Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Dr. Richard Hinkley Wolff Who Trained with Ayres at Judge Baker: " I Never Heard of ANYONE Doing Physicals There."

We have a copy of the October 27, 2004, deposition by Dr. William Ayres in the molestation civil suit filed by victim Steve A. We invite you to get your hands on a copy, because there's lots of good stuff in there.

For example:

Here's what Ayres had to say about his training at Judge Baker then: "And we had to attend lots of conferences, some of which were didactic to learn about various things. And we were - so we were exposed to a lot of what was then current, you know, child psychiatric. "

If Ayres was exposed to what was current in the 1960's at the most pre-eminent place for child psychiatry in the country, he would have learned that physicals to children in therapy were verboten at Judge Baker. According to Dr. Lee Willer and Dr. Joan Zilbach, who trained with him there, child psychiatrists were advised NOT to touch children in therapy.

We're thinking that Ayres just didn't like the "current" stuff he was being taught at Judge Baker, and so he decided to hightail it to California in 1963, where he could just start making stuff up immediately about his training at Judge Baker and feeding hokum to people about being trained to give physicals to children. (Why no one ever challenged him on this is a continuing mystery to us. ) He even got cronies like Etta Bryant to write letters to newspapers saying that back in the old days, all child psychiatrists gave physicals to kids in psychiatric training.

Well, we're sorry to have to burst Etta Bryant's bubble once more, but today we bring you yet another child psychiatrist who trained with Ayres at Judge Baker who says Ayres is just dead wrong.

Dr. Richard Hinckley Wolff, who did his residency at Judge Baker with Ayres from 1960-1961, told us today: " I never heard of anyone doing a physical at Judge Baker. I never did one myself and I never remember anyone presenting a case where they had done a physical. I've never heard of it."
Dr. Wolff said he had just a vague memory of Ayres as someone with "blondish hair". Dr. Wolff also turned out to have a good sense of humor. When we told him about the incident during the trial when Ayres asked child psychiatrist Dr. David Schwartz, a supporter of the victims, whether he was a Scientologist, Dr. Wolff let out a hearty chuckle.
As we were speaking with Dr. Wolff we suddenly recalled that in the first trial, Ayres was bragging about doing neurological tests on children in therapy. So we asked Dr. Wolff if he had received any neurological training at Judge Baker. "No, I didn't receive any neurological training. We weren't trained to do that." he said. Wolff's statement on this issue backs up statements made by another Judge Baker trained child psychiatrist named Dr.Gordon Harper who said they did no neurogical tests on kids in therapy. So, we're curious; just where was Ayres trained to do neurological tests on kids, anyway? Is he making that up too?
Also, while we perusing the deposition once more, we had a good laugh when we saw Ayres claim on Page 92:" There are a lot of psychiatrists who do physical examinations."
If this is true, why haven't any of his colleagues at Judge Baker or the other child psychiatrists we spoke to from Yale and Columbia and Duke ever heard of any child psychiatrist who does this?
And while we're at it, we're still trying to reconcile Ayres' testimony in his deposition with what he said in the trial.
Here's an exchange that's left us really confused, on Page 75
Lawyer Bob Tobin: Under what conditions would you ask a male child to drop his drawers and look at his testicles?
Ayres: I -- well, you know, I would -- I can give you THREE over the years that maybe- I think it's unusual. It's not a - would not be common."
But wait a minute!! Weren't there six victims in statute alone who got the physicals? And weren't there also four out of statute who testified? We remember Weinberg saying that there was probably a "good reason " for Ayres to medically examine Greg H. Isn't that way more than 3 already ? And hasn't Ayres admitted to giving physicals to many other boys over the years? Didn't he tell his partners that giving regular physical exams was part of what he was trained to do at Judge Baker ? But he said he only did it three times?? Help! We're really confused.
As always we bring you our running list of everyone from Judge Baker who has refuted Ayres:
Dr. Stanley Walzer; Dr. Joan Zilbach; Dr. Jacqueline Amati-Mehler; Dr. Dan Ditmore; Dr. Joseph Mullen; Dr. Richard Hinckley Wolff; Dr. Lee Willer; Dr. Gordon Harper; Dr. Irving Hurwitz; Dr. Nicholas Verven; Dr. Milton Shore: Dr. Roger Bibace; Dr. Pauline Hahn; Judge Baker Department Chair Dr. William Beardslee and Judge Baker Chief Operating Officer Stephen Schaffer


  1. Can this type of information from doctors who were at Judge Baker be admissable in the next criminal trial? If so, why didn't the prosecution look for these doctors?

  2. Also, keep think about this bit of logic:

    ayres says in his civil trial deposition that he's done "maybe THREE" exams over the years."

    ayres and his supporters talk about "physicals" being the way the "used to do it."

    ayres claimed during his criminal trial testimony that he's done "physical exams" less and less over the years.

    And yet:
    1) During the criminal trial the 6 in-statute victims were victimized long AFTER this alleged "method" would have gone out of style (had it really ever been in use, which, as you can see in the recent posts to this site, it was not...)

    2) The in-statute victims were molested BEFORE the statement that ayres made about having done "three" exams over the years.

    3) During the criminal trial, there were ayres' "medical records" of the exams presented that corroborate that the victims were "examined" despite ayres' earlier statement UNDER OATH in the civil trial that there were only about "three" times that he'd EVER done exams.

    Liar, Liar; pants on fire...

  3. To Anonymous September 8, 2009 at 10:07 am. I believe the prosecution can bring in these doctors (there are certainly enough to choose from). But if there are any lawyers out there, perhaps they can weigh in here.

  4. Liar, lied so much no pants left to be on fire. Musta been a big bonfire, one pair of his pants would stoke the fire for months!

    I am sure Ayres ass burns when he takes the witness stand!

    As well it should...