speaker-0: We have at least three different placements, three different reservations, different tribes, different pools of vulnerable victims that he was given totally unfettered access to. He was with kids on the nights and weekends, he was having kids to his home. And probably most egregiously in New Mexico, it was known to his supervisors that he went on a European vacation with a sixteen-year-old Native American born.
speaker-1: Okay. Welcome to Parallel Justice. I'm Renee Williams, the CEO of the National Center for Victims of Crime, and your host for this series. Sometimes the criminal justice system fails to obtain justice for victims. This can occur when prosecutions end in acquittal or if the charges are not filed at all. Even following a conviction, victims of crime can be left with devastating damages. So, what then is civil justice? Well, crime victims can file civil lawsuits against offenders and other responsible parties regardless of the outcome of a criminal prosecution, or even if there was no prosecution at all. While money awarded in civil lawsuits will never fully compensate a victim for their trauma, it can be a valuable resource to help victims of crime rebuild their lives. And it is a powerful incentive to hold institutions, landlords, businessmen, and employers accountable. In this series, we look at civil justice through criminal acts and bring together diverse perspectives to tackle complex questions of accountability, justice, and healing. Parallel Justice is brought to you by the National Crime Victim Bar Association, a program of the National Center for Victims of Crime. More information about the National Center and the National Crime Victim Bar Association is available at victimsofrime.org. Please be advised, some of the topics we discuss may be disturbing. This podcast is intended for adult audiences only. While some of these topics may be triggering, we have resources available to help you practice good self-care and seek support. Confidential, compassionate support is available via call, text, or chat at victimconnect.org. The views expressed in the following podcast are those of our guests. Who are experts in these areas. Their opinions are invaluable, however, they do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Center for Victims of Crime. We acknowledge that some of these views may be controversial. However, our goal in these discussions is to raise awareness of victims' rights and the options available to them. Please enjoy the podcast. Welcome back to another episode of Parallel Justice. I'm your host, Renee Williams. Joining me today is one of our favorite NCVBA members, Peter Jancy of Crew Jancy out of Oregon. Peter, it is so great to have you on with us today. Why don't you go ahead and introduce yourself and tell us what you do?
speaker-0: Sure. Hi Renee, great to be here. Well, as you said, I'm Peter Giancy. I am a partner at the law firm of Crew Jancey in Portland, Oregon. And my practice is devoted to representing victims of child abuse, child sexual abuse, and similar crimes around the country.
speaker-1: And we're gonna discuss a really complex area of law today that deals with abuse, but there's a lot of history. And so I think we need to begin the discussion with just a look at that history. And that's the history of abuse and genocide against tribes, Native Americans within this country. It's a history that still is very much with us in the present. And so there's a role of reservations. We have heard a lot in the news lately about Indian boarding schools. adoptions and what intentional harm there's been and abuse and forced separation of young children from their families by the state. And and so with all of that history, I think we need to move forward with a background of what makes this case significant and harmful. But we've got to understand how we got here. So
speaker-0: Actually, Renee, is it okay if I add one thing before we jump
speaker-1: Absolutely.
speaker-0: into that? Well, I think your comments about the history of exploitation and mistreatment of Indigenous peoples is a really important one as we talk about this. And I think it's important to acknowledge out of the outset that I'm a white man. I am not a member of an Indigenous people. And I have the honor and privilege of of being an advocate for Native Americans in this case. So I just think it's important to acknowledge the perspective that I bring and the perspective that I don't bring as we talk about this important topic.
speaker-1: Peter, can you start with a little bit of a history lesson? How did we get here? What's Indian Health Services? Why are they on reservations? And it is Indian Health Services of the United States, I believe is the full title, or the United States Indian Health Services. Why is the United States involved at all?
