At What Point Was Anna Stubblefield Culpable for her Criminal Actions?
In 2018, Anna Stubblefield, a former ethics professor at Rutgers University and Syracuse University-trained facilitator, plead guilty to two counts of third-degree aggravated criminal sexual contact with an individual who was non-verbal and profoundly disabled. She’d originally been convicted of two counts of first-degree sexual assault in 2015, but this was overturned on a technicality by an appellate court. Rather than submit to a second criminal jury trial, Stubblefield agreed to the plea deal, which also included a lesser prison term.
The case made headlines, as this was the first time a facilitator in the U.S. had been convicted of such a crime. While critics of FC celebrated the outcome, proponents, like Australian founder Rosemary Crossley, decried the sentence and staunchly supported Stubblefield and her use of FC.
Stubblefield explains how she uses Facilitated Communication while testifying at her own trial. (Image: NJ.com)
Recently, several of our contacts alerted us to an upcoming documentary about the case. I’d been awaiting the announcement of the documentary, since, in August 2022, one of the producers contacted me asking for “background information” on FC. I found it curious, since the film, she admitted, was already finished. She’d asked to talk with me by phone and I sent her some information from the website, but I never heard from her after that.
In today’s blog post, I thought I’d provide readers with a timeline of FC and the Anna Stubblefield case in anticipation of the documentary. It’s important to note that, according to Dan Engber (2015), Stubblefield’s mother, Sandra McClennen, was a first-generation facilitator and disciple of Douglas Biklen (who brought FC to the U.S. from Australia), Stubblefield served as videographer for McClennen’s early FC sessions.
I’ve included in the following timeline the dates of systematic reviews and the adoption of opposition statements by major organizations as early warning signs of the dangers of FC. My main question is this:
At what point along this timeline could Stubblefield be considered culpable for her criminal actions?
Presumably at any point, she could have participated in double-blind testing to check whether she—as her victim’s primary facilitator—was influencing (controlling, even) the “communications” generated through the use of FC. She never did.
Stubblefield Timeline
Update: This timeline was put together using media accounts of the events. In some cases, there are discrepancies in the order of events. I’ve noted those differences as I found them. If reliable new information surfaces, I will make corrections as needed.
1990
Biklen, founder of the “Facilitated Communication Institute” at Syracuse University introduces FC to the US in an article called “Communication Unbound.”
Rosemary Crossley and eight of her facilitators are involved with the “Carla” case, one of the first FC false allegation of abuse cases (see Suffering at the Hands of the Protectors and False Allegations)
1992
The “Carla” case goes to court. The court rules in favor of the falsely accused, admonishes Crossley and the eight facilitators for torturing the family, and calls the case “tragic.” (see P. Heinrichs’ reports in False Allegations)
Margot Prior and Robert Cummins publish Questions about Facilitated Communication and Autism, documenting concerns about FC and facilitator control in Australia.
1993
Frontline’s “Prisoners of Silence” airs, exposing major concerns about FC, including facilitator influence/control and harms, such as false allegations of abuse.
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry adopts a position opposing FC
1994
McClennen debates Professor James Todd about FC, so is fully aware of the dangers of FC and its lack of scientific validity.
David Felce publishes a systematic review Facilitated Communication: Results from a Number of Recently Published Evaluations Nine studies included in the review showed consistent evidence of facilitator influence with FC use.
American Psychiatric Association Council of Representatives (APACR) adopts a position opposing FC
American Psychological Association (APA) adopts a position opposing FC
1995
J.W. Jacobson, J.A. Mulick and A.A. Schwartz, A.A. publish “A history of facilitated communication: Science, pseudoscience, and antiscience” documenting the rise of FC, despite reliably controlled evidence against it.
American Association of Mental Retardation (AAMR) adopts a position opposing FC
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) adopts a position opposing FC
1998
McClennen publishes an article called Sexuality and Students with Mental Retardation warning about abuses within this population.
American Academy of Pediatrics adopts a position opposing FC
Behavior Analysis Association of Michigan (BAAM) adopts a position opposing FC
2000
McClennen introduces her daughter to Nick Pentzell who was being subjected to FC. Stubblefield, then at Temple University, acted as facilitator with him. (Engber, 2015) Note: this is before Stubblefield took the Syracuse Training in 2008.
2001
Mark Mostert publishes a systematic review called “Facilitated Communication Since 1995: A Review of Published Studies,” which found no evidence to support claims of independent communication.
2002
Emiko Kezuka publishes “A History of the Facilitated Communication Controversy” which raises questions about facilitator influence and cites lack of evidence for the technique.
