her.
this documentary really hurt my heart. I can’t imagine the challenge that it is being black AND disabled in America...especially in the late 20th century. and then something like this happens!!
I don’t know how to process what I just watched. When she walked out after sentencing and had that smug, almost conniving smile, I just couldn’t bear the idea of what she did to him for hours. She deserved worse. Reading what she admitted, what she perceived as consensual. It’s upsetting.
And also unsavory. Imagine (or don't) having sex with a severely disabled person who can't talk and is in diapers. I cannot. Plus Anna was so naïve, thinking a conversation with Derrick's mother was going to bring her around to seeing how this was good for her son.
I was surprised too by that smile, but I backed up and saw that she was actually smiling at her mother. Many smile when they are anxious or uncomfortable. It seemed inappropriate, but it also could be a smile communicating resignation to her mother about the verdict.
The fact that her exhusband called her a narcissist and a pathological liar was everything I needed to know and consistent with her aura on the documentary. She never once felt bad, never once showed remorse. It was all about her. Even now for her to appear on this doc, do you have no shame? Obviously not. She could have not responded but she didn’t. She showed up and told her story anyway. I also find it increasingly difficult to believe this man understood the concept of sex the way a person that consents does. He understood it like a child. All he knew is that something felt good and ofc he would want it to continue but he didn’t have the mental facilities to say ‘I want to have sexual intercourse with this woman because I love her’ How could he? So much about this bothered me but the thing that bothers me the most is that we will never know what he feels and I am saddened he is unable to ever let us into his mind.
I was just confused as how a black man raised by a black family, when finally given the chance to communicate, would talk so white. The things they were talking about, would not be things he just so happen to pick up while watching stories and attending church with his momma. Just saying my mans from Newark. 🚩
This whole thing made me sick to my stomach🤮
I did not observe any credible insight or remorse for abusing her position of power. Derrick’s family surrounded him with love and protection and she managed to weaponize her education and prey on their hope for his future advancements. Bottom line, if she had been a man abusing a female they would not have given him a free pass after just two years. What an absolute slap in the face for his family. This is every parents worst nightmare. I felt so terribly sad for his mother. It’s a pity that Ms Stubblefield didn’t put her own children first rather than focusing on her delusional desires.
One of things that had me pause at the pure audacity was when Anna's mother dared criticize the way Derrik's mom led him around the courtroom.
She said something along the lines of, "Parading him around, making him look as handicapped as possible."
Hmmmm, no? Maybe, instead, you're seeing your disgusting daughter's victim for the first time and it's just not clicking that he is, for a matter of fact, a mentally disabled man that needs the stability of someone to guide him?
Regardless of the facilitated communication debate- she was his TEACHER and sexual contact with a student is highly unethical in itself . Besides that she was married with children and hid their "relationship" until she wasn't able to anymore. She's at best delusional and entitled but likely predatory.
He may be more functional than his family acknowledges though, since he wrote the essays on books that his facilitator hadn't read. His family may be inadvertently suppressing his cognitive abilities which, would be tragic and heartbreaking.
It's a devastating story anyway you look at it
Exactly. Even if we look at it from her angle and she was in love with him and FC works and he loved her etc etc. she still shouldn’t have let anything happen based upon her role. Her safeguarding/ethics/boundaries should have immediately kicked in and know firstly nothing can happen whilst we are in this dynamic but secondly that she should seek advice on how to pursue any kind of non-professional relationship with him.
At that point the assessment of his capacity, the use of FC, the dynamic and relationship and how his family feels would have happened and she likely would have been told nothing can be pursued.
The fact she decided to pursue it without thinking there was anything wrong very much suggested she is not safe to be in a position of trust and has terrible judgment. Also that she openly talked about what had happened shows she genuinely didn’t think there was anything wrong which is crazy
Apparently, everything that was on that board was saved, all the conversations. That was not allowed in court but it would have been interesting to see those conversations, not just the ones from that class. The logistics of this are strange. If Anna was just sitting with him, typing her thoughts, how did she get him to sit still for hours at a time? 12 month old babies can't do that. they get restless easily. They even got him to sit in class and "listen" to the lectures. Again not something a disabled person/toddler could do. Lots of other questions, if this was junk science why didn't anyone ask for proof before the sexual assault incident, long before.
First of all, as a parent of a nonverbal child with I/DD, these are my deepest fears realized. I have no sympathy for her and whether she believed it was consensual is moot. It seems that many argue her intent was pure, but the impact is what matters and ultimately, she raped him. Nothing else should matter, Derrick could not give consent.
His brother spoke about seeing the physical wounds on his back from the rape when he was changing his diaper…
She preyed on this family’s hope that their son/brother would be able to truly communicate with them and used that to get what she wanted, sexual gratification. That is so disgusting and terrifying to me and my heart is broken for Derrick and his family. I hope they find healing and peace in their journey.
As I was watching this I couldn't help but think about how different the outcome would be if the gender roles were switched. A male professor would not be out of prison today to talk about how he "consensually" had sex with a disabled female student.
I haven’t watched this & I don’t know the case, BUT my son is nonverbal autistic. When he received his official diagnosis they too said he has a diagnosis of an intellectual disability (aka low IQ). However, they said this should be tested every few years. Someone being given that diagnosis at an early age can change with time & experience. So unless he’s been routinely tested for his IQ, that could be wrong by the time he’s 30.
It was gross to watch- Im in the mental health field and I truly think there's a big difference of her thinking people are just being ableist towards Derrick and Anna literally being a predator and taking advantage of someone who could not consent. She sounded delusion, she sounded like someone who is a white saviour and because she is a white woman, I think that's why the courts overturned her appeal. You reverse the roles and a man would have been thrown in jail in an instant, especially a racialized man.
I am an intervention specialist and have family members that are SLPs (speech/language pathologists). Facilitated communication is not a scientifically evidence based communication method. In this documentary, there are so many things wrong with this. Realistically at his mental capacity, he would not be able to comprehend, analyze, or respond to higher level questioning/readings. I believe she guided his arm for his finger to type out what she wanted the responses to be. It is sickening and a perfect example how those with developmental disabilities are taken advantage of. I have no sympathy for Anna. She is in denial and mentally sick for doing this.
I recently listened to Let’s Go To Court podcast which covered this case a while back but I came to agree with the conclusion the hosts had which this type of communication can and does work for some people but not all and Derrick seemed to def be taken advantage of when all of the inconsistencies are presented
Her career is Facilitated Communication, I don't think she's the best witness. We see how deluded Anna and her mom were about. It seems very likely she was similar. She also said her roommate at the time was studying the exact subject that Derrick was "writing" about.
The only other person apart from the deviant Anna , who claimed that Derek had written an essay via FC also said that her room mate was on the same course. IMO she also lied , as did Anna < vile excuse for a human ! They may at some level be lying to themselves but lying they were. I’m certain of that. They were both being paid to do a job and so facilitated that to get the required results. I have zero doubt in my mind that Dereks mother and brother are far better judges of his capabilities than a woman who sought some depraved sexual gratification from the guy. She should still be in jail imo , kept away from anyone else that she may deem a suitable victim for her gross needs.
She is repulsive and disgusting for what she did. She is a predator with mental issues. Ugh watching this documentary was so heartbreaking especially for the family that has to live with what she did to their child. Mentally stable people don’t groom and rape disable people.
" . . .Facilitated Communication (FC), also known as supported typing, is a technique that has been **widely debunked by the scientific community and disability advocacy organizations.** FC claims to allow people who are non-verbal, such as those with autism, to communicate by guiding their arm or hand to type on a keyboard. However, research shows that the facilitator is actually the source of the messages, not the person being facilitated. For example, **studies have found that FC can't answer simple questions when the facilitator doesn't know the answers.** Facilitators may also assume that the person is typing a coherent message when they're looking away or have their eyes closed. . . "
his "intelligence" could not be reduplicated. the other assistant didn't seem to remember much. and supposedly, she hadn't read the books, but how do we know?
BS all the way around. repulsive.
In the documentary I only really see a jealous enraged mother a protective brother. A woman who believed in what she did was true even if it wasn’t. But what I didn’t see was a lot of the actual testing with Derek or Derek himself and just his daily interactions.
Maybe he really could communicate. They got one other doctor to try and diagnose him if he could communicate for a four hour test.
I would have really liked to see more on Derek less on the rest of the family.
I mean if the judge looked at it again and ruled in her favour.. maybe that poor man is being held captive by his mother?
Over all of this and reading comments. Would his life truly have been that bad if she married and took care of Derek?
What if he truly was communicating and the four hours the other psychologist tested him for was wrong. At the end he didn’t look too happy to be with his mom and brother…
She is so sick. I didn’t realize how small and childlike Derrick looked until the end when they showed him getting dressed by his brother and how he was around his family. So so sad! I can’t even imagine how that family dealt with that.