speaker-0: Correct. Well, Indian Health Services is an agency that falls under the United States Department of Health and Human Services. So it's a public health agency, and it is responsible for providing medical and health services to Native Americans who are members of federally recognized tribes. And so historically, the reason that the federal government is involved with providing those services. Is because of the treaties that the federal government entered into with Native American tribes during colonization of North America. And so those treaties were meetings and agreements between sovereign nations as the law looks at it. And as a part of the overall picture of negotiations over what would happen with land that had been controlled by the tribes. what would happen with the peoples that inhabited those lands. Part of what was negotiated was a an ongoing obligation of the US government to provide certain services. And that includes medical health services through Indian Health Services Agency. And so today IHS is charged with providing those services to, I think it's close to three million people that are spread across 36 different states in the United States.
speaker-1: And what type of services are those? Are those clinics? Do they run hospitals? How does that
speaker-0: Wait.
speaker-1: operate?
speaker-0: Yeah, so they they have inpatient and outpatient care. They run dozens of hospitals, hundreds of clinics, many of those or most of those are on reservation.
speaker-1: And so I think it's important to note at the outset of this case, a lot of times when we're talking about torts, which is what we talk about on this show, they're in state court. This case is actually in federal court for those reasons.
speaker-0: Correct. This case is in a court that a lot of people may not be familiar with, which is called the Federal Court of Claims. And the Federal Court of Claims is a special court that was set up to deal with disputes and claims for compensation that arise out of treaty obligations and contracts that have been entered into by the federal government. The Court of Federal Claims has been described as the keeper of the nation's conscience. and as having an obligation to do justice basically against the federal government. So it's a government within the federal government that is rendering justice against the federal government.
speaker-1: So let's start from the beginning. Who is Dr. Stanley Patrick Weber? What role did he play? And what was happening?
speaker-0: Well, Dr. Stanley Patrick Weber was a pediatrician who was hired into the Indian Health Services to provide medical care to Native American children. He was brought into Indian Health Services in the 1980s, mid-1980s. And over the course of 30 years, he goes in the ranks. He served at four different locations with Indian Health Services. At times he was promoted to positions like chief of pediatrics. So he was given increasing responsibility and increasing access to vulnerable Native American children. And all the while, from the very outset, high-ranking individuals working within Indian Health Services were aware that Dr. Stanley Patrick Weber was sexually preying on his child patients and victimizing them. And sexually abusing them.
speaker-1: Now, when he was hired into IHS, were there warning signs?
speaker-0: There were warning signs when when Dr. Weber was hired from his very first placement, we know that there were at least suspicions about him sexually abusing children. And very quickly those suspicions grew into, you know, confirmed reports of grooming behavior, of egregious boundary violations, and then you know, reports of direct sexual abuse of children.
speaker-1: Who is reporting these things? And who are they reporting to?
speaker-0: You know, it it kind of escalated over time. So at the beginning, it was colleagues and and local supervisors at his first placement. we don't know a lot about his very first placement because the government has refused to release a lot of information about that yet. He started in Ada, Oklahoma. All we know at this point is that he left there under some suspicion of being a pedophile. But he left Ada, Oklahoma, and next went to New Mexico, where he was entering into a fellowship in adolescent medicine. And in New Mexico, he was engaged in really egregious boundary violations and information that it was clear to his colleagues and his supervisors that he was likely sexually abusing children. He was with kids on the nights and weekends. He was having kids to his home. And Probably most egregiously in New Mexico, it was known to his supervisors that he went on a European vacation with a 16-year-old Native American boy. In fact, they were notified of that before he left for his trip. They didn't do anything about it. They didn't discipline him or investigate when he came back. And they kept him as an employee and continued to transfer and promote him within IHS.
speaker-1: We talk so often on this show about folks being moved and files being hidden. We heard about it in the Boy Scouts case. They have files called the perversion files, which were officially not supposed to be called the perversion files, the Catholic Church, secret documents that were held under lock and key. This is starting to sound like a lot of that.
