| Revision as of 17:23, 1 January 2007 editSmee (talk | contribs)28,728 edits added infobox← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:25, 1 January 2007 edit undoSmee (talk | contribs)28,728 edits add education subsectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
| In a further ruling, James R. Lamden ordered Ofshe and Singer to pay $80,000 in attorneys' fees under California's ] suit law, which penalizes those who harass others for exercising their First Amendment rights. At that time, Singer and Ofshe declared their intention to sue Michael Flomenhaft, the lawyer that represented them in the case, for malpractice.<ref>Allen. Charlotte, ''Brainwashed! Scholars of Cults Accuse Each Other of Bad Faith'', December 1998. </ref> | In a further ruling, James R. Lamden ordered Ofshe and Singer to pay $80,000 in attorneys' fees under California's ] suit law, which penalizes those who harass others for exercising their First Amendment rights. At that time, Singer and Ofshe declared their intention to sue Michael Flomenhaft, the lawyer that represented them in the case, for malpractice.<ref>Allen. Charlotte, ''Brainwashed! Scholars of Cults Accuse Each Other of Bad Faith'', December 1998. </ref> | ||
| ==Education== | |||
| *] of the ], ], ] | |||
| *] of the ], ], ] | |||
| *], ], ], sub-specializing in ] | |||
| == See also == | == See also == | ||
Revision as of 17:25, 1 January 2007
| Richard Ofshe | |
|---|---|
| Born | United States |
| Nationality | American |
| Alma mater | Queens College of the City University of New York, B.A., M.A. Stanford University, Ph.D. |
| Known for | social psychology, pseudo-memory |
| Scientific career | |
| Fields | sociology, social psychology |
| Institutions | Professor Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley |
Richard Ofshe is a Professor Emeritus of Sociology at the University of California, Berkeley. He specializes in "coercive social control; social psychology; influence in police interrogation; influence leading to pseudo-memory in psychotherapy."
He is co-author, with Ethan Watters, of Making Monsters: False Memories, Psychotherapy, And Sexual Hysteria and Therapy's Delusions: The Myth of the Unconscious and the Exploitation of Today's Walking Worried.
On June 7, 1996, he testified at the pardon hearing for Paul Ingram. In a TV-movie about that case, Forgotten Sins, he was portrayed by William Devane.
Ofshe and Margaret Singer sued the American Psychological Association and other scholars in 1992 for "defamation, frauds, aiding and abetting and conspiracy", under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), after a report comissioned by the APA was rejected
The case was dismissed by the court on the basis that the claims of defamation, frauds, aiding and abetting and conspiracy constituted a dispute over the application of the First Amendment to a public debate over academic and professional matters; that the parties may be be described as the opposing camps in a longstanding debate over certain theories in the field of psychology, and the plaintiffs could not establish deceit with reference to representations made to other parties in the lawsuit.
In a further ruling, James R. Lamden ordered Ofshe and Singer to pay $80,000 in attorneys' fees under California's SLAPP suit law, which penalizes those who harass others for exercising their First Amendment rights. At that time, Singer and Ofshe declared their intention to sue Michael Flomenhaft, the lawyer that represented them in the case, for malpractice.
Education
- Queens College of the City University of New York, B.A., psychology
- Queens College of the City University of New York, M.A., sociology
- Stanford University, Ph.D., sociology, sub-specializing in social psychology
See also
References
- Case No. 730012-8 Margaret Singer v. American Psychological Association, Court order
- Case No. 730012-8, Margaret Singer, et al., Plaintiff v. American Psychological Association, et. Al., Defendants
"This case, which involves claims of defamation, frauds, aiding and abetting and conspiracy, clearly constitutes a dispute over the application of the First Amendment to a public debate over matters both academic and professional. The disputant may fairly be described as the opposing camps in a longstanding debate over certain theories in the field of psychology. The speech of which the plaintiff's complain, which occurred in the context of prior litigation and allegedly involved the "fraudulent" addition of the names of certain defendants to documents filed in said prior litigation, would clearly have been protected as comment on a public issue whether or not the statements were made in the contest of legal briefs. The court need not consider whether the privilege of Civil Code 47 (b) extends to an alleged interloper in a legal proceeding. Plaintiffs have not presented sufficient evidence to establish any reasonable probability of success on any cause of action. In particular Plaintiffs cannot establish deceit with reference to representations made to other parties in the underlying lawsuit. Thus Defendants' Special Motions to Strike each of the causes at action asserted against them, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 425.16 is granted." - Allen. Charlotte, Brainwashed! Scholars of Cults Accuse Each Other of Bad Faith, December 1998. Available online
External links
Richard Ofshe academic homepage
Audio of Paul Ingram Pardon Hearing
Forgotten Sins in the Internet Movie Database
 | This article about a sociologist is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it. |