After over 18 months of zealously arguing in court that the Ohio Board of Psychology does not have a duty to investigate Larry James, board Executive Director Ronald Ross’ statement that the Board had indeed “conducted an investigation,” came as a surprise, until I read Ross’ artfully vague definition of investigation: "standard review" of information “given to” them – and nothing more.
The fact remains that the Board continues to refuse to describe the steps it took to meaningfully investigate the allegations raised in this "voluminous" complaint supported by declassified government documents and James' own incriminating and inconsistent statements. Nor does Ross explain how, in light of the documentation provided, they “could not identify a basis to proceed” – a comment that, incidentally, falls tellingly short of clearing James of wrongdoing. Instead Ross has said: Our critics are wrong, we expect you to take our word on this, and we will provide no evidence to support our response. What investigation doesn't talk to those who were harmed? What investigating body refuses to follow up on legitimate evidentiary leads?
Ross’ response is reminiscent of James’ responses to allegations of misconduct: blanket, unsupported assertions that don’t engage the evidence offered. It's hard to understand how anyone would be satisfied with either.
Trudy Bond is a psychologist in Toledo, Ohio. She filed a complaint against James with the Ohio Board of Psychology.