Speaker 1: Camp Hell Anawaki is a production of I Heart Radio.
Speaker 1: The views and opinions express in this podcast are solely
Speaker 1: those of the author and participants and do not necessarily
Speaker 1: represent those of I Heart Media or its employees. Due
Speaker 1: to discussion of traumatic, sexual and violent content, listeners discussion
Speaker 1: is advised. In nineteen seventy, the Anawaki Foundation, as it
Speaker 1: was known at the time, was being investigated to see
Speaker 1: if it was fit to hold a license as a
Speaker 1: child carrying facility in the State of Georgia, the biggest
Speaker 1: concern being if it's executive, Lewis Petter, was quote a
Speaker 1: person of stable and sound judgment. In this episode, you
Speaker 1: will hear excerpts from the nineteen seventy hearing by the
Speaker 1: Georgia Department of Family and Children's Services regarding whether or
Speaker 1: not to revoke the Anawaki Treatment Center's license, performed here
Speaker 1: by voice actors. John H. Hinchi, Assistant Attorney General representing
Speaker 1: the State of Georgia, began questioning former counselor Roger Drew Rosel.
Speaker 1: What was Dr Petter's position while you were at an Awaki.
Speaker 1: He was a general director over the entire camp. Did
Speaker 1: he supervise your activities as a group leader on occasion, Yes,
Speaker 1: what do you mean on occasion? I saw very little
Speaker 1: of Dr Petter in so far as instructing me as
Speaker 1: a group leader. There were times when we had problems,
Speaker 1: if we had specific problems, or sometimes if he wanted
Speaker 1: to sit in on a group meeting, he would do that. Uh,
Speaker 1: this wasn't on a very regular basis. Did you discuss
Speaker 1: your activities on a regular basis with Dr Petter? The
Speaker 1: problems Dr Petter was really more than anybody else. If
Speaker 1: we had a particular problem or something out of the ordinary,
Speaker 1: we would usually end up going to Dr Petter. What
Speaker 1: sort of problems are you referring to? When I can
Speaker 1: think of problems with kids? Uh, sexual problems, they were
Speaker 1: all most always. Did you discuss any sexual problems with
Speaker 1: boys under your supervision with Dr Petter? Yes, Sir, I did.
Speaker 1: Would you relate those conversations with Dr Petter? On one occasion,
Speaker 1: I went to Dr Petter and told him that had
Speaker 1: come to me told me that he was having sexual
Speaker 1: intercourse with He told me that this behavior had gone on.
Speaker 1: Who told you? Counselor Roger Rosel was referring to two
Speaker 1: of the boys from in Awaki who were having sexual relations.
Speaker 1: Their names have been redacted from this document for their protection,
Speaker 1: told me that he had been sexually involved with that
Speaker 1: At first, he had been doing it just in order
Speaker 1: to have sex. Then he told me that he liked
Speaker 1: and he wanted to have sex because he liked him.
Speaker 1: I went to Mr Petter and told him that he
Speaker 1: had come to me, and I didn't know what to
Speaker 1: tell because this was the first time I think that
Speaker 1: I had been confronted directly with one of the boys
Speaker 1: telling me that they were actually involved sexually with another
Speaker 1: boy there in the camp. Mr Petter told me not
Speaker 1: to discourage this behavior. Told me not to discourage what
Speaker 1: kind of behavior, Not to discourage their sexual behavior, but
Speaker 1: to tell them they shouldn't be promiscuous about it. To
Speaker 1: encourage this relationship. Mr Petter told me to encourage this relationship.
Speaker 1: Over the past several weeks, we have received number of
Speaker 1: very serious allegations concerning both the facility out there in
Speaker 1: a number of individuals involved with him. It was just
Speaker 1: a form of their therapy. They were told to do it,
Speaker 1: and at the time he was fourteen and a half
Speaker 1: fifteen years old, they didn't know any better. I asked him,
Speaker 1: why are you letting this happen? Why are you covering
Speaker 1: up for Louis Patter. He had no answer to that
Speaker 1: question involved having paid little such districle and the contrary
Speaker 1: of what they should. I'm disturbable the fact of something
Speaker 1: that is still going on. And anyway, I'm Josh Stain
Speaker 1: and this is Camp Hell an Awake. In our last episode,
Speaker 1: we heard from the foreign patient of an Awake who
Speaker 1: had succumbed to Lewis Petter's manipulation and abuse. Now Roger
Speaker 1: Roselle's testimony had begun to unravel Petter's pseudo psychological theory
Speaker 1: regarding sexual practices. Rozel claimed that Petter had been encouraging
Speaker 1: sexual relations between the boys on campus as well as
Speaker 1: with counselors. Assistant Attorney General John Hinchy continued his questioning
Speaker 1: of the former counselor. Did you have any other conversations
Speaker 1: with Dr Petter about this particular theory of his. It
Speaker 1: wasn't too long before I left an Awake. Mr Petter
Speaker 1: was talking to me in the office of the camp.
Speaker 1: I've been thinking about leaving. Mr Petter told me that
Speaker 1: I was suffering from homosexual fear. And I asked him
Speaker 1: what this was. He told me that I was afraid
Speaker 1: that I was a homosexual, but that I could work
Speaker 1: this out. He told me that I needed to work
Speaker 1: this out. Could you tell us about that in detail? Well,
Speaker 1: in the same conversation, Mr. Petter told me that he
Speaker 1: would be willing to work it through, that he had
Speaker 1: to find out that he could trust me. And at
Speaker 1: the same time, he brought up the point that I
Speaker 1: had been in the police department. Roselle had formerly worked
Speaker 1: for the Atlanta Police, where he left after admitting to
Speaker 1: filing a false police report, a stain on his professional career.