speaker-0: Absolutely. It's a pattern that we see in all the institutions that we deal with, whether it's the Boy Scouts, the Mormon Church, the Catholic Church. This was a situation where there was well-known information that was documented, that was kept secret. And, you know, I think it's important to remember in these situations that these transfers and the concealment of this information, it's not just an omission. It's not just failing to take action. You're taking a dangerous predator and putting them into a new pool of victims who have no community information about this person. So it's not a neutral act. You're actually removing the ability of children and their parents to be self-protective. You know, at least in a community where there's some information swirling out there about a predator, people can avoid, they can have their children, you know, try to stay away from this person. But in a new community where no one knows anything better than, hey, this is our new all-star pediatrician, no one's prepared for the danger that they're facing.
speaker-1: I was just going to say you're this is similar in other ways of you're putting them in positions of power and authority and respect, frankly. with the Catholic Church, it was like fighting God. Here it's your child's pediatrician.
speaker-0: Absolutely. And, you know, who do we trust more than our doctors? You know, people that are there to make sure that we're healthy and to look out for our welfare. And, you know, I think it's important to acknowledge along the lines of your comments at the beginning, that we're dealing with a very vulnerable population of people. This isn't your average suburban white kid going to their pediatrician. Dr. Weber was preying on. Children, in particular, boys who were he knew were from broken homes, whose parents were struggling, who didn't have the same ability to protect their children and to be watchful of what was going on with their children because of the other challenges that they were facing, often because of you know, systemic challenges that they themselves were facing. And so we know that Weber and and the supervisors at the time knew. That Dr. Stanley Patrick Weber was specifically targeting the most vulnerable within an already vulnerable population. In fact, he kept lists and was known for keeping lists of boys within his target age range that were from, you know, particularly troubled homes. And several of our clients in this case were from, were actually at times living in group homes because of instability within their families.
speaker-1: I know I read an article on him where he also used the fact that he was a physician to get away with abuse, saying it was medical treatment.
speaker-0: Correct. Yeah. Oftentimes the abuse by Dr. Weber would take place within the context of a medical visit. It would grow out of, you know, ostensibly medical counseling and and physical exams. And then he would, you know, continue to push things further and further. And you know, for a young child who you know, he targeted kids who are generally between nine and 13 years old. And so young children who don't know what to expect in medical care, don't know what's a normal part of a medical visit. It was extremely confusing and disorienting.
speaker-1: So we have him moving around quite a bit. What was his grooming process?
speaker-0: Well, his grooming process was in some ways typical of what we see of predators in a lot of organizations. He would befriend children. He would engage in a increasing boundary violations, having them ride in his car, having them to his home alone, buying them gifts. it was noted by one of his colleagues who visited his home that his basement was like set up as, you know, every Boy's dream with stocked with video games and the kind of snacks that kids would like, and he had no children of his own. So, you know, he was orienting and designing his life around targeting children. And, you know, he would then find ways to increasingly isolate his victims, keep them from others and be alone with them. He would give them drugs and alcohol, and he would sexually abuse and rape them.
speaker-1: Now, his colleagues who are noting this and are now reporting it, what other actions did they take? And how did IHS respond?
speaker-0: Well, his colleagues, you know, there were several colleagues who noticed this behavior and were concerned about it and tried to take action within IHS. In Montana, one of his colleagues was a psychologist who had prior training working with sexual offenders. That psychologist was immediately concerned about the patterns that he saw from Dr. Weber. And he tried to escalate that to his supervisors. He brought that information. To the CEO of the hospital that Weber was working at. In other situations, folks tried to get someone to investigate. They tried to bring this information forward. And the consistent pattern from IHS was to ignore the reports for as long as they could, to squelch or try to pressure the people that were bringing these reports to stop making noise about this. And that included retaliating against people that were bringing these concerns forward. They would reduce the scope of their duties. They in one case took away bonus pay. They accused one of his reporters of being homophobic. They moved one of the reporters or the complainants to a different office, less desirable office. And in one case, totally relocated somebody, sort of banished them to a remote outpost and eventually kind of forced them out of the organization. So this was a kind of a continuing pattern over the course of Dr. Weber's 30 years with IHS of okay, ignore when we can't ignore, try to discourage people from reporting when that doesn't work, and when things get to the point where we just can't keep it quiet anymore, pass the trash, move Dr. Weber to another location.