2005
Paul Probst publishes “Communication unbound – or unfound ” ? Ein integratives Literatur-Review zur Wirksamkeit der ‘ Gest ü tzten Kommunikation ’ ( ‘ Facilitated Communication/FC ’ ), an investigation of FC which showed it to be a pseudoscientific practice with a “high risk of harmful psychological and social side effects.”
Association for Behavior Analysis adopts a position opposing FC
McClennen travels to Australia to meet Crossley and Annie McDonald. (Engber, 2015)
2007
Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network adopts a position opposing FC
Stubblefield, in an article for Disabilities Quarterly, argues that a person’s intellect—and the degree to which he or she is “disabled” —is a social construct, as much a venue for tyranny, as race, gender or sexuality. (Engber, 2015)
2008
Anna Wehrenfennig and Luca Syrian publish Autismo e comunicazione facilitata: Una rassegna degli studi sperimentali [Autism and facilitated communication: A review of the experimental studies], a systematic review of FC studies that showed support for facilitator influence and control over FC-generated messages. The study warned that FC should not be used in legal proceedings.
McClennon testifies in the Wendrow case as an expert witness for the use of FC (Michigan) (Engber, 2015) The case involved false allegations of abuse obtained via FC. The jury rules in favor of the Wendrows (the defendants and wrongfully accused). (See False Allegations of Abuse)
Stubblefield takes a three-day workshop at Syracuse University to become a facilitator. (Engber, 2015)
Stubblefield meets her future victim and acts as his facilitator for the next two years at his home, Rutgers, and the Cerebral Palsy Center of North Jersey. (Szteinbaum, 2014). *date discrepancy with Engber’s account.
New Zealand Ministries of Health and Education adopts a position opposing FC.
2009
The victim’s brother, Wesley, takes one of Anna’s classes at Rutgers where she shows the pro-FC film “Autism is a World” during the class. Wesley approaches Anna to work with his brother (Engber, 2015). After one session, Stubblefield’s future victim, purportedly, begins typing. Stubblefield claims that “It was clear he knew the alphabet and could spell simple words. He was a fast learner.” (Engber, 2015; Moriarty, 2018)
The victim’s family is, at least initially, convinced of the progress. P (his mother) states: “I thought it was the best thing since sliced bread” and Wesley states that his brother “… is the “Jackie Robinson of FC.” (Engber, 2015)
2010
Mark Mostert publishes a second systematic review called “Facilitated communication and Its legitimacy — Twenty-first century developments.” Again, he reports, there is no evidence to support claims of independent communication.
Syracuse University renames the “Facilitated Communication Institute” the “Institute on Communication and Inclusion” in an attempt to “fly under the radar,” citing “past scandals” as a primary reason for the name change. (Engber, 2015)
(June) Stubblefield, Wesley, and his brother attend a disabilities conference at Temple University in Philadelphia at the request of McClennen. Stubblefield and her future victim “write” an essay (using FC) on the topic of Article 21 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Wesley reads it at the conference. (Engber, 2015; Wichert, 2015; Moriarty, 2018)
(September) Wesley’s brother enrolls in a literature course with Stubblefield at Rutgers. (Moriarty, 2018; Wichert, 2015). Sheronda Jones acts as facilitator. She claims that “He pretty much read the books…I can’t tell you what he read. And he typed out the information…I know because one of my roommates was in the class with him, and they pretty much wrote some of the same things.” (Engber, 2015)
Stubblefield develops “deep feelings” for her student. She claims: “I began to gradually be aware that I was having romantic feelings…I became aware of things when he wrote the essay. It wasn’t all that original – people who had had the same experience had said similar things – but with all the spelling mistakes, he had a way of putting things.” (Engber, 2015)
Stubblefield ingratiates herself with her student’s family. P called her “Aunt Anna or Cousin Anna”. Wesley claims “She was like family” (Engber, 2015)
(October?) Stubblefied and her student attend a second conference in Milwaukee. The paper they presented was later published in Disability Quarterly. (Engber, 2015)
Stubblefield sexually exploited her student at a pool party (Szteinbaum, S. April 2014) Note: this is not corroborated with other news reports.