Speaker 1: Apparently Petter knew this and made sure that rosel knew it.
Speaker 1: He told me that he was aware of this the
Speaker 1: entire time I had been employed by him, and asked
Speaker 1: me if I knew that he was aware of this.
Speaker 1: I told him I was. Then he said, see, you
Speaker 1: can trust me. I knew this all along, and yet
Speaker 1: I still let you work here. Now you need to
Speaker 1: let me trust you, and you have to prove it
Speaker 1: that I can trust you. At this time, I said,
Speaker 1: all right, I'll prove it, and he shut the blinds
Speaker 1: in the room and the curtain and I went over
Speaker 1: and hugged him. You went over and what and he
Speaker 1: hugged me. He tried to kiss me, but I turned
Speaker 1: my head, or it appeared to me that he was
Speaker 1: going to kiss me. Is this the only time that
Speaker 1: something like that happened? No, sir. Another time we had
Speaker 1: gone to Franklin, North Carolina to a gym show. One
Speaker 1: of the boys was with us, and on the return
Speaker 1: trip he was asleep in the back seat. Well before
Speaker 1: the return trip we had stopped to eat something there
Speaker 1: in Franklin. He kept suggesting that we stay in the
Speaker 1: motel there and I said, no, we can go ahead
Speaker 1: and make the trip back tonight. On the way back,
Speaker 1: while the boy was asleep in the back, Mr Petter
Speaker 1: put his hand on my neck and rubbed my neck.
Speaker 1: Later he dropped his hand on my leg close to
Speaker 1: my groin and rubbed my leg there. The boy awoke
Speaker 1: about that time, and did Petter do anything when he
Speaker 1: woke up, He moved his hand. Charles Edwards cross examination
Speaker 1: that followed attempted to further smear Roselle's reputation by grilling
Speaker 1: him about using illicit drugs, specifically marijuana. Rosel said he
Speaker 1: had never used any legal drug before in his life.
Speaker 1: Edwards leaves Rosel with a final remembrance of his failed
Speaker 1: police career. When you went down to the police department.
Speaker 1: You took an oath, didn't you, Yes, sir? I did?
Speaker 1: You took an oath to uphold the law and do
Speaker 1: your duty? Isn't that right? Yes, sir? You violated that oath,
Speaker 1: didn't you, Yes, sir. Attorney for the state, John Hinchy
Speaker 1: requested to ask a few more questions. Did Dr Petter
Speaker 1: know about this police report before you came to work
Speaker 1: at Unawaki? Did not tell Dr Petter myself, but Dr
Speaker 1: Petter did tell me later on that he was aware
Speaker 1: of it and had been aware of it since the
Speaker 1: time of my employment. Did he ever say anything to
Speaker 1: you about this report? It was during the time when
Speaker 1: I wanted to leave the camp. I had signed an
Speaker 1: agreement that said that if I left the camp at
Speaker 1: any time within two years, I would have to pay
Speaker 1: a certain amount of money for training I received. I
Speaker 1: was going to leave anyway. Mr Petter told me that
Speaker 1: if I left the camp that he would have to
Speaker 1: inform any employers that might seek him as a reference
Speaker 1: of my problems, and that this would include the police department.
Speaker 1: Mr Petter said that I had done this as a
Speaker 1: result of homosexual fear, and told me that if I
Speaker 1: would bring him in writing a letter from a psychologist
Speaker 1: or a psychiatrist saying that I was under treatment for
Speaker 1: homosexual fear, that he would let it go. According to
Speaker 1: rosel Petter extended power over his staff, just as he
Speaker 1: did the patients at Awake. If anyone chose to leave,
Speaker 1: they could be indebted to him financially, and Petter would
Speaker 1: be sure to have something to hold over their head.
Speaker 1: Not only did Roselle alleged that Petter was using the
Speaker 1: false police report as leverage, but that he even had
Speaker 1: the gall to request a written letter from a psychologist
Speaker 1: admitting and writing that Roselle was guilty of the exact
Speaker 1: prognosis Petter claimed for all of the crimes which Louis
Speaker 1: Petter was accused of. He had a backup plan and
Speaker 1: seemed willing to use anything he could against anyone who
Speaker 1: claimed otherwise. In its case against an Awake, the state
Speaker 1: had interviewed students who claimed to have been abused by
Speaker 1: Petter and a staff member who testified to witnessing this
Speaker 1: type of behavior as well as being personally threatened. The
Speaker 1: next witness would be another unnamed patient who alleged he
Speaker 1: was included in Petter's inner circle, the small group of
Speaker 1: patients who would stay at Petter's house on the weekend,
Speaker 1: basically living with their abuser. Are you acquainted with Dr
Speaker 1: Lewis Petter, the respondent in this proceeding, Yes, I am.
Speaker 1: Have you ever engaged in sexual activities while at an
Speaker 1: awaking yes? Did you have any sexual relations with Dr
Speaker 1: Petter while you were there? Yes? Yes I did? And
Speaker 1: when was the first occasion? Paulson must have been six
Speaker 1: or seven months after I was there. Can you describe
Speaker 1: that occasion and what happened first? Started off came in,
Speaker 1: You know, I was at the camp and it was
Speaker 1: said that I could go to Dr Petter's house and
Speaker 1: that there was a girl there that I could date
Speaker 1: that night with and Mr Petter's daughter, which was Rita.
Speaker 1: So while I was in there taking a shower, this
Speaker 1: was when I was first confronted with it. I was
Speaker 1: kind of played around with that was the first thing.