speaker-1: And did children come forward ed report and how are they treated if they did?
speaker-0: We have little information about reports by children at the time. You know, we know statistically that it's very unusual for children to report abuse at the time. And that was particularly true, you know, in the 80s and 90s and 2000s, especially when we're talking about male victims being victimized by a male in authority. And but we do know that there were times where parents became aware and became concerned and confronted Weber and and brought it to the attention of his supervisors. At one point, Weber was assaulted by one of his victims, and that was became a something that was known to his supervisors. But again, at every step of the way, IHS turned a blind eye to this kind of repeated information that they were receiving that made it just abundantly clear that he was sexually abusing his patients.
speaker-1: So what finally made them sit up and pay attention?
speaker-0: Well, Weber, he worked in Montana for several years until you know, the information just became too great and they transferred him to Pine Ridge in South Dakota. In South Dakota from nineteen ninety-five to I think twenty sixteen. He continued as a pediatrician despite, you know, continuing to abuse and continuing to be suspected at high levels of the organization of being a pedophile. And frankly, no one within the government That had an opportunity took any action. What really changed this case, and I think it's really important that we call this out, what really changed this case was the work of a tribal prosecutor, a woman named Elaine Yellowhorse, who became aware of the plight of and the impact that this abuse had on some victims, and began to investigate Weber and began to put pressure on. US federal government agencies to stop passing the trash, to stop turning a blind eye to this. And so it was really, you know, someone who was an outsider to the federal government beginning to pay attention and beginning to listen to victims and care about victims that started the process of shining a light on Weber. Interestingly, someone tipped off Dr. Weber to the fact that he was under investigation, was about to be prosecuted. And so he did not leave the organization until he learned that and he resigned voluntarily. And in sort of a chilling turn of events, we have public statements by folks who were working with Weber at the time that recall him being closed off in his office shredding documents. So this wasn't the situation where the federal government became aware and moved in swiftly and you know, surprised him and escorted him off. property and made sure that the documents about what he had done to victims were preserved. You know, he was given an incredibly long leash up until the moment that he was prosecuted.
speaker-1: And the fact that he was practicing it until two thousand sixteen, that wasn't that long ago.
speaker-0: Not at all. I mean, you know, he was allowed access to children from essentially 1986 to 2016. So 30 years. And I think you can make a pretty great argument that within the first couple of years of his career, he should have been terminated and probably prosecuted at that point. So we have at least three different placements and three different reservations, different tribes, different pools of vulnerable victims that he was given totally unfettered access to. despite having every opportunity to stop him. Wow.
speaker-1: Well, unfortunately, that is all the time we have for this week. Peter, I want to thank you again for joining us. And because we never like to leave folks on a cliffhanger, Peter is going to join us next week to actually talk about what happened to Dr. Weber and where this case stands right now. Thank you so much for joining us for another episode of Parallel Justice. Please tune in next week. Thank you so much for joining us for this conversation. Again, we know the topics discussed can be difficult and may be emotionally triggering. Support is available at victimconnect.org through call, text, or chat. We encourage you to take time today to learn about your rights and options that are available to you. Building safer communities requires every one of us to take action. Visit victimsofrime.org to learn more. And check out our show notes for today's speakers' information. This podcast was created by the National Center for Victims of Crime in partnership with our center and affiliate, the National Crime Victim Bar Association, the nation's first professional association of attorneys and expert witnesses dedicated to helping victims seek justice through the civil justice system. To support this podcast, please visit victimsofrime.org/slash donate. Parallel Justice is produced by the National Center for Victims of Crime, written and hosted by me, Renee Williams, and edited by Michael.