2011
(January) Wesley does a Google search to find “Autism is a World” (the film he’d seen in Stubblefield’s class) but finds “Prisoners of Silence” instead. Rifts begin to form between the family and Stubblefield. (Engber, 2015)
(March) Stubblefield claims her victim (through FC) wrote: “I want more than anything [to be in a romantic relationship] but I don’t know if that’s possible for people with disabilities like mine.” Stubblefield decides not to keep her feelings to herself and, a week after this talk, tells her student she loves him. He types (with her as facilitator) “I love you, too.” And “So now what?” (Engber, 2015)
(April, 7) Stubblefield writes in an email to Wesley that his brother is “one of my very best friends” and claims that “Just spending time with him is a pleasure. He’s a really remarkable guy, your brother.” (Wichert, September 17, 2015)
At the victim’s home while his mother is at church: Stubblefield initiates physical contact (a kiss) while lying with her victim on his bed. He keeps sitting up, then lowers himself onto the floor. (Note: he has a severe physical disability that makes mobility difficult). Stubblefield, using FC, asks if anything is wrong. She claims he facilitated: “Nothing’s wrong” and that he was very happy, but overwhelmed. He “scooted out into the hall.” Stubblefield claims she told him that he was “calling the shots” and that there was “no pressure,” but then stripped naked, pushed down his pants, loosened his diaper and performed oral sex on him. (Engber, 2015)
A week later, in Stubblefield’s office at Conklin Hall (Rutgers), she, again initiated sexual contact (on a blanket and exercise mat). She asked if he wanted to see pornography. Supposedly, he declined via FC. At some point during the day, Stubblefield takes him to see the pro-FC film “Wretches and Jabberers.” (Engber, 2015)
The following Sunday in her office, “it finally happened.” Stubblefield reports that, if her victim needed something, he would “bang the floor, and she would pause to set him up with the keyboard.” She assaulted him for hours. (Engber, 2015)
Before Memorial Day 2011, Stubblefield warns [her victim] that his mother and brother might be upset by their relationship. They (his legal guardians) might even ban her from seeing him. (Engber, 2015)
(May 28) Stubblefield discloses the sexual relationship to her victim’s mother and brother. Stubblefield later shows up at their home unannounced. She’s asked to leave. Wesley reports:. “She looked shocked, looked like she was ready to break down and cry.” (Wichert, September 17, 2015)
Stubblefield tells her victim’s family “I will put in writing, prick my finger and sign with blood – whatever makes you reassured that this is for real.” (Engber, 2015)
After Stubblefield repeatedly calls their home, shows up unannounced, and contacts the day program her victim attends, Wesley contacts Rutgers officials in an attempt to get her to stop. Rutgers contacts Essex County prosecutors.(Wichert, September 16, 2015; Moriarty, 2018)
(August) In a recorded call, Stubblefield admits to sexual transgressions, saying “Yes, [he] wanted to be physically involved with me, and I wanted to be physically involved with him.” (Engber, 2015)
(November) Stubblefield is banned from campus, put on unpaid leave, and prohibited from interacting with Rutgers students. (Wichert, November 8, 2015)
2013
A grand jury in Essex County indicts Stubblefield on charges of aggravated sexual assault. She pleads not guilty to the charges. Approximately a month later, the victim’s family files a civil lawsuit against her in state Superior Court. Superior Court Judge Siobhan Teare presides over Anna Stubblefield’s trial in Newark on September 23, 2015. (Moriarty, May, 11, 2018)
2014
R.W. Schlosser, S. Balandin, B. Hemsley, T. Iacono, P. Probst, and S. Von Tetzchner publish Facilitated communication and authorship: A systematic review citing no reliably controlled studies that prove FC as an independent form of communication.
2015
Superior Court Judge Siobhan Teare rules that an expert in facilitated communication [Rosemary Crossley] can’t testify in Stubblefield’s defense because the expert improperly assisted DJ during her own examination of him. Teare, states that FC is “not a recognized science,” and rules that while Stubblefield can describe the technique as part of her defense, she can’t testify about it as an expert herself without risking an intervention by the judge at trial. (Moriarty, May 11, 2018)
(September) The prosecution’s expert witnesses testify that Stubblefield’s victim is mentally impaired, unable to consent, and describes FC as a discredited technique. (Moriarty, May 11, 2018)
(September 17) Wesley testifies he saw three abrasions/bruise on his brother: “They looked like somebody was dragging my brother across a floor. I think once we ascertained the ways in which Anna Stubblefield used my brother, I put two and two together.” (Wichert, September 17, 2015)
(October 2) A jury in Newark finds Stubblefield guilty of two counts of first-degree aggravated sexual assault after deliberating for less than three hours. A juror tells NJ Advance Media the jury just didn’t believe Stubblefield’s story that her victim was actively communicating with her. (Wichert, October 3, 2015; Moriarty, May 11, 2018)
(November 10) Stubblefield files a motion with the judge seeking to have the verdict set aside and either be acquitted or granted a new trial. (Abreu, 2015)
(December) Stubblefield writes a letter to the judge asking for mercy. “I believed that he and I were intellectual equals, and that our romantic relationship was consensual and mutually loving. I intended no harm, and I had nothing to gain.” (Engber, 2016)
(December) The court denies Stubblefield’s bid to throw out her conviction. Judge Teare states that “Based upon the evidence that was presented during the trial, a reasonable jury could have found and did indeed find that the defendant was guilty of the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.,” The judge also says the jurors were able to judge the credibility of all of the witnesses, including Stubblefield, and “accord their testimony its due weight.” (Wichert, December 10, 2015)
2016
(January 16) Teare sentences Stubblefield to 12 years in state prison, calling the professor’s actions “the perfect example of a predator preying on their prey.” (Moriarty, May 11, 2018)
Stubblefield defaults in the civil case and a judge awards her victim’s family $2 million in compensatory damages and $2 million in punitive damages. The family’s attorney later indicates that the suit was filed with no expectation they would collect anything. (Hawkins, 2016; Wichert, October 25, 2016; Moriarty, May 11, 2018)
2017
(April) Stubblefield’s attorney argues before a state appeals court in New Brunswick that Teare should have allowed testimony (by Stubblefield’s “expert” witness) regarding FC at the trial. (Moriarty, May 11, 2008)
(June) The court overturns Stubblefield’s convictions on both counts. The case is remanded back to Essex Vicinage for a new trial and assigned to Judge John Zunic. (Moriarty, May 11, 2018)
2018
The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) renews is opposition to FC and adds Rapid Prompting Method to its statement.