Speaker 1: And what happened on medication. I was in there at
Speaker 1: the sink and Mr Pettick came in and started fumbling
Speaker 1: around with me. You just started rubbing me all over
Speaker 1: and things of this nature, and just kind of laughing
Speaker 1: and smiling. Did he say anything? He said, you're a
Speaker 1: good boy, and things like this. Did you try to
Speaker 1: run away? I was more or less frozen. This is
Speaker 1: right when I get out the shower and I was shaving,
Speaker 1: I put down my shorts and just walked out. Can
Speaker 1: you describe what happened on the second occasion? I couldn't
Speaker 1: exactly list them in in a complete order or anything.
Speaker 1: There are many occasions. I can explain occasions to you.
Speaker 1: How many occasions it must have been ten, eleven, twelve
Speaker 1: on up there. What did Petter do on these numerous
Speaker 1: occasions that you just mentioned, pash, debating, fondling, I guess
Speaker 1: you would say, kissing, this stuff. Did he ask you
Speaker 1: voluntarily to do this with him? He always approached me
Speaker 1: like you've been rejecting me for a week or two,
Speaker 1: and I like to know why, and things like this.
Speaker 1: This was the way it would first begin. And then
Speaker 1: he would say something like, well, why don't we just
Speaker 1: go in here in the bathroom. It's something of this nature.
Speaker 1: Another approach was, you know you have a homosexual problem
Speaker 1: that you need to work through. The only way you
Speaker 1: can work through this is having one masculine image around
Speaker 1: you all the time. This patient's experience reflects much of
Speaker 1: what we heard in the first testimony. By this account,
Speaker 1: Petter was convinced that nothing would come of his behavior,
Speaker 1: so blatant has to even partaken this abuse in his
Speaker 1: own home with his wife and daughters in the next room.
Speaker 1: Did you ever tell anyone else at the camp about
Speaker 1: these incidents with Dr Petter? No? I didn't. Did you
Speaker 1: ever try to put a stop to them? I was
Speaker 1: always more or less just I would do my best
Speaker 1: to reject them. What would you do? I go around
Speaker 1: like at the camp or something of someone said Doc
Speaker 1: was on the campus, I would leave or something like that.
Speaker 1: During this time I was living with them, I kept
Speaker 1: more or less to myself or Wayne Petter, who was there.
Speaker 1: Wayne was Louis Petter's adopted son. I just do my
Speaker 1: best to reject it. Then, if I was up watching
Speaker 1: a late show or something, everybody else would go to bed,
Speaker 1: you know, and then Mrr Petter and I would be
Speaker 1: in there. I started to go to bed, and he
Speaker 1: would start his routine over again, where generally did these
Speaker 1: incidents occur with Dr Petter in his office? Yes, one
Speaker 1: occasion was in was in his office. That was the
Speaker 1: only one in his office. The rest of these were
Speaker 1: at his home. Some members of the hearing panel had
Speaker 1: questions about this part of the testimony. How old were
Speaker 1: you during this time? I was about fourteen when I
Speaker 1: when I first went out there, I'm nineteen. Now. How
Speaker 1: long did you live there? About two years? Did you
Speaker 1: think that moving in the house Lewis Petter would make
Speaker 1: it more convenient for him to do these things? I figured,
Speaker 1: you know that maybe how it's wrong, Maybe it was
Speaker 1: nothing I was. I was so confused, and I admit
Speaker 1: I was emotionally upset quite a bit. I just I
Speaker 1: wanted a family situation. That was the best way and
Speaker 1: the only way I knew to get one. You put
Speaker 1: up with it just to get to live there, That's right.
Speaker 1: One issue that came up in this hearing was that
Speaker 1: this patient had signed two separate affidavits in regards to
Speaker 1: Dr Petter. When did you sign the first one? I
Speaker 1: signed the first one for him. I don't know exactly
Speaker 1: what data was, but it was in Mr Edward's office.
Speaker 1: Do you remember the circumstances when you signed this affidavit. Yes,
Speaker 1: the way I gather it is that Roger In and
Speaker 1: Bob Akistino were filing suit on him, a million dollars suit.
Speaker 1: How did you find out about that? Was told this
Speaker 1: by whom by Dr Petter and by the whole Petter
Speaker 1: family at the time I was living there, that and
Speaker 1: in all some sort of homosexual acts that they were
Speaker 1: going to try to prove that he had participated in.
Speaker 1: And so Colonel Parker and members of the board, several
Speaker 1: of them came out to the administration building and awake,
Speaker 1: and Dr Petter was going to discuss this with them.
Speaker 1: So I was on campus and knew that they were
Speaker 1: going to be out there in the whole. While I
Speaker 1: was going up there, he told me if I wanted
Speaker 1: to help him out, the best thing I could do
Speaker 1: was they asked any questions about, say that I participating
Speaker 1: in masturbating with him, say five or six times, something
Speaker 1: like this. The patient is referring to another boy from
Speaker 1: an awake his name also redacted for protection. The patient
Speaker 1: claims Petter again shifted the blame for his actions to
Speaker 1: another student onto someone else. Have you ever participated in
Speaker 1: masturbating with No, I have not go on. So he
Speaker 1: said they were going to try to wreck his home,
Speaker 1: his family and Antawaki itself. Who was Bob Dugustino Roger
Speaker 1: in this is way? He had told me. So he said,
Speaker 1: you go in there. You know they're gonna call you
Speaker 1: in and they're gonna ask you questions. And he said
Speaker 1: that placed this in my answers when asked about that,
Speaker 1: was that was the main thing. Did he offer you
Speaker 1: any favor or payment of money for doing this? No?