speaker-1: Okay. Welcome to Parallel Justice. I'm Renee Williams, the CEO of the National Center for Victims of Crime, and your host for this series. Sometimes the criminal justice system fails to obtain justice for victims. This can occur when prosecutions end in acquittal or if the charges are not filed at all. Even following a conviction, victims of crime can be left with devastating damages. So, what then is civil justice? Well, crime victims can file civil lawsuits against offenders and other responsible parties regardless of the outcome of a criminal prosecution, or even if there was no prosecution at all. While money awarded in civil lawsuits will never fully compensate a victim for their trauma, it can be a valuable resource to help victims of crime rebuild their lives. And it is a powerful incentive to hold institutions, landlords, businessmen, and employers accountable. In this series, we look at civil justice through criminal acts and bring together diverse perspectives to tackle complex questions of accountability, justice, and healing. Parallel Justice is brought to you by the National Crime Victim Bar Association, a program of the National Center for Victims of Crime. More information about the National Center and the National Crime Victim Bar Association is available at victimsofrime.org. Please be advised, some of the topics we discuss may be disturbing. This podcast is intended for adult audiences only. While some of these topics may be triggering, we have resources available to help you practice good self-care and seek support. Confidential, compassionate support is available via call, text, or chat at victimconnect.org. The views expressed in the following podcast are those of our guests. Who are experts in these areas. Their opinions are invaluable, however, they do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Center for Victims of Crime. We acknowledge that some of these views may be controversial. However, our goal in these discussions is to raise awareness of victims' rights and the options available to them. Please enjoy the podcast. Welcome back to another episode of Parallel Justice. I'm your host, Renee Williams. Joining me today is one of our favorite NCVBA members, Peter Jancy of Crew Jancy out of Oregon. Peter, it is so great to have you on with us today. Why don't you go ahead and introduce yourself and tell us what you do?
speaker-0: Sure. Hi Renee, great to be here. Well, as you said, I'm Peter Giancy. I am a partner at the law firm of Crew Jancey in Portland, Oregon. And my practice is devoted to representing victims of child abuse, child sexual abuse, and similar crimes around the country.
speaker-1: And we're gonna discuss a really complex area of law today that deals with abuse, but there's a lot of history. And so I think we need to begin the discussion with just a look at that history. And that's the history of abuse and genocide against tribes, Native Americans within this country. It's a history that still is very much with us in the present. And so there's a role of reservations. We have heard a lot in the news lately about Indian boarding schools. adoptions and what intentional harm there's been and abuse and forced separation of young children from their families by the state. And and so with all of that history, I think we need to move forward with a background of what makes this case significant and harmful. But we've got to understand how we got here. So
speaker-0: Actually, Renee, is it okay if I add one thing before we jump
speaker-1: Absolutely.
speaker-0: into that? Well, I think your comments about the history of exploitation and mistreatment of Indigenous peoples is a really important one as we talk about this. And I think it's important to acknowledge out of the outset that I'm a white man. I am not a member of an Indigenous people. And I have the honor and privilege of of being an advocate for Native Americans in this case. So I just think it's important to acknowledge the perspective that I bring and the perspective that I don't bring as we talk about this important topic.
speaker-1: Peter, can you start with a little bit of a history lesson? How did we get here? What's Indian Health Services? Why are they on reservations? And it is Indian Health Services of the United States, I believe is the full title, or the United States Indian Health Services. Why is the United States involved at all?