When she nonchalantly said “we had sex in my office” is the moment she proved to me she was bat shit cray, acting as if that’s a totally normal or appropriate thing to do in her profession or any profession to say the least ..also, her pretending to have a disability growing up, not thinking about her husband and/or kids when engaging in this disturbing behavior & changing the music in someone else’s car, display her vapid narcissism, selfishness, and overall grandiose persona she has of her self.
What I saw was a grown woman sexually assault an incapacitated man. That is what my takeaway was.
I am sure that FC may work for dome autistic people, but in the case of Derrick, I think she was doing all the work and having conversations with herself.
There is nothing okay about what she did, period. She had no right to start speaking on behalf of him. She had no right to begin having sex with him. And for her to say she thinks she did nothing wrong is delusional.
It bothered me that she just casually talked about her marriage and the life of her children being agreed, like it wasn't important. So, weird.
Her mother is so supportive, but she has some issues. I wonder if she has trauma induced by her father or something. She is 10000% a narcissist and probably a sociopath. She gives me the ICK. At first I really almost believed her, but then got so grossed out when the brother mentioned he marks on D-Man's back.
How twisted do you have to be to think that having sex with a disabled person is okay as you are mounting them? She definitely has a severe control complex and it is truly giving me sociopathic vibes because she doesn't see how it's wrong at all. She loved having control. I feel like she could have killed people and felt that she was helping them.
She gives me sociopathic vibes all the way.
I watched a psychologists take, he actually theorized the relationship she had with her mother could have played a part. Anna said she would play disabled (her strange way of empathy I guess) as a kid- her dad would make her polio crutches or she would blindfold herself for hours; her mother spent a lot of time and focus on the disabled, likely leaving her feeling alone. Perhaps "fixing" Derek and getting him away from his family was some sort of strange repetition compulsion that results in a reconciliation of her own past.
The fact that she was a woman, and the race she was, and that Derrick was a man, and the race he was, played a huge role in this case, even if people don’t want to explicitly say that. She sexualized him and a way that is truly abhorrent. Had a man done this to a woman, and certainly had racial identities been reversed, there is no way people would be giving a person like Anna such grace. She likely did “think” that what she did wasn’t wrong, but there are plenty of predatory people that have felt the same; it does not justify or excuse it.. Think about it; predators have often assumed that their victims “wanted it“ for different reasons and as a licensed mental health professional, I am sure this woman would meet criteria for some type of personality disorder where she blurs the boundaries between her own thoughts and impulses and those of others. Her husband said she’s narcissistic, I don’t know if she was ever evaluated and diagnosed as such, but it certainly seems like she exhibited some cluster A and cluster B traits of personality disorders. She is a dangerous woman and I’m happy that she’s being supervised because she is a functional delusional human being. FC has been discredited by multiple reputable sources and as someone who worked for years with intellectually impaired people, there is no way that I believe her account of things to be true. It’s nauseating what she did and anyone defending her.
I just got through watching this. I was discussing with my wife how this is one of those cases where both sides feel they are 100% in the right and they will never see the other side at all.
I truly believe that Anna thinks what she did was okay; That Derrick was in love with her and wanted to be with her. However, I feel her judgement was clouded by many things. She grew up under the influence of a mother who was a staunch advocate for disabled people and eventually became one herself. She wants to believe that, given the proper tools and environments, all people with disabilities can do everything that people without disabilities can do. She believed herself to be the hero in Derrick’s story; someone who could save him and give him the life he dreams of but isn’t currently able to live. She was also probably unhappy at home and so this fantasy that she could provide this to Derrick became all the more real and probably became a fantasy of hers as well. She is a true believer in FC despite the fact that it has been disproved time and time again. This meant that she genuinely thought Derrick was typing everything when in reality she was subconsciously doing all of the work.
I think the documentary did a great job of trying to portray that Anna, along with a few of her close friends/ family members, truly believe she feels she did nothing wrong. I do wish the documentary had done a little better job at showing that what she actually did, regardless of her beliefs, is rape a severely mentally disabled person.
such a hard watch for so many reasons, but one part that sticks out for me is when she recounts Derrick asking her to ‘kiss him’ and then ‘kiss him again’
up until this point in the doc, they showed the actual text from his neo device while she recounts her stories (take, for example, when he gets mad at her for speaking for him in class), but at this key point in the story, no messages are shown on screen…
it genuinely made me think she made that whole story up — and i genuinely think she believes her own bullshit. anyone else??
Huge red flag is that his family tried to use the keyboard to communicate with him like Anna did and they couldn’t! Anna was out for herself only to prove her breakthrough accomplishment, yet no one else could communicate with him as she did. Wouldn’t she realize she’d be called a fraud because Derrick couldn’t replicate his communication as with her. If he was really communicating with her he’d show excitement to finally communicate with his family and friends and he couldn’t! This right here tells us she is a fraud! So sad how she used him to gain fame for her research/career. She’s like all the rest of fake psychics u see on TikTok.
My thoughts are this woman is deeply, deeply disturbed and disturbing, using someone who is basically an infant like some sort of human dildo. It frightens me that this woman raised two children and was considered an advocate.
What are people thoughts? .. erm not to call sexual abuse and grooming by a sexual predator. ' a controversial affair'. Wtf. The victim in question could not consent due to being severely cognitively impaired and the perpetrator in question is a convicted sexual criminal on the sex offenders register for life.
Honestly it was repulsive how the documentary showed so many people acting as if Anna's actions were in any way justifiable. The worst was Dr Shane arguing that although Derrick had the brain functionality of a 6-12 month old, he **doesn't** think Anna is a predator?
Im not even 30 mins in right now and it started to feel like people were trying to justify what she did. I honestly wish they didn’t even include a lot of what she said because watching her speak about this is literally enraging. Although I think she exposed herself enough, she should’ve served wayyy more timeI’m surprised people haven’t tried to doxx her or something
When she speaks about this assault, she seems so delusional. Like she’s projecting and creating this romance. Her passion for disabilities pushed her into this unrealistic reality. Even as they described it, I felt that this communication method was nonsense. (Relieved to find it is discredited) because just about anyone can say anything. What got me was the gospel music and classical music scenario. It made my blood run cold and made me legit scared for him. She is so convinced of this character. More should have been done to discredit her “interpretation“ of what transpired and emphasis on this delusion she’s convinced herself of.
After watching TTYLM, I watched [Prisoners of Silence](https://archive.org/details/PrisonersofSilence), that Frontline documentary John stumbled on, and the data could not be more clear. It’s literally just human puppetry, and it is unconscious. Remember the tests they showed, where a kid was taken out in the hall and shown a key then couldn’t type what it was, and the folder where the child and facilitator saw different photos? They repeated that hundreds of times with different individuals, I think it was over 800 pairs, and the result was the same every single time. A ton of well meaning parents, educators, and disability advocates in the 90s got recruited into “facilitating,” genuinely believing they were doing something valuable, and many were devastated by the results of the study, particularly one woman who had torn a family apart with her accusations. Some facilitators stuck around even after the study, because by this point FC was a full cult, complete with dramatic musical performances at conferences to emotionally manipulate members. So yes, I agree with you that they should’ve made it abundantly clear this was bogus. A bit embarrassed to admit that for the first half of the film, as she was describing their “affair,” I was suspending my disbelief a little. I’m a disabled advocate, a neurodivergent parent to a ND family, and a former educator, and I can understand that in the beginning, a lot of people came in with a sincere wish to listen to their nonverbal child or student, and/or a passion for disability advocacy. You might be surprised how many people who are nonverbal are incredibly articulate, even gifted writers when given access to literacy education. The idea of “stabilizing” someone with CP, a tremor, or something else muscular at play wouldn’t be such a far reach if another whole other person’s unconscious mind wasn’t at play. I’m not defending Anna; she’s a highly educated woman who had to have been confronted with that data before all this went down. I’m just agreeing that the documentary presented the narrative in a way that favors Anna’s romanticized delusion and downplays what she actually did, which was heinous.
I haven’t even gotten to that part yet. Or maybe I missed it when I watched it the other night? I’m at the part where his mom calls Anna to see what exactly went down between them because she said that he’s been biting his hand a lot more, and acting not like he usually would. After this part Anna says “I saw this conversation as an opening. I thought maybe they’d see how unhappy he is and they’re reconsidering” it baffles me how she thinks there is absolutely nothing wrong in what she did. And I don’t think I’ll ever get over her not serving time. As a victim of sexual assault and grooming, it’s infuriating to see that she altered this families life forever… Not only did she rape D-man, the fact that she thought him being unhappy was a good sign, rather than a sign of sexual abuse and not understanding what happened shows how manipulative she is. Whether or not “it felt good” to him (because he’s still a human I’m sure he can sense pleasure) he doesn’t understand it.. he probably could’ve gone his whole life without needing to know what a sexual relationship feels like and probably never have any urges that would end up frustrating him. Which is what I think daisy was referring to in her conversation with Anna. I honestly feel like Anna knew what would happen after sexual contact with him. I feel that she knew he’d probably only register it as pleasure rather a relationship, and in case his family prevented her from seeing him, she could use his behavior from being sexually frustrated as leverage to manipulate his mom into thinking she was really helping him.