Speaker 1: All he said was, you know, if things work out right,
Speaker 1: you'll still be able to go to college. You'll still
Speaker 1: have a home anytime you want it, have a home
Speaker 1: with home him. Did you sign the affidavits? Yes? I did.
Speaker 1: Did you sign any other affidavits? Yes. Right after that,
Speaker 1: it was on November the six, I got to thinking
Speaker 1: about the whole situation, you know, I mean, really just
Speaker 1: how wrong it was because I never had any sexual
Speaker 1: acts or anybody else anyone out there on the campus
Speaker 1: as far as that was concerned. So I started feeling
Speaker 1: guilty about it. So if there was gonna be a suit,
Speaker 1: I figured, heck, why not tell the truth. At first,
Speaker 1: I just want to stay out of it. But then
Speaker 1: I had already gotten in it. So I signed affidavit
Speaker 1: for Bob Dextino. Did you sign any later affidavits? Yes?
Speaker 1: After that I resigned one for Dr Pettick. Why did
Speaker 1: you do that? Because I started being pressured by my
Speaker 1: peers and things like that. When all this mess started
Speaker 1: up about the court stuff, I was completely rejected and
Speaker 1: thrown aside head. It just really upset me. So then
Speaker 1: I resigned for Dr petterck. Where did you do that?
Speaker 1: It was in the Sheriff's office of Douglas Field that
Speaker 1: I signed it, wrote it out, dictated it, and then
Speaker 1: O'Barry wrote it out and and I signed it. Was
Speaker 1: it the truth? I'm referring to the third affidavit you
Speaker 1: signed and Sheriff Abercrombie's office. No, what is the truth?
Speaker 1: Would you tell us now? The truth? As far as
Speaker 1: this whole thing goes, I know you know I've done
Speaker 1: homosexual acts with Dr Petter and I know of him
Speaker 1: doing them. There are people on both sides that I
Speaker 1: care about. Ends just it confused, mixed up thing. I
Speaker 1: really just don't want to have any more to do
Speaker 1: with it because there's too many people getting hurt in it.
Speaker 1: And there's too many of my friends and things of
Speaker 1: this nature that just getting all torn up with it.
Speaker 1: Why did you decide to tell us the truth? Because
Speaker 1: I wanted it to be the end of it. I'm
Speaker 1: tired of hearing about it. M State Attorney John Hinchy
Speaker 1: had laid out the testimonies of multiple patients of an
Speaker 1: Awaki who alleged that they were the victims of Louis
Speaker 1: Petter's abuse, both mental and physical. Hinchi showed Petter's efforts
Speaker 1: to cover himself with false affidavits from current patients and
Speaker 1: pointed to Petter's arrogance in the face of being questioned.
Speaker 1: Anawaki had attempted to discredit its former patients, using the
Speaker 1: knowledge gleaned from their own medical records against them. Now
Speaker 1: it was time for Charles Edwards to do damage control
Speaker 1: on Inawak's behalf. What transpired is a series of testimonies
Speaker 1: from friends of Lewis Petter, who, in their eyes, could
Speaker 1: do no wrong. The following is just one example of
Speaker 1: a friend of Petters who was willing to vouch for
Speaker 1: his character. Would you state your name for the hearing committee, please,
Speaker 1: Sir John J. Purple Jr. Do you know Dr Pettter? Yes, sir?
Speaker 1: How long have you known him? Since nineteen one? Can
Speaker 1: you state what his character is in the community in
Speaker 1: which he lives in works? In my experience, it's been
Speaker 1: above reproach. I've had dealings with him professionally. Are you
Speaker 1: familiar with the charges that have been brought against Dr
Speaker 1: Petti concerning homosexual activities? I know nothing about specific charges.
Speaker 1: I just know in the general sense. And do you
Speaker 1: know him well enough that if you had a teenage
Speaker 1: son who was emotionally disturbed, even though charges like these
Speaker 1: had been made, would you have any hesitation of still
Speaker 1: sending that son to the center out there for treatment?
Speaker 1: I would have no hesitation whatsoever. That is all State
Speaker 1: Attorney John HINCHI began his cross examination. If the charges
Speaker 1: against Dr Petter were true, would your opinion of him change?
Speaker 1: I can't see how they could be true. I have
Speaker 1: never had any reason to believe I understand, But if
Speaker 1: they were proven true, would your opinion of him change?
Speaker 1: Let's back up a minute. I'm not familiar with the
Speaker 1: charges the charging question that this hearing is and I
Speaker 1: quote and awake, he maybe in violation of the minimum
Speaker 1: requirement applicable to child carrying institutions, requiring that the executive
Speaker 1: in every instance be a person of state able sound
Speaker 1: judgment whose integrity is above reproach, and that Louis J. Petter,
Speaker 1: executive director, is reported to have had immral ellicit relationships
Speaker 1: consisting of homosexual acts with one or more of the
Speaker 1: boys who have been patients or students of this child
Speaker 1: caring institution, and has further condoned the practices of homosexual
Speaker 1: acts between other boys at this institution. Now, if this
Speaker 1: charge were proven true, would your opinion of Dr Petter change?
Speaker 1: Or in the alternative, would you send your son to
Speaker 1: Anna Wake he with Dr Petter as the director. I
Speaker 1: would be quite surprised if this could be proven true.
Speaker 1: I still believe that Lewis Petter could help my son,
Speaker 1: even if such charges could be substantiated. Even if the
Speaker 1: charges could be substantiated and be proven true, you think
Speaker 1: he could help your son. Yes, even if Petter had
Speaker 1: been practicing sexual acts with the children at Anawaki, this
Speaker 1: man claimed he would still put his own son in
Speaker 1: Petter's control. Many of in Aweki's witnesses would be asked
Speaker 1: the same series of questions, each corroborating Petter's remarkable character.