speaker-0: Correct. Well, Indian Health Services is an agency that falls under the United States Department of Health and Human Services. So it's a public health agency, and it is responsible for providing medical and health services to Native Americans who are members of federally recognized tribes. And so historically, the reason that the federal government is involved with providing those services. Is because of the treaties that the federal government entered into with Native American tribes during colonization of North America. And so those treaties were meetings and agreements between sovereign nations as the law looks at it. And as a part of the overall picture of negotiations over what would happen with land that had been controlled by the tribes. what would happen with the peoples that inhabited those lands. Part of what was negotiated was a an ongoing obligation of the US government to provide certain services. And that includes medical health services through Indian Health Services Agency. And so today IHS is charged with providing those services to, I think it's close to three million people that are spread across 36 different states in the United States.
speaker-1: And what type of services are those? Are those clinics? Do they run hospitals? How does that
speaker-0: Wait.
speaker-1: operate?
speaker-0: Yeah, so they they have inpatient and outpatient care. They run dozens of hospitals, hundreds of clinics, many of those or most of those are on reservation.
speaker-1: And so I think it's important to note at the outset of this case, a lot of times when we're talking about torts, which is what we talk about on this show, they're in state court. This case is actually in federal court for those reasons.
speaker-0: Correct. This case is in a court that a lot of people may not be familiar with, which is called the Federal Court of Claims. And the Federal Court of Claims is a special court that was set up to deal with disputes and claims for compensation that arise out of treaty obligations and contracts that have been entered into by the federal government. The Court of Federal Claims has been described as the keeper of the nation's conscience. and as having an obligation to do justice basically against the federal government. So it's a government within the federal government that is rendering justice against the federal government.
speaker-1: So let's start from the beginning. Who is Dr. Stanley Patrick Weber? What role did he play? And what was happening?
speaker-0: Well, Dr. Stanley Patrick Weber was a pediatrician who was hired into the Indian Health Services to provide medical care to Native American children. He was brought into Indian Health Services in the 1980s, mid-1980s. And over the course of 30 years, he goes in the ranks. He served at four different locations with Indian Health Services. At times he was promoted to positions like chief of pediatrics. So he was given increasing responsibility and increasing access to vulnerable Native American children. And all the while, from the very outset, high-ranking individuals working within Indian Health Services were aware that Dr. Stanley Patrick Weber was sexually preying on his child patients and victimizing them. And sexually abusing them.
speaker-1: Now, when he was hired into IHS, were there warning signs?
speaker-0: There were warning signs when when Dr. Weber was hired from his very first placement, we know that there were at least suspicions about him sexually abusing children. And very quickly those suspicions grew into, you know, confirmed reports of grooming behavior, of egregious boundary violations, and then you know, reports of direct sexual abuse of children.
speaker-1: Who is reporting these things? And who are they reporting to?
speaker-0: You know, it it kind of escalated over time. So at the beginning, it was colleagues and and local supervisors at his first placement. we don't know a lot about his very first placement because the government has refused to release a lot of information about that yet. He started in Ada, Oklahoma. All we know at this point is that he left there under some suspicion of being a pedophile. But he left Ada, Oklahoma, and next went to New Mexico, where he was entering into a fellowship in adolescent medicine. And in New Mexico, he was engaged in really egregious boundary violations and information that it was clear to his colleagues and his supervisors that he was likely sexually abusing children. He was with kids on the nights and weekends. He was having kids to his home. And Probably most egregiously in New Mexico, it was known to his supervisors that he went on a European vacation with a 16-year-old Native American boy. In fact, they were notified of that before he left for his trip. They didn't do anything about it. They didn't discipline him or investigate when he came back. And they kept him as an employee and continued to transfer and promote him within IHS.
speaker-1: We talk so often on this show about folks being moved and files being hidden. We heard about it in the Boy Scouts case. They have files called the perversion files, which were officially not supposed to be called the perversion files, the Catholic Church, secret documents that were held under lock and key. This is starting to sound like a lot of that.
