So these three cases represent the trajectory of the "multiple victim child
abuse" story. The fact that Grant Snowden was released by an appeals court and
that Bobby Fijnje was acquitted means that of the three stories Frank Fuster's
has yet to be revisited -- which is why we have chosen to emphasize his story
in our broadcast.
At this point, since the children's testimony and the gonorrhea evidence has
been largely discredited, Frank Fuster's case hinges on Ileana's testimony --
but she has changed her story several times now. What do you think are her
motivations and how credible did you find her to be?
Ileana's recantation to FRONTLINE of the recantation of her
recantation should certainly be enough to make any of us skeptical of her
testimony, and we are. On the other hand, much of what Ileana was telling
people at the time of her incarceration was the story she has told FRONTLINE.
It was only after months in jail, the activities of the group known as the
"Behavior Changers," and the actions of the prosecutors and her own attorney
that Ileana admitted guilt and testified against Frank Fuster. Obviously,
there are enough elements of her story that might provide an explanation for
her testimony that we felt justified in reporting her latest version so that
viewers could have the necessary information to form a fuller opinion about
As to Ileana's motivation -- she clearly says that she's talking to us with the
hope of clearing her name by getting the guilty verdict in this case
You spoke to the Fusters, their lawyers, and the judge in Fuster's trial.
Aside from the parents of the victims, no one from the other side would speak
to you. The lead prosecutor on the case, Ileana's original defense
attorney, the "behavior changers," the Bragas, Janet Reno -- all declined your requests for
interviews. Why do you think this is?
This case is 17 years old. The actions of the people you mentioned resulted in
a guilty plea by Ileana and a guilty verdict of Frank Fuster. FRONTLINE feels
obligated to examine the methods of gathering evidence in this case, and
publicly examine the actions of all of these individuals. The participants you
mentioned obviously don't feel the same obligation.
During the 1980s there was a rash of prosecutions for child sexual abuse in
day care centers. In the 1990s, the pendulum seems to have swung in the
opposite direction, with many convictions overturned. Was it all a case of
massive panic or hysteria, as the conventional wisdom now has it? Many parents
continue to maintain that their children were victimized. What is the legacy of
Whether the children in these cases were actually abused may never be known.
What is certain is that the process has certainly harmed everyone involved and
continues to be a point of angry contention by participants on all sides.
What do you think the final outcome of this case will be?
Frank Fuster's attorneys tell FRONTLINE that appeals in his case have faced
serious uphill obstacles all along the way. Whether the broadcast of "Did
Daddy Do It?" will change that is very much an open question.
What's Ileana's next move? Is she willing to testify for Frank? What are
the consequences if she does or does not?
Ileana faces serious charges from the Immigration and Naturalization
Service. She is also subject to perjury charges if she changes her
testimony in court. She believes her best hope for the future is for Frank to
be exonerated, the conviction overturned, the record of the conviction erased.
home : introduction : a monster? : lessons from the 80s : interviewing children
miami method : discussion : interviews : video : producer chat : tapes & transcripts
press : credits : privacy : FRONTLINE : wgbh : pbsi
web site copyright 1995-2013 WGBH educational foundation