Speaker 1: One thing that seemed clear from this series of testimonies
Speaker 1: is petters strong ties to the community in Douglasville and
Speaker 1: his assurance to keep himself in a good light to
Speaker 1: the people that mattered. Edwards next witness would be sure
Speaker 1: to make an impression on the panel. From the Department
Speaker 1: of Family and Children's Services, Petter's old friend, Jim Parham.
Speaker 1: Parham had served as the director of de Facts from
Speaker 1: nineteen sixty three to nineteen sixty seven. Would you state
Speaker 1: your name for the hearing committee, Thomas M. Jim Parham.
Speaker 1: What kind of work are you in or profession? Well,
Speaker 1: I'm a social worker. I'm a professional social worker by training,
Speaker 1: and I'm a correction specialist in the Institute of Government
Speaker 1: at the University of Georgia. I'm also an assistant professor
Speaker 1: in the School of Social Work and School of Sociology. Now,
Speaker 1: in the nineteen fifties, where were you employed. I was
Speaker 1: employed at the Fulton County Juvenile Court up until nineteen
Speaker 1: fifty seven, and then I worked with Mr Petter at
Speaker 1: the Savannah Chatham County Juvenile Domestic Relations Court till fifty
Speaker 1: nine and subsequently at other places. Is that where you
Speaker 1: first became acquainted with Dr Petter? Yes, In the late forties,
Speaker 1: he was a probation officer and subsequently a psychologist at
Speaker 1: the juvenile Court. I was a detention home attendant at
Speaker 1: night while I was at Emory, and when I graduated
Speaker 1: from Memory, I took a job as a probation officer.
Speaker 1: He and I worked together quite frequently from fifty one
Speaker 1: until fifty five, at which time I went off to
Speaker 1: graduate school on leave of absence. When I returned, he
Speaker 1: was negotiating for a job to set up the first
Speaker 1: combined juvenile domestic court in Georgia. He asked me if
Speaker 1: I would be interested it and going along with him.
Speaker 1: I did go, and we worked together for two years
Speaker 1: and setting up that court. And did you work closely
Speaker 1: with him and see him almost daily? During that period
Speaker 1: of time from fifty one until we went off to
Speaker 1: school in fifty five, we were together daily well except
Speaker 1: for weekends, and and many time on weekends because we
Speaker 1: were interested in our jobs, and we had a good
Speaker 1: many of the more difficult assignments, and we undertook camping
Speaker 1: trips and cave exploring trips and interesting things to do,
Speaker 1: because we found that a lot of the kids that
Speaker 1: we were interested in trying to help didn't fit in
Speaker 1: very well to any of the existing organizations. For instance,
Speaker 1: if they would go to Boys Club or the Why
Speaker 1: or something like that, well, quite frankly, they were so
Speaker 1: aggressive they got turned away, or either they were so
Speaker 1: withdrawn they wouldn't be accepted. So we found that this
Speaker 1: was helpful. That kind of experience gave these kids something
Speaker 1: interesting to do, something they could go back to their
Speaker 1: group and talk about something of interest. We took scores
Speaker 1: of youngsters. I wouldn't begin to think how many, but
Speaker 1: we took scores off among camping trips where we were
Speaker 1: together for extended periods of time, two or three days
Speaker 1: at a time while we were together, just constantly, I stated,
Speaker 1: at his house, whenever I went there for a while
Speaker 1: we were together, I would say, if not practically all
Speaker 1: the time, from what you've said, you've known Dr Petta
Speaker 1: about twenty years, then is that right? At least twenty
Speaker 1: during that time, have you ever seen any indication of
Speaker 1: any misconduct or improper sex conduct on the part of
Speaker 1: Dr Petta in any way? No, has any of the
Speaker 1: children that have worked with him, or whom you may
Speaker 1: know that have known him, reported any incident of improper
Speaker 1: conduct on the part of Dr Petter to you. No, No,
Speaker 1: And I would think if there had been any kind
Speaker 1: of incident, you know, it would have been impossible for
Speaker 1: that not to have come to my attention because of
Speaker 1: the way we worked many times with this same child.
Speaker 1: I would have him as a probation officer or a
Speaker 1: probation counselor Lewis would be psychological testing or some sort
Speaker 1: of psychological counseling, and it would have been I think
Speaker 1: highly likely if such had occurred, that it would have
Speaker 1: been brought to my attention. And it never was and
Speaker 1: never has been. And you say you visited in his
Speaker 1: home many times. Have you ever seen, in connection with
Speaker 1: these visits in his home any indication of domestic strife
Speaker 1: or problems between he and Mrs Petta? I would say
Speaker 1: it was almost uniquely clear of such. In fact, probably
Speaker 1: less than any family I've ever known. A number of
Speaker 1: these boys lived in their home, haven't they? And is
Speaker 1: that part of some of the therapy for them? Well?
Speaker 1: I would think that Louis Petter goes further in his
Speaker 1: efforts to help people than most anybody in the business.
Speaker 1: I know he is willing to go further and to
Speaker 1: extend himself and his family. They have been that way.