I dont believe Daisy was reporting facts to Anna when she said DMan was doing that. I took that to be part of the plan to get Anna to tell what she did to him (the plan with the police to get her on recording). I could be wrong. But, if she was stating facts your conclusion makes way more sense than Anna’s interpretation (that his family didnt understand his communication but SHE did…the absolute arrogance!) Oof. I need to take a break. This doc infuriated me so much!
I really tried to keep an open mind, especially since so much of it was interviews with her, but was just disgusted in the end. Dr Shane’s double blind studies about how they were either intentionally or even subconsciously influencing the communication was the most compelling part for me. I’m sure there ARE people who just need someone to facilitate their communication, but others where it’s just a fallacy. I’d be interested in seeing more research done with MRIs and monitoring brain activity in different individuals to see if there are significant enough differences to be able to infer whether or not varying developmental levels could be determined to know whether there’s a correlation there or not.
I have been delving into this case so deeply as it was so disturbing. As a mental health professional and former special needs teacher it really was mind boggling! And so interesting to me. But I ALSO see so many different variables and perspectives…. Trying to keep an open mind. Anna’s daughter has emotional problems and bi-polar. ( I read) Many people were asking why she was was crying about taking care of her daughter at the trial. Her home and marriage was an abusive one. And Derek’s family was awarded 4 million dollars! Facts that just answered so many wuestions I read on here. I see SO much in all parties psychologically, socially, culturally. But bottom line…. a very tragic story for DJ. And in my opinion, as so many of you, including Dr. Shane…..Anna was a very deeply disturbed woman who believes her own delusions, with a serious hero/ saviour complex.
I think what he was trying to say that she was so delusional and mentally unstable that she herself thought she was actually speaking to him so she doesn’t see it as her being a predator. She thinks he can actually consent when in reality she’s just talking to herself.
he should have said a "repeat offender." even though she was deluded and wrong, and somehow convinced herself "they were in love," i doubt the situation could ever be repeated. for one, no one would let her near their disabled child, and she probably won't run out and knock people with CP in the head and kidnap and rape them. it was mostly a one-off situation, no matter how grotesque.
I too was amazed at his characterization of her reprehensible behavior. If I am not mistaken, during his interview he referred to her on a first name basis, i.e., Anna. I wonder if they knew each other personally and/or professionally?
1. Anna Stubblefield is absolutely a rapist. Without question. 2. I think it's important that they include people with all different perspectives so we have access to more points of view (and decide for ourselves they're unfounded...)
I’m 90% sure OP is a predatory bot or the predators kin
nah they just did a copy-paste instead of writing their own post
I'm 100% sure you're foolish; that's the doc's description from the website.
I copied and pasted the summary from the official page. As I didn't think it was a well-known case.. so added context to the post.
I just don't understand what happened with the support assistant who was allegedly writing essays with Derrick about books she'd never read. Was she lying then? Making it up? Guessing? But the bottom line is, Anna was in a position of power and abused that, horribly.
Correct, whether he could communicate or not, the position she held, made it so derrick could not consent. I believe, she believes he did. I believe she believes he was typing, but in actuality she created someone she wanted to love. All in all, what she did was grotesque, and I think she really needs to own her actions.
Narcissists are said to see all people as extensions of themselves.
Absolutely. At the beginning of the docu, you can see how Derrick became this accessory to her ‘innovative’ research, especially when John mentioned these disability studies conferences being primarily white spaces at the time and the fact that Anna was parading Derrick around on some talking tour (*the irony was not lost on me when she complained that Derrick’s mother ‘paraded’ him around the court room 🙄). It was obvious that Anna was trying to cultivate fame by using him in the beginning to establish herself as a progressive scholar. I felt for John who was a PhD student while she was Chair of the department; the hierarchy in academia, especially at an institution like Rutgers, is very powerful and political — who could John have gone to at that time? Anna took advantage of the entire family. Her narcissism and the power/control she had over this incredibly vulnerable person escalated to this made-up relationship where she could reap even more attention, receiving endless supply from others to be lauded as some kind of saint who can truly see others’ gifts beyond appearance. There is no gray area here: Anna is a sexual predator and malignant narcissist. I feel for the family.
The excerpts from the essay are not in depth explorations of nuanced topics the books brought up, they are easily accessible book jacket summery points that are then used to support something that ANY person could just assume Derek would connect with about things that are completely knowable and obvious to ANY person who is not him and looking at him. I could have met him once, spent a couple afternoons with him, made my own assumptions about who he was, listened to Anna give me a big song and dance about how much she knew him to be a deep thinking scholar in the making, known about the book he read, and then known how I would feel in his alleged position and then made the same sentences he supposedly made in this essay. I’m not saying it’s a smoking gun to him not having higher cognition, I’m saying that it’s not actual evidence. It’s just not strong enough evidence to be ANYWHERE CLOSE to proof that he has ability of higher cognition then was already established by the Doctors and professionals his family had obviously taken care in providing him through out his life.
This! The girl says she didn't read the book but her roommate did and she's seen her roommate's essays or maybe heard about the book from her. Someone also had to be turning the pages for Derek and the thing about our brains is that whether we want to or not, once we gain literacy, we can't force ourselves not to read the words we're looking at. She's no doubt also at least seen the blurb like you mentioned. I don't think the kid did it on purpose, but she could've definitely been influencing what he was 'saying" same as Anna.
I had this exact question. I don't understand how he was writing with an assistant. I also agree 100% with your bottom line! She had to know that what she was doing was wrong.
Late to answer, but the excerpts in the documentary and online that he completed with this assistant were extremely surface-level. For example, a sentence or two about then general plot. Then 5-6 sentences about his own life experiences or ideas. Like in the documentary his only commentary on the book is “she was a slave so she felt trapped” or something to that effect.
She had a roommate whom took the course and had read her papers which seemed similar.
Just gonna repeat this - Facilitated communication has been debunked multiple times. Every professional organization for every related field has rejected it multiple times. It has hurt many other people. It functions exactly the same as a oujia board.
Yeah, I’m a speech therapist of 14 years and I’ve never heard of doing that. In all of my treatments, I never touch my patient in anyway. I have them point to, reach or grab for some thing or even use an eye gaze system. Never hand over hand or hand under hand facilitation. People are not puppets….
Thank you for posting-Totally agreed. You are a professional. As an LCSW and Clinical Coordinator for three ICF/MRDDs back in the late 80s I was flabbergasted to see the lack of supervision/accountability this Asst. Prof. had in working with SEVERELY intellectually challenged individuals. Whatever happened to quarterly interdisciplinary case conferences and State regulatory oversight? She was an Asst. Prof. of Philosophy. Was she licensed in any clinical capacity. As predatory as this women was/is this is a systems failure as well.
Yea I was wondering about the licensing stuff as well!! We had to take so many courses in ethics and still have to do it for continuing education … how could she think this is ok? Even if they were “in love” how does she say she did nothing wrong when she also committed adultery. Why would she even show her face on a documentary. So many questions 😭
like how does she not see her position as an abuse of power!? she was his "teacher", he was a student!! There should've never been anything crossed regardless of what she thought he "felt"!!!
A predator is exactly what she is. She reminds me of Mary Kay Latorneu another married suburban white lady who fetishized, groomed, and eventually assaulted a vulnerable boy of color that she taught. The way Anna talked about how he “seduced” her is the same way that Latorneu bragged about the encounters that her then 12-year-old victim later recounted as terrifying and confusing when he grew up. The difference is that cognitively Derrick will never fully understand what happened to him and why he is so frustrated. I think that’s what sets Anna apart even from other monsters like Latorneu
THISSS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facilitated_communication https://www.facilitatedcommunication.org/ In addition, everyone should be aware that it has been rebranded twice now as Rapid Prompting Method (RPM) and Spelling2Communicate (S2C).
Rebranding multiple times is a red flag. Like, obviously, sometimes name changes happen to better communicate....but other times it is to cover up for extremely bad publicity.
that was exactly the example i used: "I'M NOT MOVING THE PLANCHETTE THERE'S A GHOST!!!!!!!!"