Stubblefield agrees to plead guilty to a third-degree charge of aggravated criminal sexual contact with DJ under an agreement with the Essex County Prosecutor’s office. Entering her guilty plea before Zunic on March 19, Stubblefield admits she knew at the time of her sexual encounters with DJ that he had been found mentally incompetent and could not legally consent. (Moriarty, May 11, 2018)
2019
The American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD) adopts a position opposing FC and Rapid Prompting Method.
2023
To date, I’ve been unable to find any public denouncement of FC by Stubblefield, McClennen, Biklen, or Crossley.
References/Recommended Reading:
Opposition Statements
State of New Jersey v. Marjorie Anna Stubblefield
References:
Burke, M. (2018, March 19). Educator trained in discredited communication method at SU pleads guilty to criminal sexual contact. The Daily Orange.
Engber, Daniel. (2015, October 25). The Strange Case of Anna Stubblefield. New York Times.
Engber, Daniel. (2018, April 5). The Strange Case of Anna Stubblefield - Revisted. New York Times.
Flaherty, Colleen. (2018, March 23). Former Professor Admits to Assaulting Disabled Man. Inside Higher Ed.
London, W., and Barrett, S. (2018, May 20). Facilitated Communication practitioner sentenced. Consumer Health Digest.
Napoliello, Alex. (2018, May 11). No more prison for ex-Rutgers professor who sexually assaulted disabled student. NJ.com.
Szteinbaum, Sabrina (2014, April 21). Rutgers-Newark philosophy department chairwoman to appear in court for alleged sexual abuse of mentally-handicapped man. University wire (Carlsbad).
Wichert, Bill. (2014, November 13). Hearings set for Rutgers professor accused of sexually assaulting mentally disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com.
Wichert, Bill. (2014, December 11). Rutgers professor accused of sexual assault fights to bar document from trial. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, January 8). Judge OKs document detailing Rutgers professor’s sexual relations with mentally disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, February 20). Expert can’t prove she can communicate with disabled man who may be victim of sex assault, judge rules. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, March 26). Trial date set for Rutgers professor charged with sexual assault of mentally disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, August 13). Judge sets rules for professor’s testimony at sex assault trial. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, August 20). Controversial technique at center of professor’s sex assault trial. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, August, 25). Jury selection to begin in Rutgers professor’s sex assault trial. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, September 9). Is professor using ‘Ouija Board’ science to defend herself in sex abuse case? NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, September 10). Professor goes on trial in alleged sexual abuse of disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, September 11). Professor, accused of sex assault, declares love for disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, September 17). Professor accused of bruising disabled man during sex assault. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, September 18). Disabled man could not consent to sex in professor’s abuse case, expert says. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, September 23). Professor begins consent defense in alleged sex assault of disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill (2015, September 24). Professor had ‘just a regular relationship’ with disabled man, she says in Court. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, September 25). Professor rejects claim she ‘rape’ disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, October 1). Jury begins deliberations in professor’s sex assault trial. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, October 2). Professor found guilty of sexually assaulting disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, October 3). Juror explains why professor was convicted of sexually assaulting disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, November 8). Professor looks to overturn conviction for sex assault of disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2015, December 10). Professor loses bid to throw out conviction for sex assault of disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2016, January 15). Professor sentenced to prison for sexual assault of disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2016, January 24). Convicted professor’s jailhouse letter: I loved disabled man. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Wichert, Bill. (2016, October 25). Rutgers prof convicted in sex assault of disabled man ordered to pay $4M. NJ Advance Media for NJ.com