Speaker 1: I think they are unique in that respect. Also, do
Speaker 1: you have any idea of how many boys you and
Speaker 1: Dr Petter took on these trips over the years. I
Speaker 1: sat scores of them. I'm sure it would add up
Speaker 1: to perhaps more than a hundred. In the event you
Speaker 1: had a teenage boy who had emotional problems and you
Speaker 1: are familiar with the charges against Dr Petter, would you
Speaker 1: have any hesitation in sending that type of youngster over
Speaker 1: to an awaking No. I wouldn't have any hesitation. I
Speaker 1: would think any professional in the business would want these
Speaker 1: charges cleared, and personally I would have no objection. I
Speaker 1: certainly would consider the charges untrue, but I would think
Speaker 1: that any professional in the business would want these kinds
Speaker 1: of charges erased, would want to see them cleared before
Speaker 1: he made recommendations. Now, this type of thing is not
Speaker 1: an uncommon charge where people who work with children, especially
Speaker 1: emotionally disturbed people, is it. No, It happens frequently for
Speaker 1: all of us who are familiar with institutions of this
Speaker 1: sort where children are kept where they are kept voluntarily
Speaker 1: or involuntarily. Anytime you have a large congregation or aggregation
Speaker 1: of people with personality problems, you are much more likely
Speaker 1: to have events of this type. Charges of this type.
Speaker 1: They are frequent, you know, for those of us who
Speaker 1: have had experience with them to realize that great care
Speaker 1: and great caution should be taken in handling them. They
Speaker 1: certainly can't be ignored. But the fact that there are
Speaker 1: discontented people that are trying to be helped, that they
Speaker 1: are likely to be unhappy for various reasons, they do
Speaker 1: have problems. This has to be considered. I think when
Speaker 1: such charges are made. Harm had made his argument clear.
Speaker 1: The children and anawaki were troubled, unhappy people. They had
Speaker 1: a reason to make claims against the head of the
Speaker 1: place they were forced to be. Quite simply, he said,
Speaker 1: they couldn't be trusted. Have you found in working with
Speaker 1: children and young people that on occasions where they are
Speaker 1: disturbed and unstable they turn against the person who was
Speaker 1: trying to help. It's not uncommon at all because such
Speaker 1: people that many times have strong dependency complexes. They invest
Speaker 1: a good bit of themselves in someone who comes into
Speaker 1: contact with them and attempts to help them, and they
Speaker 1: want many more times than it is possible for any
Speaker 1: human to give. But it's not uncommon, particularly with delinquent kids,
Speaker 1: that they will turn against the person who is trying
Speaker 1: to help them. They will do something that will cause
Speaker 1: some disruption of the problem or some disruption of their
Speaker 1: court status, and this kind of thing. They will do
Speaker 1: this quite frequently. Playing right off of the testimony which
Speaker 1: had just taken place, an Awaki attorney, Charles Edwards, called
Speaker 1: back to the stand the patient who had spoken a
Speaker 1: few days earlier against Petter, the one who stated he
Speaker 1: had been a part of his inner circle. After some
Speaker 1: events transpired over the weekend, the boy had a serious
Speaker 1: change of mind and yet again signed another affidavit in
Speaker 1: Petter's favor and decided to completely recant his testimony. Now
Speaker 1: you remember testifying here before a few days ago, right now, Actually,
Speaker 1: had there been any sexual acts between you and Dr Petter? No,
Speaker 1: there there has not. In fact, I stretched you to
Speaker 1: a great extent there. I mean it was like you know,
Speaker 1: boys out on campus, like you come up to eat
Speaker 1: at the lodge or something. You know, you put your
Speaker 1: arms around them because you liked them and things like that.
Speaker 1: It was the same way with Dr Petter, And I
Speaker 1: believe I stated before the fact of him being a
Speaker 1: father to me, that was the truth. And when I
Speaker 1: first decided to leave there, it was more or less
Speaker 1: just kind of a thing to get out on my own.
Speaker 1: When you lived in Dr Petter's house, was there anything
Speaker 1: improper up there in the house? Oh no, sir, At
Speaker 1: no time was there none such going on? Is like that? Now?
Speaker 1: I will refer you to the statement that you gave
Speaker 1: Sheriff Abercumber. Was it true? Yes, it was that they
Speaker 1: had threatened Dagostino had threatened you. Is that right? That
Speaker 1: is correct? With police action, that is right. If you
Speaker 1: didn't give him the statement, that's correct. And what you
Speaker 1: are testifying to now about any improper conduct on the
Speaker 1: part of Dr Petter is not true. Is that right? Correct?
Speaker 1: It is a completely false statement. And there has never
Speaker 1: been any improper conduct or sexual acts between you and
Speaker 1: Dr Petter since you have known him, Is that right?
Speaker 1: That's right? And I haven't even heard of as far
Speaker 1: as boys or anything or anybody else seeing anything about it.
Speaker 1: And some of these groups, did you know of Wren
Speaker 1: and Dagastino discussing sex at any time. Roger Wren at
Speaker 1: the time, he said, in the group had to have
Speaker 1: what I think you call it a seance or what
Speaker 1: it is. The group has to stay in together until
Speaker 1: they decide to bring up their feelings. And it was
Speaker 1: about myself and Roger in came in and said, look,
Speaker 1: you're know, I'm going to tell you what it is.
Speaker 1: Reminds you of Dr Petter, so therefore you want to
Speaker 1: have sex with and that is the way you're going
Speaker 1: to solve it. And he walked out. Mr Baxley came
Speaker 1: in there after that. He got really upset about it
Speaker 1: and he just missed a group and went down there
Speaker 1: to talk to WN. And that's the last I've heard
Speaker 1: of it. Have you ever heard Mr Dakastino speak of
Speaker 1: communistic activities at all of any nature. I have heard
Speaker 1: him say that. The people to some of his associates
Speaker 1: or people that had worked with either thought he was
Speaker 1: a member of the mafia or either he has some
Speaker 1: type of comm in this connection. And I inquired about
Speaker 1: it one time and he never gave me a definite answer.