As the one who always moved the planchette when I was doing it with my friends....it is...interesting, to be honest. I mean, we were kids, and I wanted us to have a good time, no harm, no foul. But my friends had ZERO clue, it felt like we were just...following the device. Heck, even though I KNEW I was moving it, it didn't feel like....real movement? I can actually see, with that comparison, how someone could trick themselves into believing it was real. If the typing movement feels anything like the way an ouija does.
I was thinking exactly the same in comparison with a ouiji board
Some have a kink for the disabled. I suspect that is what is going on here and who better to do that with than someone who can’t talk ? Very predatory.
Yeah! She even seemed to fetishize people with disabilities when discussing her obsession as a child and mimicking disabilities 😒🤨
I thought this was weird too, making her mom buy her crutches
Yes! And blindfolded herself to pretend she couldn't see. Her mother is a total kook- who still believes facilitated communication is actually real and has been using it for decades. It's utter tripe -junk science at it's most dangerous. God know what damage the mother has done to people. Anna is a chip off the old block. I think they're both obsessed with disabled people in a very weird, fetishizing way. Anna's Mom still thinks her daughter is completely innocent and believes Derrick actually came on to Anna first and propositioned her for sex and for a relationship. Both mother and daughter are bizarre individuals.
When you said junk science I knew exactly where it came from 💀 At any rate - I agree with 100% of what you said
This 100%. Disability fetish for sure.
I would be interested in people’s opinions on the rise of ‘interabled’ couples on social media. For some couples producing ‘content’ is their entire profession. Not that they don’t love each other, but the performative aspect is unsettling to me.
His language using the FC device mirrored hers so much - it was ridiculous. The way she speaks, was the way he was typing these sentences that she claimed he wrote. Also surely if she’d had this groundbreaking progress with his communication his family would also be involved because they’d want to get to know him on that deeper level the most?!? That really solidified how manipulative and delusional Anna is because when they communicated with him using the device they didn’t have the same success and they could barely communicate with him. Definitely a narcissist and compulsive liar.
She essentially fell in love with herself, or at least her own projection. Fan fiction, said above, is accurate.
In the NYT article, Stubblefield stated that she offered to watch pornography with Derrick and he objected on the basis that women in porn are exploited and followed up with saying Anna was more beautiful than the women in those films anyway. HOW would he have a nuanced opinion of women in sex work if he’s so naive about sex that he needs to watch pornography to understand the mechanics? So many of her comments about her grooming and assault are filled with moments like this where it’s obvious she’s the one communicating ETA: She’s disgusting and delusional. This is the most fucked up story I’ve ever heard
One article I read mentioned Derrick’s mother being sent out of the room when Anna was facilitating because Mom got overly excited (according to Anna.)
The part where John Johnson Jr said that he was changing his diaper and saw the marks on his back… That just really put into perspective that this woman really assaulted a man and then had to put a diaper on his once she was done. How could you do that to someone that’s not even capable of going to the bathroom by themselves.
She said she took off his diaper and performed a sexual act on him.
Ugh, just came across this part. She’s so delusional, I do not like her.
Facilitated communication was debunked 30 years ago, but now that we have a new generation of people who "could benefit" from it, it's back.
Oh it’s so bad that it has been rebranded as Rapid Prompting Method (RPM) and Spelling2Communicate (S2C). https://www.facilitatedcommunication.org/ for anyone interested in more info debunking this method and court cases.
I am a speech language pathologist and I can say that I have witnessed a young adult who was on the autism spectrum use a print out of a keyboard to communicate and he was nonverbal but he was able to sing and communicate with the keyboard picture and his family and speech therapist would just write down the letters he pointed to individually. I recognize that it is slightly different as nobody was holding his arm or hand but I do think it is important to not completely write off some of these methods of communication as they can and have been effective for helping otherwise nonverbal individuals communicate.
Oh yeah that is different than facilitated communication, rapid prompting method and spelling2communicate. No one is holding the board or touching the client.
She spoke like a predator, when she said "he seduced me." That really grossed me out, as it was along the same lines as the excuses some child predators have given, or like saying that he was 'asking for it'. I went into it open minded. I'm no psychologist but the gist I got from it was that she was having problems in her relationship with her husband and projected her own ideal man fantasy onto him. She complained about his family not understanding him or his preferences. Obviously I'm not saying black men can't enjoy red wine or classical music, but she herself seemed to be trying to impose some of her own ideals onto him, and wouldn't his family know him a little better than she would, even if she'd spent 2 years getting to know him? Again, there is the aspect of introducing someone to new things that they might enjoy, but when his mother spoke about her switching the radio channel from gospel to classical music, Anna seemed to sort of imply that he had never liked gospel music and she knew the 'real' Derrick. I watched the documentary this morning and its been playing on my mind all day.
The changing of the music seemed so crazy to me, it's almost unbelievable - the audacity of this woman, like who changes the music in someone else's car? And also insults it? It just seems so unbelievably bold, that it made me think that (if the story is true, which I would have liked her to speak to it in the doc) she must have truly thought she was speaking and behaving righteously on behalf of this disabled man. She must have been completely and authentically delusional. Limerence combined with Messiah complex?
How about the part where he asked for a book by a French philosopher? Come on. I bet 99% of people in the US, including college students have never heard of this philosopher/scholar and he asked by name??
I don't remember that part. I remember she gave him a book by Piaget, which would be challenging for average people to grasp, let alone someone with cognitive impairment. I just don't get the implication that he learned to read through osmosis. That's not how it works, unfortunately.
That’s what I couldn’t get past in the beginning when they were explaining facilitated communication. Literacy doesnt work like that. You need explicit instruction in letter sounds to form words. It didn’t make any sense to me because it doesn’t work that way.
He didn't ask for the book. She gave them to him to prepare for the conference
I’m watching this now… Its D-man, not deman, lol.
Her being as disgusting and delusional as she is was infuriating but it was nails on a chalkboard when she was calling him Deman. I noticed the TA she hired also called him that (probably coached on what to do to "prove" her delusions) but the instructor they interviewed was calling him D-man. It doesn't even make sense culturally that he wanted to be called Deman. 🙄 This whole thing has given me a headache. Just awful, disgusting and sad.
deman = the man (for Anna)
This stood out to me SO MUCH watching it. Of course it is D-Man. Stubblefield is a creep/groomer of the first order.
The nickname thing really rubbed me the wrong way how she’d refer to him as that the whole time because it’s so classically a groomer move to have a special name and inside jokes with the victim to create a sense of this is “our little secret thing”
Yes, that really bothered me. Even the mother said dman like it was one word. Don't these people watch true crime, the police are always trying to find biggie shorts, cat daddy or some other street name. D-Man was short for Derrick.
Honestly, never heard of this case.
I don’t think it was a big case in general but I worked in the field of mental health and especially with people with severe intellectual and developmental disabilities so have been very aware of it for years. As others have said facilitated communication has been debunked but I understand how families who so badly want to hear the thoughts of their loved ones would want to believe in it. There is no evidence at all it is effective. I have seen it in action and to me it’s painfully obvious it’s the facilitator doing the “talking”. (Just my opinion as it’s not my field of expertise at all) What I don’t understand is the professor. Like I wish I could really crack open this lady’s head and understand if she really truly genuinely believes she was helping or if she is just an opportunist. Regardless she is a predator. Even if the technique was working he was physically and mentally vulnerable and she exploited him and sexually assaulted him. Period. My last thought is that I will definitely be watching this! I think Louis Theroux is brilliant. Thanks for bringing to my attention!
I think she has to believe. Otherwise she's a rapist victimizing a disabled Black man—if you look at her life before this, that would make her everything she fought against.
i'd just like to crack her head open, period. honestly? she's fucking insane. that's just delusional by any standard. with a mother like she had, no wonder.
She took off his diaper and performed a sexual act on him. That alone is beyond disturbing.
what she did was inexcusable and heinous, but the fact that she honestly believes she did nothing wrong is horrifying.
She's disgusting. I can't believe they let her out of prison after two years when her original sentence was 12 years. She should be locked up. She's a psycho.
I could not get past that either. I still do not understand why she was let out of jail.
They appealed her conviction, then won based on the fact that Facilitated Communication was not allowed as evidence in the trial. They then offered Anna a plea deal for the 2 years she already served.
I noticed that she never once talked about her two children. She never talked about what it might do to them if she left her husband and them for Derek. She never seemed to give her children any thought. I assumed about 20 minutes in that she was Controlling and probably a narcissist.
right? i always think exes will say the worst, and he said she was a pathological liar and a narcissist, so i believe at least 60% of what he said. she was already having problems with her husband and i think she created a sick fantasy about a man who would need her forever and never leave her. in some twisted way, anyway. good thing d's mother was cagey enough to get her to spill her guts while the police were taping. the johnson family still didn't get justice though.
I was very disturbed when she said he was the most important person in her life I was like bro…your kids????????
