Loudoun County – Sandra Glenney, Dr. Lindahl


A parent who disappears, if he’s spoken of at all, is at the mercy of the one who stays  behind and of a child’s wishy washy memory

From “Take this man” by Brando Skyhorse.

This statement is direct and incredibly truthful. In the world of Sandra Glenney , assistant County Attorney, and one of her favorite psychologists , Dr. Mary Lindahl this is very  true.  They understand memory as it relates to a child. Lindahl is aware of child’s wishy washy memory and she takes full advantage of it.  Lindahl is well aware of how easy memory can be manipulated, as well as Glenney is. It is important to understand that Lindahl isn’t the only one, any psychologist that Glenney uses is going to think like Lindahl. The psychologists that testify for Glenney and are akin to a witches coven, it is a very small but tight circle.

Glenney , along with the backing and the sanctioning of the court, is the one who makes the parent disappear.   Perhaps , her most avid backers are on the Circuit Bench in Loudoun. If she loses in Juvenile Court, Glenney will appeal immediately to the Loudoun Circuit Court. The parents who are falsely accused in Loudoun, are accused because they want to be involved in their child’s life. The accusations are a tool used to make the other parent disappear.  Lindahl, on demand , provides the required testimony to ensure this happens. It is a nice little racket they run with the blessing of the Court. It is a racket, it isn’t justice , it is a racket and the players are Glenney, Lindahl and any judge in Loudoun who goes along with it. One of the more notorious judges to go along with it was Judge Thomas D. Horne.

The research is clear on children and memory, younger children and their memory can easily be manipulated.  This manipulation is done by unscrupulous mental health professionals. The following link at dougmesner.com has a vast source of material that describes the problems with Lindahl’s type of psychotherapy.   I would encourage everyone to read the material. Some of the material provides excellent insight into the therapeutic abuses of the past.

However in the world of Dr. Lindahl she doesn’t see it this way.  Either she doesn’t know the research about memory and false accusations or she simply doesn’t care. Perhaps she simply wants the $150 per hour she commands from Loudoun County.  Along with the battleground for memory , the concept of child suggestibility will surface during a false accusation case.  Below are excerpts from a hearing in which Dr. Lindahl attempted to explain why she felt a four-year old was resistant to suggestion.  It can be expected that Lindahl will always testify that  the child in question will  always be resistant to suggestibility,

Q. Can you give me some examples of how she’s usually resistant of how the child is unusually resistant to suggestion?

A. Lindahl’s answer “I haven’t tried to suggest to her”

It should be obvious that Dr. Lindahl is going to testify that any child is resistant to suggestion , if it fits the needs of Sandra Glenney. Lindahl’s methods are junk and were debunked in the 80′s and 90′s. Glenney uses her for one reason and one reason only.  She testifies to what Glenney wants.

Please be aware of the team of Lindahl and Glenney,











Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>