Speaker 1: I just came right out and said, are you a
Speaker 1: member of the mafia? And he didn't either say yes
Speaker 1: or no. He said, some people believe I am, some don't.
Speaker 1: That is as far as it went, so I never
Speaker 1: asked him any further. Had Petter once again managed to
Speaker 1: manipulate this patient from his inner circle, The boy redacted
Speaker 1: everything he had testified, the abuse, the grooming, living with Petter,
Speaker 1: all of it. Not only that he had shifted the
Speaker 1: blame to Roger Brenn and Robert Dagastino, stating that it
Speaker 1: was Wren who had told him his mental problems were
Speaker 1: sexual in nature, even claiming Dagasina was involved with the mafia.
Speaker 1: For every testimony, the State of Georgia brought forth an
Speaker 1: AWAKEI had their reply ready. Over the course of four
Speaker 1: days and awake, he brought forth a number of Petter's friends,
Speaker 1: officials from the state government, higher ups from the Fulton
Speaker 1: Police Department, many of them an Awaki board members as well,
Speaker 1: all giving glowing statements on Petter's behalf. Principles from schools
Speaker 1: in Douglas County testified on the foundation's behalf, again stating
Speaker 1: that any claims were more than likely falsehoods from scorned patients.
Speaker 1: Now it was time for Petter himself to speak Charles
Speaker 1: Edwards began his examination. Would you state your name, please,
Speaker 1: Louis Petter? What was your position an Awake? Prior to
Speaker 1: about a month or six weeks ago? I was the
Speaker 1: chief administrative officer for an Awaki Residential Treatment Center. What
Speaker 1: is your position now on the executive secretary to the
Speaker 1: Board of Trustees of the Antiwaki Foundation Incorporated. Since the
Speaker 1: initial claims against Petter had occurred, his rolling in Awaki
Speaker 1: had already been scaled back, perhaps in an attempt to
Speaker 1: save face and understate his participation at the treatment center.
Speaker 1: A replacement director had been brought on. Within a few
Speaker 1: months of the initial reports filed from Dagostino and Wren.
Speaker 1: It was shown to the panel that now Petter's role
Speaker 1: was strictly administrative, helping with the operating board at Inawaki,
Speaker 1: who handled its finances and future projects. What do you
Speaker 1: understand your duties to be. I'm to handle all those
Speaker 1: matters regarding the foundation, the board's activities. I'm to do
Speaker 1: the public relations work. I'm to serve in a consulting
Speaker 1: capacity with parents. I'm to plan the expansion program of
Speaker 1: the various centers that may be developed by the Foundation
Speaker 1: throughout the state. You have been working out there since
Speaker 1: when the idea of an awake he got started about
Speaker 1: nineteen sixty and we began to meet and talked many
Speaker 1: days about the idea of knowing what a youngster needs
Speaker 1: and then trying to provide the services that are non
Speaker 1: existent in the real problem. We were letting a lot
Speaker 1: of children go by the wayside because of this, and
Speaker 1: so some thirty five to forty people had part in
Speaker 1: the setting up of the basic concept around an awake, attorneys, solicitors,
Speaker 1: you name it, from around the state, superior court, judges
Speaker 1: and what have you. Finally they came together and tied
Speaker 1: up this idea. I had a good position and had
Speaker 1: always been under civil service and always either worked for
Speaker 1: the state of the county ever since I graduated from
Speaker 1: college in ninety seven, I served as a probation officer,
Speaker 1: and I was the first psychologist attached to any court
Speaker 1: full time in the history of Georgia. I went from
Speaker 1: there and set up the first division of psychological services
Speaker 1: with the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation. I went from there
Speaker 1: on a repetition bit. I was asked not once but
Speaker 1: a dozen times by the Superior Court judges in the
Speaker 1: Eastern Judicial your circuit of Georgia to come and set
Speaker 1: up the first family court in Georgia because they wanted
Speaker 1: to set precedent. And from there I accepted the challenge
Speaker 1: to come and set up and awaken. There have been
Speaker 1: hundreds of children and families brought back together and helped,
Speaker 1: and if I asked, we could put a thousand people
Speaker 1: in the hallway. You know that you've heard the charges.
Speaker 1: The damn lie. Pardon me. Has there ever been sexual
Speaker 1: relationships of any kind between you and any of these
Speaker 1: boys that have testified here? Not ever. I deal with
Speaker 1: psychotic people. I deal with women and girls in my
Speaker 1: offices as well as boys, and they do nearly anything
Speaker 1: when they're working through their problems to try to seduce
Speaker 1: you into whatever they're doing. Anybody that's in the field
Speaker 1: doing therapy and depth will have to face up to
Speaker 1: this sort of thing. In other words, you sort of
Speaker 1: put yourself on the line any tudy that gets into
Speaker 1: this work. I've talked to people in family service. There
Speaker 1: are three women over there right now who would come
Speaker 1: here and testify. They've been accused by their women clients
Speaker 1: that they're lesbians. This sort of thing you go down
Speaker 1: and talk to the probation officers for Fulton County Court,
Speaker 1: and they're accused from time to time. Anybody that deals
Speaker 1: with emotionally disturbed kids that are really involved in the
Speaker 1: hot turmoil of the thing, I'd be willing to go
Speaker 1: before any board of psychiatrists, sick psychiatrists, ten I'd be
Speaker 1: glad to have them sent by the state or anybody
Speaker 1: else out there to evaluate that program. That is the
Speaker 1: best damn program to rehabilitate character disorders of any place
Speaker 1: in the United States. I've got referrals from other places
Speaker 1: that have failed, and they've been successful with them. Interesting enough,
Speaker 1: there wasn't a single parent that withdrew aboard from there
Speaker 1: facing the accusations, and I made it my personal point
Speaker 1: to go to most of the parents and tell them.