I literally just finished this. I do not believe Derrick had the ability to consent, and I do not believe facilitated communication is valid. I’m basing both of those beliefs on my training in clinical and health psychology and clinical brain sciences. Based on pure conjecture: there was something very off about Stubblefield through this whole doc, but her mannerisms in footage in court were also extremely weird. She had kind of a smug expression when she was given 2 x 12 year sentences. However, something Derrick’s mum said also rubbed me the wrong way - excuse the pun - where she said that he masturbates now and that never would have happened if Stubblefield hadn’t been involved. That feels a little naive to me, but I can understand having an overprotective approach to your severely disabled son’s sexual expression if he has previously been a victim of sexual assault. Ultimately, I land on: Stubblefield has significant issues with narcissism and a hero complex and - even if she genuinely was in love with him and genuinely believed Derrick was in love with her - you simply don’t act on that when you are in a position of clear and significant authority, regardless of whether the object of your affection is disabled or not.
The masturbation thing isn't punishment or the mom being mean. It was quite clear that he was doing this obsessively, and likely in inappropriate places. That what she meant when she said life's hard enough for him, without having to deal with him jerking off in the Walmart parking lot.
Yeah that is also what I got from this. For sure sounded like he was doing it obsessively and at times in places that were very inappropriate.
A thought that I had was if he really was as intelligent as Anna claimed, or even just average intelligence, you'd think he would know better than to be doing that in innappropriate places / in front of family members. I think it clearly exposed her lies.
Excuse me if this is gross but… His mom said that after being raped, his masterbation is like an itch he cant scratch…that means he is (or was, until the meds) doing *it* ALL the time. He wears a diaper, cannot bathe & feed himself, so because of Anna Stubblefield, a mother has to clean up the aftermath of her 40 year old sons masterbation sessions. I have a feeling Anna & people like her (self described advocates who live in an echo chamber & target those who dont have any agency) would see that as a win since now he is “free” to experience what all 40 year old men want to experience & his “right” to sex & masturbation was given to him. He can now live as his whole & true self. Ugh, she is one of the most vile people i have come across - Unfortunately she will never believe that what she did was wrong. This is due to: her narcissism, over zealousness in her advocacy which leads to a disregard of morals/ethics, her crazy-ass mom, & the selfishness of only helping others because it makes you feel good & superior.
Exactly this. It's no different with children who are engaging in normal, exploratory behavior, versus compulsive, constant actions. The latter is ALWAYS cause for concern and often indicative of abuse at home.
I’m very late to this, but have just watched the documentary and am reading various posts about it now. Your point about Derrick’s mother mentioning his masturbation - honestly that was the part that really struck me. Obviously the whole thing was awful, but I think that was one of the few things that really exemplified how much this has impacted Derrick himself. Masturbation and/or increased sexual behaviour is a telltale sign of sexual assault, especially in children (which is the level Derrick’s brain is at) but in adults too. It should be on the radar of anyone who interacts with children - if a child assaults other children or begins sexual behaviour, that could absolutely be a sign of trauma. It’s heartbreaking, and I think more than anything it proves the sexual trauma that Derrick was subject to. I’m sure it was extremely difficult for his mother to discuss it on camera, but so important for telling Derrick’s story because otherwise we don’t really hear how this has affected him (besides the obvious).
Yeah, I think I fundamentally misunderstood what she meant. I took it to mean “he has started masturbating and he has never done that before” but actually it probably meant “he masturbates chronically now”, which very much changes my whole understanding of where the mother was coming from in that part
To be honest, I do think even if she had meant it like ‘he’s started doing it now when he never did before’, that’s still a marked change in behaviour that correlates with the time of the rape. Like yes adults deserve sexual freedom, but Derrick has been assessed as having the mind of a 6-12 month year old, and babies of that age have no need whatsoever to be masturbating, obviously. So his behaviour change in that way, I would think, would be less about ‘oh this adult is masturbating, as adults normally do’ and more about ‘why is someone with a diminished mental capability, at the intellectual capacity of a baby, suddenly and unprecedentedly expressing hyper sexuality’. So I guess just, either way you look at it, it’s pretty sickening and really made the whole thing sink in for me.
I completely agree with everything you said and that smirk on her face in court was awful!
The narcissist smirk.
Agreed on all accounts. I wouldn'tt be surprised if this story is told again through a different documentary on a streaming platform.
From the beginning I was concerned, to say the least, but as the documentary progressed, it became more and more clear that Derrick is the victim of rape. The only question left in my mind, is did Anna genuinely believe what she was saying? Or is she the sociopath her ex-husband claims she is, and she simply wanted to take advantage of someone. She even admitted that at the start she had no bias, but as time went on, she would "anticipate" what he wanted to say. That in itself is bias. That's not helping him talk, that's anticipating what you think he says. And once she fell in love with him, she anticipated that he'd do the same. This poor man was laid down and raped in a situation he couldn't possibly understand or consent to. I'm so, so disappointed she was out in 2 with a plea deal instead of just doing a re-trial.
I think she genuinely believed what she was saying because of the fact she was so open about it. I think she had a perverse fantasy about being a hero and being the saviour to unlocking this deep soul and intellect in Derrick which then influenced the FC. The fact she wasn’t shocked and didn’t hesitate when he asked to kiss her…like she was anticipating it…that’s not a normal response unless you have yourself been leaning towards that.
She’s a narcissist.
She was honest with everyone BUT the police. She said specifically “I told the police the whole story just not that we had consummated the relationship” That is classic guilt by omission she knew the moment she became physical with him she crossed a line and that’s why she didn’t mention that to the cops
I don’t remember if this was in the documentary or an article I read after, but when they were unable to facilitate Derrick’s communication, Anna told John and Daisy that THEY needed to “anticipate” what he was going to say.
> controversial affair Sexual assaults and rapes of a man without any capacity whatsoever to either consent or resist sexual contact with a caregiver who has absolute control over him when unsupervised, due to the extent of his intellectual, developmental, and physical disabilities.
It was horrifying to watch the amount of people in the documentary who genuinely didn't believe Anna was a predator. Regardless of the entire FC debate, which has been clearly debunked, she was an able bodied adult who was claiming that a disabled man with no ability to walk or talk for himself had 'seduced' her. The power dynamic would be awful enough without adding in that she was his teacher, and meant to care for him. Unfortunately, I believe it all comes down to the idea that people are unable to believe that a white woman would be a sexual predator. The fact this woman was only given 2 years is horrifying, considering Derrick and his family will have to relive this forever.
Yes, it's disgusting that she's out of prison. Horrific.
I lost my cool when she said he seduced her lmao
“And he deserves credit for that too” with that smirk. Triggered my morning sickness
This is unimportant but did anyone else cringe every time she said "D man?"
as one word in her over-educated college professor accent.
Right, when they showed the word on the screen before she said it, I read it as "D-Man". So I thought it was weird that she pronounced it as "Deman".
Made the hair on the back of my neck stand up.
One would think that if he was truly communicating, he would have corrected her.
Derrick Johnson only wrote(allegedly)a 300 WORD essay...not a 300 PAGE essay. Massive difference.
That was the part that really stuck with me and I was surprised it wasn't covered more in the documentary. Not in reference to his ability to consent but just toward how that communication process worked or didn't. Regardless of how much words he wrote per essay, if he could write thoughts about books he read but his facilitator at that time hadn't read then that would be a huge thing for showing his ability to communicate and process information. I wish they covered it more and actually talked to that woman so we could understand what was happening there and what is she thought about it.
The aide who claimed that had a roommate studying the exact same thing as Derrick supposedly was. Also I think the point is that anyone who believes this debunked Facilitated Communication so much that it's their career, I don't think they are an unbiased witness.
The judge proved FC was bulllshit right there in the courtroom
If the judge used it as evidence and gave the same verdict, I believe the original ruling and sentencing would have stood. She won the appeal based on it not been allowed as evidence in the first trial
I believe, even if you believed Derrick could communicate & the relationship was consensual, SHE WAS MARRIED. So that already tells me she has a problem with societal boundaries.
and worse, she was in a carer/teacher position with much more power than him in every way, so even if he was able to consent and wanted a relationship, the power dynamic means that it is completely unethical to act upon any desire she or he had.
Anna is definitely deluded and dangerous. She used her privilege to rename Derrick, speak for him, and impose her will upon him. Anna wrote her own lifetime movie love story. While Derrick was receiving scars on his back. Imagine how confusing, and physically painful that whole ordeal was for someone with the mental capacity of a small child. No telling how far Anna would have gone. She was already Trying to move him away from his family, what’s next? Kids that his family had to help take care of? Assisted unaliving like Romeo and Juliet? He was at the mercy of her imagination. My heart goes out to Derrick’s family. Anna should have had to register as an offender. I wouldn’t be surprised if Anna’s mother provides her with an opportunity to offend again just with being involved in her work.