speaker-0: Absolutely. It's a pattern that we see in all the institutions that we deal with, whether it's the Boy Scouts, the Mormon Church, the Catholic Church. This was a situation where there was well-known information that was documented, that was kept secret. And, you know, I think it's important to remember in these situations that these transfers and the concealment of this information, it's not just an omission. It's not just failing to take action. You're taking a dangerous predator and putting them into a new pool of victims who have no community information about this person. So it's not a neutral act. You're actually removing the ability of children and their parents to be self-protective. You know, at least in a community where there's some information swirling out there about a predator, people can avoid, they can have their children, you know, try to stay away from this person. But in a new community where no one knows anything better than, hey, this is our new all-star pediatrician, no one's prepared for the danger that they're facing.
speaker-1: I was just going to say you're this is similar in other ways of you're putting them in positions of power and authority and respect, frankly. with the Catholic Church, it was like fighting God. Here it's your child's pediatrician.
speaker-0: Absolutely. And, you know, who do we trust more than our doctors? You know, people that are there to make sure that we're healthy and to look out for our welfare. And, you know, I think it's important to acknowledge along the lines of your comments at the beginning, that we're dealing with a very vulnerable population of people. This isn't your average suburban white kid going to their pediatrician. Dr. Weber was preying on. Children, in particular, boys who were he knew were from broken homes, whose parents were struggling, who didn't have the same ability to protect their children and to be watchful of what was going on with their children because of the other challenges that they were facing, often because of you know, systemic challenges that they themselves were facing. And so we know that Weber and and the supervisors at the time knew. That Dr. Stanley Patrick Weber was specifically targeting the most vulnerable within an already vulnerable population. In fact, he kept lists and was known for keeping lists of boys within his target age range that were from, you know, particularly troubled homes. And several of our clients in this case were from, were actually at times living in group homes because of instability within their families.
speaker-1: I know I read an article on him where he also used the fact that he was a physician to get away with abuse, saying it was medical treatment.
speaker-0: Correct. Yeah. Oftentimes the abuse by Dr. Weber would take place within the context of a medical visit. It would grow out of, you know, ostensibly medical counseling and and physical exams. And then he would, you know, continue to push things further and further. And you know, for a young child who you know, he targeted kids who are generally between nine and 13 years old. And so young children who don't know what to expect in medical care, don't know what's a normal part of a medical visit. It was extremely confusing and disorienting.
speaker-1: So we have him moving around quite a bit. What was his grooming process?
speaker-0: Well, his grooming process was in some ways typical of what we see of predators in a lot of organizations. He would befriend children. He would engage in a increasing boundary violations, having them ride in his car, having them to his home alone, buying them gifts. it was noted by one of his colleagues who visited his home that his basement was like set up as, you know, every Boy's dream with stocked with video games and the kind of snacks that kids would like, and he had no children of his own. So, you know, he was orienting and designing his life around targeting children. And, you know, he would then find ways to increasingly isolate his victims, keep them from others and be alone with them. He would give them drugs and alcohol, and he would sexually abuse and rape them.
speaker-1: Now, his colleagues who are noting this and are now reporting it, what other actions did they take? And how did IHS respond?
speaker-0: Well, his colleagues, you know, there were several colleagues who noticed this behavior and were concerned about it and tried to take action within IHS. In Montana, one of his colleagues was a psychologist who had prior training working with sexual offenders. That psychologist was immediately concerned about the patterns that he saw from Dr. Weber. And he tried to escalate that to his supervisors. He brought that information. To the CEO of the hospital that Weber was working at. In other situations, folks tried to get someone to investigate. They tried to bring this information forward. And the consistent pattern from IHS was to ignore the reports for as long as they could, to squelch or try to pressure the people that were bringing these reports to stop making noise about this. And that included retaliating against people that were bringing these concerns forward. They would reduce the scope of their duties. They in one case took away bonus pay. They accused one of his reporters of being homophobic. They moved one of the reporters or the complainants to a different office, less desirable office. And in one case, totally relocated somebody, sort of banished them to a remote outpost and eventually kind of forced them out of the organization. So this was a kind of a continuing pattern over the course of Dr. Weber's 30 years with IHS of okay, ignore when we can't ignore, try to discourage people from reporting when that doesn't work, and when things get to the point where we just can't keep it quiet anymore, pass the trash, move Dr. Weber to another location.