Speaker 1: They said, Dr Petter, we are standing with you right
Speaker 1: to the line. And every parent of the old group
Speaker 1: when this thing came out knew of these charges. I
Speaker 1: didn't know who I was really being accused by. I
Speaker 1: couldn't find out and couldn't defend myself. And I think
Speaker 1: it is significant that not a single parent withdrew a
Speaker 1: single child, and they're right now standing with me behind this,
Speaker 1: and they want me to sue. As if summating all
Speaker 1: of Anawaki's previous witnesses testimonies, Petter had made his argument.
Speaker 1: The State of Georgia needed an awake. They took the
Speaker 1: kids that nobody else wanted, that couldn't be helped except
Speaker 1: by them. Every witness who spoke against him couldn't be trusted.
Speaker 1: They were psychotic, emotionally disturbed kids who held a grudge
Speaker 1: against him. He was a man with a history of
Speaker 1: working for the state, close relationships with many powerful people
Speaker 1: in government. Surely somebody would have had something to say
Speaker 1: about this behavior if it was true. Petter was supposedly
Speaker 1: just more of a figurehead at this point. Anyways, this
Speaker 1: was Petter's last chance to save himself, and he pulled
Speaker 1: out every stop he could. The hearing was then called
Speaker 1: to a conclusion so the three person panel could discuss
Speaker 1: the testimony with the rest of the State Board for
Speaker 1: Children and Youth. A decision was made nearly a month later.
Speaker 1: The minutes from the October twenty meeting with the State
Speaker 1: Board of Children and Youth reads as follows. It begins
Speaker 1: with a member of the panel board, Zack Smith, reporting
Speaker 1: on the results of the hearing. Mr Smith reported that
Speaker 1: the hearing officers recommendations had been mailed to board members
Speaker 1: prior to the board meeting. He said he thought the
Speaker 1: hearing was conducted in a satisfactory manner. He said Anna
Speaker 1: Wake he had been allowed to remain open in administrator
Speaker 1: had been appointed and the staff of the division will
Speaker 1: visit periodically to investigate the situation. Dr Hutcherson said the
Speaker 1: Services Committee would like to recommend that we accept and
Speaker 1: approve the action of the Hearing Panel Committee of Anawaki
Speaker 1: Foundation Incorporating and that we authorized the granting of a
Speaker 1: license to Annawaki. Mr Smith said Mr Petter has no
Speaker 1: responsibility for administration and does not work with the boys
Speaker 1: or staff. He said he did not know what personal
Speaker 1: contacts he has with the boys outside of the premises.
Speaker 1: Dr Hutcherson moved that the Board expressed great appreciation to
Speaker 1: the Hearing Panel Committee and staff who have dealt with
Speaker 1: this delicate situation in such a fine way. Antawake would
Speaker 1: remain open and receive their license as a child caring facility.
Speaker 1: This license, granted by the State of Georgia, would be
Speaker 1: the first step in Antawaki's future plans for expansion. The
Speaker 1: stipulations of the panel that Louis Petters stand down as
Speaker 1: director and not have any further contact with his patients
Speaker 1: had been preempted and put into place before the hearing
Speaker 1: even began. But now everything hinged on one very important condition.
Speaker 1: Someone would need to check in on the facility regularly
Speaker 1: to see that it operated in the manner prescribed. Only
Speaker 1: a year after this hearing, another change in the Department
Speaker 1: of Family and Child Services would affect who that person
Speaker 1: would be. Louis Petter's old friend, Jim Parham would once
Speaker 1: again take over as the director of the Department of
Speaker 1: Family and Child Services, next time on Camp hell Anawaki.
Speaker 1: That was the biggest disappointment of our lives. It was
Speaker 1: emotionally painful to me to see the lack of concern
Speaker 1: and reaction by the authorities who had the duty to
Speaker 1: do something about this. If they're going to try and
Speaker 1: stop you from taking the George bar, they're going to
Speaker 1: go after you. Hammer and Tom they were accredited as
Speaker 1: a hospital that made an Awake a gold mine. They
Speaker 1: told me you would have to be processed and evaluation,
Speaker 1: so you would go to a place called the E
Speaker 1: N O unit, and I felt like I was in jail.
Speaker 1: I had a long pingernail like shoot my fingernails down
Speaker 1: to like a saw a pattern. I was trying to
Speaker 1: scratch through my veins in my arm. I just I
Speaker 1: literally wanted to die. Camp hell an Awake was created
Speaker 1: and hosted by Josh Thane, with producer Miranda Hawkins and
Speaker 1: executive producers Alex Williams and Matt Frederick. The soundtrack was
Speaker 1: written and performed by Josh Stane and Adrian Barry. This
Speaker 1: episode featured the voices of Michael Weaver, Mike Perkins, Robin Bloodworth,
Speaker 1: Brian Troxel, Nick Tokosky, tofor Pain, Noel Brown, and Jason
Speaker 1: Francisco Blue. Archival footage provided by ws B and CBS News.
Speaker 1: Find us on Instagram at camp hell pod. That's c
Speaker 1: A M p h E L L p O D.
Speaker 1: Educate yourself about the issue of child abuse and things
Speaker 1: that you should look for at the Darkness to Light
Speaker 1: website D two ll dot org. That's d the number
Speaker 1: two l dot org. Camp hell Anawaki is a production
Speaker 1: of I Heart Radio. For more podcasts for my heart Radio,
Speaker 1: visit the i heart Radio app. Apple Podcasts or wherever
Speaker 1: you listen to podcasts,