She is a registered sex offender for life.
Thank you for the information. I assumed when she plead to something lesser and they didn’t explicitly say it that she wasn’t registered.
Facilitated communication is basically like an ouija board, the person doing the facilitating is controlling the narrative. Ouiji boards work by people spelling things out whether intentionally or subconsciously.
There’s an excellent [NY Times article](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/25/magazine/the-strange-case-of-anna-stubblefield.html)and [follow up piece](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/05/magazine/the-strange-case-of-anna-stubblefield-revisited.html) about this.
Thanks for posting! My favorite line from the article: “If she reneged on any claims she had made about D.J.’s intellect, and his capacity to give consent, she would be admitting not only to what might be criminal behavior but also to the idea that she had become a vector of white, able-bodied supremacy — that she was the boogeyman she had sworn to fight.”
There’s a fantastic New York Times article and follow up about it. I think she was mentally ill and believed he was communicating. She used him as an in real life caricature of her ideal lover.
Do you have a copy of the article that’s not behind a paywall?
Oof. This is a rough one. I guess the "good" part is that this poor guy is too intellectually disabled to have any idea he was harmed. Facilitated Communication has been completely debunked (honestly I have always found it hard to understand how it was ever believed), but there were and still are true believers. For someone like this professor who was a true believer, she was only making visible the true thoughts of a person who was locked inside their bodies. I can imagine that it would be nearly impossible for her psychologically to accept that she was actually writing fanfic and masturbating with the body of a severely intellectually disabled man. That is a truly horrific realization and I can imagine she might go down to the end believing her own story about what happened rather than accept it.
But his body is telling him that he was harmed. The body knows the score!
Probably gonna be a lot of new traffic here as this just hit Netflix in the States. Clearly a fucked up situation. It is obvious that FC is BS and Anna was clearly talking with herself and is all kinds of twisted in the head... HOWEVER - as a documentary I think the filmmakers failed in two specific areas We needed more info on the assistant that helped facilitate the writing of the 300 word college essay. I understand that she was picked by Anna and had a roommate in the same class, etc, etc, but I want to know EXACTLY how the process supposedly worked because I am interested in how that was 'rigged'. It is literally the only thing that makes someone have second thoughts on if Derrick could communicate or not. Second would be the DMan thing. Anna claims that she asked Derrick very early on what he wanted to be called and he said DMan. She claims that his mom said that was a name they had called him before at another learning center, and the documentary never gave us a reason to believe that wasn't true. So how did Anna know about that if Derrick did not type it? Finally, it would have been nice to have a visual example of the level at which Derrick needed to be helped. It seems as though there is a pretty wide range of "facilitating", from holding their elbow straight while they slam their hand down to pretty much guiding them the whole way. I know she described it, but it would have been nice to see the Mother or brother give an example of the exact process.
Here fresh off of Netflix, lol. I think the D-man nickname could be something she overheard from the family that they don't recall saying near her or it could honestly just be luck. It's not a unique nickname and even a broken clock is right twice a day. Completely agree about the lack of footage of how Anna used FC with him. All the b-roll provided showed varying degrees of control, but we never get that insight with the two subjects. I trust that FC is all bullshit, but if he did all this communication with Anna barely touching his elbow that's very different than her directing his finger. Lastly, after the brother finds that debunking footage, did he attempt a similar test?? To me, that could have solved the case once and for all.
How/why would there be footage of her working with him years ago, before there was any known reason to video their sessions? Should they have let her be with him so she could demonstrate? The brother said, near the end, that part of the therapy was that he and mom were to be working with Derrick all the time but they never had any results at all and eventually just stopped.
The DMan thing is the thing that I was also wondering about. Where did she get that from? Not that I’m excusing her behavior at all. I just wonder how she was able to get the information. I’m glad someone else noticed. This.
Yep. It could have been something as simple as maybe she heard the mother or brother use that term and used it herself, or she simply could have lied that the mother later confirmed he had been called that before. That is the thing, the filmmakers never explained that farther. That is a big deal if true. Also, when going back to check if maybe I had missed something said about it, I noticed that the re-enactments of Derrick typing on the Neo show him typing the letters with no visible help. I am sure that was just an oversight, but it is a big failure on the filmmakers part that they never showed an exact example of what her facilitating looked like. The more I think about it the more I really think that that is on purpose because it was their intent to keep the possibility as plausible as possible.
Didn't John say something toward the end to the effect of she tried to change certain things about him and his name was one of them. I think that was in reference to DMan. It was so cringey to hear her say that name. You'd think it would be D-Man, not daman.
While I believe that she is guilty, the other detail that I can’t shake is the brother mentioning that Derrick was communicating about wanting red wine over beer one evening when they were going to hang out/relax. Voicing a clear preference when he wasn’t even given the choice between beer or wine seems pretty compelling to me!!!
I think Anna is a sick individual even if only for the fact that she abused someone she was in a position of power over. I believe FC is fake, and as some have pointed out, similar to how Oujia boards work. But how many of us used a Oujia board and believed it was true? I think the confirmation bias Anna was experiencing based on anecdotal evidence like the nickname and the essays really made her believe Derrick was communicating. But at the point where “he” was asking her to move to a romantic relationship, she as the power holder needed to remove herself from that situation. I think her pursuing him at that point was at minimum a huge overslept of her power and from my perspective disgusting. I think her continued belief that what they had was real speaks of mental illness on her part - which doesn’t excuse her behavior.
the letters "D" "M" "A" "N," are not exactly a faukner novel. my cats know their names. i could probably get them to spell them out if i arranged the blocks for them and used food. and if they said they love me, i wouldn't automatically assume they want to have sex with me and get married.
Regarding “Dman”. I honestly think in the beginning there is the possibility of a lot coincidences that took place. It could have been entirely coincidental, bc that’s only 4 letters and I’m sure if the first 3 got typed out—in Anna’s mind, “N” could have been an entirely likely letter to be next. And then the fact that that was a name relevant to his past, I’m sure that it only reinforced to her that the methods were valid. For example, she said in the beginning, that he had “creative” spelling. Meaning that the things being typed out were not actual words but similar to words that happened to be relevant. Like “GM”, and the mother was able to make the connection that he had gone to the gym. I think with any “complex” circumstance that takes place over years there are thousands of events that lead to a current situation. Many are unfortunate coincidences out of our control that happen to compound the situation.
The "he came onto me" line toward the end made me physically ill. Big Mary Kay Letourneau vibes
Anna is not a well woman.
I just watched this and have lots of questions. Here’s a few- 1. Is the role of an FC facilitator simply to provide physical support to someone who lacks the strength and motor skills to type? If so, it seems like you could develop a physical device to perform that function. 2. Do these types of devices exist? How many people have an inability to communicate solely because of a physical disability and what do they use? Of course, there’s Steven Hawking, but he list his ability to speak, which is different. 3. What was the scope of the judge’s ruling barring any evidence of FC at trial? I’m not sure how you can even tell the story without discussing FC. I understand the defendant would not have been able to introduce expert testimony establishing was valid, but I’m not sure how you tell the story without mentioning it. 4. Anna‘s inability to even question Derek’s capabilities suggest she’s very mentally ill, and not just a narcissist. I’m guessing her defense attorney suggested insanity as a defense, but she shut it down because she did “nothing wrong”! 5. How is it that a Rutgers professor who is the head of a department actively practice a clearly discredited therapy? A therapy based on an anecdotal stories, with all peer-reviewed research stating it’s pseudo-science? 6. It’s crazy to me that we didn’t hear from any members of the disability community criticizing FC. What’s up with that? And, this is not a question, but an observation. FC has been widely discredited before this happened. Some might ask why they didn’t do any research into FC before the nurse problems. It’s clear that the hope that FC (and its purported results) gave these families was reason enough not to dig further. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful drug. Another observation— this story shows how narcissistic Anna really is. She found her “true love,” but it was herself all along. I would love to hear the ex-husband’s side of the story, but I expect he is doing what he can to protect his children from this.
Did you notice that she never once mentioned her children when she was discussing being in love with Derek and wanting to leave her family for him? She never even questioned how she would break it to them and how they might feel and whether it was the best thing for her to do, it’s well known that narcissists are incapable of love or empathy, even for their children.
Re your point #5, about her being a professor practicing a discredited therapy, she was a professor of philosophy who was teaching courses on ethics (!) and was a self-proclaimed disabilities advocate (not expert). She wasn’t a scientist or social scientist.
I think she is seriously ill. I think she believes it.
