Talk:Satanic Panic

	This Satanism related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

Amanda Knox

This is getting some search engine hits form "amanda knox satanic cult." With her acquittal in Italy there is a lot of interest going around. If someone with more time and/or knowledge wants to look over what we have just to make sure its a good representation of what we can do? Tmtoulouse (talk) 08:06, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I will see what I can do in the next ten minutes before having to run off and learn how to point and shoot fire extinguishers again. ^{...I'll cruise your octohedron!} 08:11, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

It may be a language issue (being Italian while Google is biased towards English articles) but I'm having a lot of trouble tracking down the first-hand blogging of Gabriella Carlizzi. None of the papers seem to link directly to it. ^{...I'll pander your sacrifice!} 08:20, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Let me have a look and see if I can come up with it. The Spikey Punk ^{I'm punking my punk!} 08:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I mean, I've always had my suspicions about media involvement but now I'm looking into it it's difficult to find anything that doesn't look like it's been massaged quite a lot by the US press for the sake of spinning their story. ^{...I'll curate your snake!} 08:30, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

You'll have to translate them, but this and this might be what we're looking for. The Spikey Punk ^{I'm punking my punk!} 08:32, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Meredith Kercher entry to be removed from the page

The report that prosecutor made a satanism allegation in the Meredith Kercher case is false. It is not supporter by any credible source and actually outright contradicted by all direct sources. The story about Gabriella Carlizzi allegedly being the source of the prosecutor's view is a narrative pushed by some authors/journalists, namely Doug Preston & Mario Spezi. It can be shown that this is contradicted in reality and that the sources are discredited. Therefore it should be removed entirely from the page, IMHO Gornik (talk) 23:31, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Oops. Sorry for getting rid of your edit.ClickerClock (talk) 05:38, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

West Memphis Three

As the West Memphis Three section is very biased (and makes stuff up - Jessie was coerced, but confessed multiple times of his own volition), I'm removing it. This is a case where the prosecutors were right for the wrong reasons - there was "muh Satanists" idiocy here, but Damien Echols is a proven sociopath and psychopath who tortured a dog to death. --104.56.23.57 (talk) 06:40, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Rather than just deleting the section, suggest how it could be improved. Which particular sentences are wrong? How can any specific statements be reworded and improved? Saying you don't like it on the talk page isn't sufficient reason to delete it immediately. "See talk page" indicates that a consensus has been reached and you are enacting it. —Kazitor, ^pending 00:21, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

This sums up all the evidence in favor of them being guilty. It makes a compelling case that the three were guilty, but the prosecutors were on the wrong tangent. Had they just focused on Damien being a psychopath (his family was literally terrified of him, and for good reason - a few months prior, he tortured and disemboweled a Great Dane), we wouldn't be having this conversation. People have latched onto the Satanic Panic thing and are trying to flat-out ignore the evidence against them, claiming Jessie was coerced into confessing. He wasn't. He repeatedly confessed of his own volition, to the point his lawyer basically said to stop because he kept incriminating himself. He was a bit delayed, yes - but he also deliberately tested low on an IQ test to help the defense. It's someone with an IQ of 85-90 deliberately trying to act like they have an IQ of 70-75. --158.222.69.9 (talk) 19:19, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

If the section needs rewriting with greater attention to facts then bring some citations to the party. What is stated above ("People have latched onto the Satanic Panic thing") makes it obvious that the section belongs in the article. 79.72.140.112 (talk) 10:44, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

comments from Twitter reader

from [1] - David Gerard (talk) 15:19, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Center for the Treatment of Ritualistic Deviance

″We don’t know the percentages because so much is secretive, but we do know ... it (Satanism) is beginning to show up throughout the country,″ Trahan said. — Psychiatric Hospital Sets Up Unit To Treat Satanism (Charles J. Gans September 6, 1989) ^{— Unsigned, by: BruceGrubb / talk / contribs}

@BruceGrubb On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you. Spud (talk) 12:05, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Thought I did. Weird.--BruceGrubb (talk) 03:17, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

'Titivillus ate the tildes'? :) Anna Livia (talk) 09:17, 18 July 2022 (UTC)