speaker-1: And did children come forward ed report and how are they treated if they did?
speaker-0: We have little information about reports by children at the time. You know, we know statistically that it's very unusual for children to report abuse at the time. And that was particularly true, you know, in the 80s and 90s and 2000s, especially when we're talking about male victims being victimized by a male in authority. And but we do know that there were times where parents became aware and became concerned and confronted Weber and and brought it to the attention of his supervisors. At one point, Weber was assaulted by one of his victims, and that was became a something that was known to his supervisors. But again, at every step of the way, IHS turned a blind eye to this kind of repeated information that they were receiving that made it just abundantly clear that he was sexually abusing his patients.
speaker-1: So what finally made them sit up and pay attention?
speaker-0: Well, Weber, he worked in Montana for several years until you know, the information just became too great and they transferred him to Pine Ridge in South Dakota. In South Dakota from nineteen ninety-five to I think twenty sixteen. He continued as a pediatrician despite, you know, continuing to abuse and continuing to be suspected at high levels of the organization of being a pedophile. And frankly, no one within the government That had an opportunity took any action. What really changed this case, and I think it's really important that we call this out, what really changed this case was the work of a tribal prosecutor, a woman named Elaine Yellowhorse, who became aware of the plight of and the impact that this abuse had on some victims, and began to investigate Weber and began to put pressure on. US federal government agencies to stop passing the trash, to stop turning a blind eye to this. And so it was really, you know, someone who was an outsider to the federal government beginning to pay attention and beginning to listen to victims and care about victims that started the process of shining a light on Weber. Interestingly, someone tipped off Dr. Weber to the fact that he was under investigation, was about to be prosecuted. And so he did not leave the organization until he learned that and he resigned voluntarily. And in sort of a chilling turn of events, we have public statements by folks who were working with Weber at the time that recall him being closed off in his office shredding documents. So this wasn't the situation where the federal government became aware and moved in swiftly and you know, surprised him and escorted him off. property and made sure that the documents about what he had done to victims were preserved. You know, he was given an incredibly long leash up until the moment that he was prosecuted.
speaker-1: And the fact that he was practicing it until two thousand sixteen, that wasn't that long ago.
speaker-0: Not at all. I mean, you know, he was allowed access to children from essentially 1986 to 2016. So 30 years. And I think you can make a pretty great argument that within the first couple of years of his career, he should have been terminated and probably prosecuted at that point. So we have at least three different placements and three different reservations, different tribes, different pools of vulnerable victims that he was given totally unfettered access to. despite having every opportunity to stop him. Wow.
speaker-1: Well, unfortunately, that is all the time we have for this week. Peter, I want to thank you again for joining us. And because we never like to leave folks on a cliffhanger, Peter is going to join us next week to actually talk about what happened to Dr. Weber and where this case stands right now. Thank you so much for joining us for another episode of Parallel Justice. Please tune in next week. Thank you so much for joining us for this conversation. Again, we know the topics discussed can be difficult and may be emotionally triggering. Support is available at victimconnect.org through call, text, or chat. We encourage you to take time today to learn about your rights and options that are available to you. Building safer communities requires every one of us to take action. Visit victimsofrime.org to learn more. And check out our show notes for today's speakers' information. This podcast was created by the National Center for Victims of Crime in partnership with our center and affiliate, the National Crime Victim Bar Association, the nation's first professional association of attorneys and expert witnesses dedicated to helping victims seek justice through the civil justice system. To support this podcast, please visit victimsofrime.org/slash donate. Parallel Justice is produced by the National Center for Victims of Crime, written and hosted by me, Renee Williams, and edited by Michael.