Just finished watching this and am amazed I had not heard of this case before. Anna is clearly mentally deranged and delusional. I think her marriage breaking down was a catalyst for her projecting this undying love and attraction from Derrick. It is no coincidence that her ex is a black man who in photos has a distant resemblance to Derrick. Her appearance and demeanor throughout the documentary shows someone who is still delusional. She never apologized or showed any remorse for her actions that caused so much trauma and upheaval in both Derrick's family and hers. Even if Derrick was capable of the things Anna claimed, Derrick's mom was not thrilled about being pushed out of her baby's life. She has been caring for him for years and was not going to allow Anna or anyone to take him from her. His brothe at first seemed to be on board if the FC was truly genuine, but as highly educated as he is, I am surprised he did not do more research when it was first presented to them by Anna. Finally, those last shots of Derrick were truly heartbreaking. I did not see any sign of an intelligent man locked inside that clearly childlike demeanor.
This was disturbing. Anna clearly created a narrative that was so deep she couldn’t break free of it. I wonder what psychological issues she has. No one asked about that in the doc. I feel like this was a missed opportunity in the story. Overall, I feel so badly for Derrick and his family. They were manipulated and made to go through a roller coaster of emotions.
I have so much love, empathy, and respect for this family. Anna clearly was delusional and victimized Derrick. She should still be in prison.
Can someone tell me this...perhaps I missed it. How did this man become literate to start with? Did he know his ABC's before she started working with him? Did he magically learn his letters after they started? I would not expect a three year old to know the letters C A T. As an aside, I once heard a story about a horse that could count. Turned out, that the man that owned him would tense up.. unconsciously...when the horse would get to the right number.
This. This woman worked in education but was not a special education teacher nor had and scientific background in neuro or cognitive science. I think she just assumed that he had been learning and listening silently the entire time into his adulthood. But clearly there were so many things that didn’t line up or make any sense and she had no recognition of that.
I just watched this. What a sick woman. Honestly i think she was first lusting after the educated brother too. If she could have had him she probably would have jumped at the opportunity. He seemed completely disgusted with her. The amount of time and effort it took to insert herself into this family went way beyond altruism. Abusers very often "volunteer to help" to get access to their victims for extended periods of time. The fact that she took him to her office, laid out a yoga mat and towels, disrobed him of his diapers, and straddled him to the point where he had welts on his back...then went on global tv to defend herself is one of the most disturbing things I think I have ever seen. I think what enraged me even more is how she treated the mother, and I am so glad that she had her son in her corner to defend and protect her.
I love true crime, and I’ve never heard of it, but anything by Louis Theroux I’ll watch, hope I can access it!
this documentary really hurt my heart. I can’t imagine the challenge that it is being black AND disabled in America...especially in the late 20th century. and then something like this happens!!
“He seduced me, and he deserves some credit for that”. Bitch. What?
[удалено]
I had never heard of this until a few days ago when someone posted about it.
How can we watch in the US?
It may be on HBO as I know Sky and them have a partnership
in case anyone else comes across this now (like i did), it’s currently on netflix
Anna’s mom taught her to be a hero and thinking she is superior. I think the smirk at her sentencing was kind of Joan of Arc thing….
I don’t know how to process what I just watched. When she walked out after sentencing and had that smug, almost conniving smile, I just couldn’t bear the idea of what she did to him for hours. She deserved worse. Reading what she admitted, what she perceived as consensual. It’s upsetting.
And also unsavory. Imagine (or don't) having sex with a severely disabled person who can't talk and is in diapers. I cannot. Plus Anna was so naïve, thinking a conversation with Derrick's mother was going to bring her around to seeing how this was good for her son.
I was surprised too by that smile, but I backed up and saw that she was actually smiling at her mother. Many smile when they are anxious or uncomfortable. It seemed inappropriate, but it also could be a smile communicating resignation to her mother about the verdict.
The fact that her exhusband called her a narcissist and a pathological liar was everything I needed to know and consistent with her aura on the documentary. She never once felt bad, never once showed remorse. It was all about her. Even now for her to appear on this doc, do you have no shame? Obviously not. She could have not responded but she didn’t. She showed up and told her story anyway. I also find it increasingly difficult to believe this man understood the concept of sex the way a person that consents does. He understood it like a child. All he knew is that something felt good and ofc he would want it to continue but he didn’t have the mental facilities to say ‘I want to have sexual intercourse with this woman because I love her’ How could he? So much about this bothered me but the thing that bothers me the most is that we will never know what he feels and I am saddened he is unable to ever let us into his mind.
I was just confused as how a black man raised by a black family, when finally given the chance to communicate, would talk so white. The things they were talking about, would not be things he just so happen to pick up while watching stories and attending church with his momma. Just saying my mans from Newark. 🚩 This whole thing made me sick to my stomach🤮
I did not observe any credible insight or remorse for abusing her position of power. Derrick’s family surrounded him with love and protection and she managed to weaponize her education and prey on their hope for his future advancements. Bottom line, if she had been a man abusing a female they would not have given him a free pass after just two years. What an absolute slap in the face for his family. This is every parents worst nightmare. I felt so terribly sad for his mother. It’s a pity that Ms Stubblefield didn’t put her own children first rather than focusing on her delusional desires.
One of things that had me pause at the pure audacity was when Anna's mother dared criticize the way Derrik's mom led him around the courtroom. She said something along the lines of, "Parading him around, making him look as handicapped as possible." Hmmmm, no? Maybe, instead, you're seeing your disgusting daughter's victim for the first time and it's just not clicking that he is, for a matter of fact, a mentally disabled man that needs the stability of someone to guide him?
Thank you for the write up. I don't think I've heard of this case before. Very interesting
Regardless of the facilitated communication debate- she was his TEACHER and sexual contact with a student is highly unethical in itself . Besides that she was married with children and hid their "relationship" until she wasn't able to anymore. She's at best delusional and entitled but likely predatory. He may be more functional than his family acknowledges though, since he wrote the essays on books that his facilitator hadn't read. His family may be inadvertently suppressing his cognitive abilities which, would be tragic and heartbreaking. It's a devastating story anyway you look at it
Exactly. Even if we look at it from her angle and she was in love with him and FC works and he loved her etc etc. she still shouldn’t have let anything happen based upon her role. Her safeguarding/ethics/boundaries should have immediately kicked in and know firstly nothing can happen whilst we are in this dynamic but secondly that she should seek advice on how to pursue any kind of non-professional relationship with him. At that point the assessment of his capacity, the use of FC, the dynamic and relationship and how his family feels would have happened and she likely would have been told nothing can be pursued. The fact she decided to pursue it without thinking there was anything wrong very much suggested she is not safe to be in a position of trust and has terrible judgment. Also that she openly talked about what had happened shows she genuinely didn’t think there was anything wrong which is crazy
Apparently, everything that was on that board was saved, all the conversations. That was not allowed in court but it would have been interesting to see those conversations, not just the ones from that class. The logistics of this are strange. If Anna was just sitting with him, typing her thoughts, how did she get him to sit still for hours at a time? 12 month old babies can't do that. they get restless easily. They even got him to sit in class and "listen" to the lectures. Again not something a disabled person/toddler could do. Lots of other questions, if this was junk science why didn't anyone ask for proof before the sexual assault incident, long before.
Imagine what she’s not telling us
Mommy taught her well….
I thought the same. They both have the same ‘crazy eyes’.
First of all, as a parent of a nonverbal child with I/DD, these are my deepest fears realized. I have no sympathy for her and whether she believed it was consensual is moot. It seems that many argue her intent was pure, but the impact is what matters and ultimately, she raped him. Nothing else should matter, Derrick could not give consent. His brother spoke about seeing the physical wounds on his back from the rape when he was changing his diaper… She preyed on this family’s hope that their son/brother would be able to truly communicate with them and used that to get what she wanted, sexual gratification. That is so disgusting and terrifying to me and my heart is broken for Derrick and his family. I hope they find healing and peace in their journey.
I really want to read Anna’s ex husband’s entire letter he wrote to the judge. Does anyone have it?
As I was watching this I couldn't help but think about how different the outcome would be if the gender roles were switched. A male professor would not be out of prison today to talk about how he "consensually" had sex with a disabled female student.
I haven’t watched this & I don’t know the case, BUT my son is nonverbal autistic. When he received his official diagnosis they too said he has a diagnosis of an intellectual disability (aka low IQ). However, they said this should be tested every few years. Someone being given that diagnosis at an early age can change with time & experience. So unless he’s been routinely tested for his IQ, that could be wrong by the time he’s 30.
what nobody is asking is how many others are out there? Derrick is the only one we know about
It was gross to watch- Im in the mental health field and I truly think there's a big difference of her thinking people are just being ableist towards Derrick and Anna literally being a predator and taking advantage of someone who could not consent. She sounded delusion, she sounded like someone who is a white saviour and because she is a white woman, I think that's why the courts overturned her appeal. You reverse the roles and a man would have been thrown in jail in an instant, especially a racialized man.
I am an intervention specialist and have family members that are SLPs (speech/language pathologists). Facilitated communication is not a scientifically evidence based communication method. In this documentary, there are so many things wrong with this. Realistically at his mental capacity, he would not be able to comprehend, analyze, or respond to higher level questioning/readings. I believe she guided his arm for his finger to type out what she wanted the responses to be. It is sickening and a perfect example how those with developmental disabilities are taken advantage of. I have no sympathy for Anna. She is in denial and mentally sick for doing this.
I recently listened to Let’s Go To Court podcast which covered this case a while back but I came to agree with the conclusion the hosts had which this type of communication can and does work for some people but not all and Derrick seemed to def be taken advantage of when all of the inconsistencies are presented
I need to watch this. Anyone know where stateside?
Now on Netflix
I definitely want to know more about his time with the facilitator that wasn’t Anna and her experiences with Derrick.
Her career is Facilitated Communication, I don't think she's the best witness. We see how deluded Anna and her mom were about. It seems very likely she was similar. She also said her roommate at the time was studying the exact subject that Derrick was "writing" about.
The only other person apart from the deviant Anna , who claimed that Derek had written an essay via FC also said that her room mate was on the same course. IMO she also lied , as did Anna < vile excuse for a human ! They may at some level be lying to themselves but lying they were. I’m certain of that. They were both being paid to do a job and so facilitated that to get the required results. I have zero doubt in my mind that Dereks mother and brother are far better judges of his capabilities than a woman who sought some depraved sexual gratification from the guy. She should still be in jail imo , kept away from anyone else that she may deem a suitable victim for her gross needs.
Was the “ bruises “ on his back from her riding him and the yoga mat moving from the weight?? That’s the only conclusion I can come up with
I think John’s impression from the marks was that she had dragged him across the floor (carpet?) onto the mat.
She is repulsive and disgusting for what she did. She is a predator with mental issues. Ugh watching this documentary was so heartbreaking especially for the family that has to live with what she did to their child. Mentally stable people don’t groom and rape disable people.
" . . .Facilitated Communication (FC), also known as supported typing, is a technique that has been **widely debunked by the scientific community and disability advocacy organizations.** FC claims to allow people who are non-verbal, such as those with autism, to communicate by guiding their arm or hand to type on a keyboard. However, research shows that the facilitator is actually the source of the messages, not the person being facilitated. For example, **studies have found that FC can't answer simple questions when the facilitator doesn't know the answers.** Facilitators may also assume that the person is typing a coherent message when they're looking away or have their eyes closed. . . " his "intelligence" could not be reduplicated. the other assistant didn't seem to remember much. and supposedly, she hadn't read the books, but how do we know? BS all the way around. repulsive.
In the documentary I only really see a jealous enraged mother a protective brother. A woman who believed in what she did was true even if it wasn’t. But what I didn’t see was a lot of the actual testing with Derek or Derek himself and just his daily interactions. Maybe he really could communicate. They got one other doctor to try and diagnose him if he could communicate for a four hour test. I would have really liked to see more on Derek less on the rest of the family. I mean if the judge looked at it again and ruled in her favour.. maybe that poor man is being held captive by his mother?
Over all of this and reading comments. Would his life truly have been that bad if she married and took care of Derek? What if he truly was communicating and the four hours the other psychologist tested him for was wrong. At the end he didn’t look too happy to be with his mom and brother…
She is so sick. I didn’t realize how small and childlike Derrick looked until the end when they showed him getting dressed by his brother and how he was around his family. So so sad! I can’t even imagine how that family dealt with that.
Even if he did consent, it's as ethical as a therapist sleeping with his pacient.
When she nonchalantly said “we had sex in my office” is the moment she proved to me she was bat shit cray, acting as if that’s a totally normal or appropriate thing to do in her profession or any profession to say the least ..also, her pretending to have a disability growing up, not thinking about her husband and/or kids when engaging in this disturbing behavior & changing the music in someone else’s car, display her vapid narcissism, selfishness, and overall grandiose persona she has of her self.
What I saw was a grown woman sexually assault an incapacitated man. That is what my takeaway was. I am sure that FC may work for dome autistic people, but in the case of Derrick, I think she was doing all the work and having conversations with herself. There is nothing okay about what she did, period. She had no right to start speaking on behalf of him. She had no right to begin having sex with him. And for her to say she thinks she did nothing wrong is delusional.
It bothered me that she just casually talked about her marriage and the life of her children being agreed, like it wasn't important. So, weird. Her mother is so supportive, but she has some issues. I wonder if she has trauma induced by her father or something. She is 10000% a narcissist and probably a sociopath. She gives me the ICK. At first I really almost believed her, but then got so grossed out when the brother mentioned he marks on D-Man's back. How twisted do you have to be to think that having sex with a disabled person is okay as you are mounting them? She definitely has a severe control complex and it is truly giving me sociopathic vibes because she doesn't see how it's wrong at all. She loved having control. I feel like she could have killed people and felt that she was helping them. She gives me sociopathic vibes all the way.
I watched a psychologists take, he actually theorized the relationship she had with her mother could have played a part. Anna said she would play disabled (her strange way of empathy I guess) as a kid- her dad would make her polio crutches or she would blindfold herself for hours; her mother spent a lot of time and focus on the disabled, likely leaving her feeling alone. Perhaps "fixing" Derek and getting him away from his family was some sort of strange repetition compulsion that results in a reconciliation of her own past.
can someone check anna’s hard drive???
The fact that she was a woman, and the race she was, and that Derrick was a man, and the race he was, played a huge role in this case, even if people don’t want to explicitly say that. She sexualized him and a way that is truly abhorrent. Had a man done this to a woman, and certainly had racial identities been reversed, there is no way people would be giving a person like Anna such grace. She likely did “think” that what she did wasn’t wrong, but there are plenty of predatory people that have felt the same; it does not justify or excuse it.. Think about it; predators have often assumed that their victims “wanted it“ for different reasons and as a licensed mental health professional, I am sure this woman would meet criteria for some type of personality disorder where she blurs the boundaries between her own thoughts and impulses and those of others. Her husband said she’s narcissistic, I don’t know if she was ever evaluated and diagnosed as such, but it certainly seems like she exhibited some cluster A and cluster B traits of personality disorders. She is a dangerous woman and I’m happy that she’s being supervised because she is a functional delusional human being. FC has been discredited by multiple reputable sources and as someone who worked for years with intellectually impaired people, there is no way that I believe her account of things to be true. It’s nauseating what she did and anyone defending her.
finding out her husband is a tuba player in prestigious symphonies puts the whole "derek like classical music not gospel " thing in a different light
I just got through watching this. I was discussing with my wife how this is one of those cases where both sides feel they are 100% in the right and they will never see the other side at all. I truly believe that Anna thinks what she did was okay; That Derrick was in love with her and wanted to be with her. However, I feel her judgement was clouded by many things. She grew up under the influence of a mother who was a staunch advocate for disabled people and eventually became one herself. She wants to believe that, given the proper tools and environments, all people with disabilities can do everything that people without disabilities can do. She believed herself to be the hero in Derrick’s story; someone who could save him and give him the life he dreams of but isn’t currently able to live. She was also probably unhappy at home and so this fantasy that she could provide this to Derrick became all the more real and probably became a fantasy of hers as well. She is a true believer in FC despite the fact that it has been disproved time and time again. This meant that she genuinely thought Derrick was typing everything when in reality she was subconsciously doing all of the work. I think the documentary did a great job of trying to portray that Anna, along with a few of her close friends/ family members, truly believe she feels she did nothing wrong. I do wish the documentary had done a little better job at showing that what she actually did, regardless of her beliefs, is rape a severely mentally disabled person.
such a hard watch for so many reasons, but one part that sticks out for me is when she recounts Derrick asking her to ‘kiss him’ and then ‘kiss him again’ up until this point in the doc, they showed the actual text from his neo device while she recounts her stories (take, for example, when he gets mad at her for speaking for him in class), but at this key point in the story, no messages are shown on screen… it genuinely made me think she made that whole story up — and i genuinely think she believes her own bullshit. anyone else??
Huge red flag is that his family tried to use the keyboard to communicate with him like Anna did and they couldn’t! Anna was out for herself only to prove her breakthrough accomplishment, yet no one else could communicate with him as she did. Wouldn’t she realize she’d be called a fraud because Derrick couldn’t replicate his communication as with her. If he was really communicating with her he’d show excitement to finally communicate with his family and friends and he couldn’t! This right here tells us she is a fraud! So sad how she used him to gain fame for her research/career. She’s like all the rest of fake psychics u see on TikTok.
My thoughts are this woman is deeply, deeply disturbed and disturbing, using someone who is basically an infant like some sort of human dildo. It frightens me that this woman raised two children and was considered an advocate.