Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2003, Page 236
Smart may at some point feel anxiety over her separation from Mitchell. (Catherine S.
Blake, AP, Internet, 3/19/03)
Cult Expert on Smart Case
Chico State University (CA) sociologist Janja Lalich, an assistant professor and cult expert
who was once a member of a left-wing political cult, says that mind control is the reason
Elizabeth Smart did not run away from her abductors. ―When you get caught in that
reality, you start to adopt that reality,‖ she said. ―Obviously [those caught in a cult] don‘t
have the same freedom of choice we do out in the real world.‖ Lalich adds that Smart‘s
recovery will be difficult. ―I think when somebody goes through an experience like that it‘s
very traumatizing and hard to process.‖ (Devin Davis, The Orion, CA State University-
Chico, Internet, 3/26/03)
Understanding What Happened to Elizabeth Smart
Was Elizabeth Smart ―brainwashed,‖ and does she need to be ―deprogrammed,‖ or was
she a victim of the ―Stockholm‖ syndrome, where hostages begin to identify with their
captors? University of Vermont psychiatrist David Fassler says that Smart‘s failure to try to
escape doesn‘t mean she was brainwashed. She may have been threatened with harm if she
cried out, and so pursued an unconscious survival strategy of trying to win the goodwill of
her captors. (Jeffrey Kluger, Time Magazine, Internet, 3/24/03)
Steven Hassan [a cult exit counselor], who has studied cults and mind-control behavior for
many years, believes that Elizabeth became very suggestible because she was in mortal
fear and disoriented in her new situation, which made her open to Mitchell‘s undue
psychological influence, dependent on him, and obedient.
Trauma psychologist Dr. Elizabeth Carll [sic] thinks, rather, that Elizabeth Smart‘s case
exhibits Stockholm syndrome: after a time the captive bonds with the captor when it is
clear that pleasing the captor will promote survival.
Both Hassan and Carll believe that Elizabeth‘s transition back to normalcy will be difficult,
especially because she is living in a ―fishbowl.‖ (CBS News, Internet, 3/13/03)
Elizabeth‘s family believes that she was, indeed, brainwashed—but not sexually violated—
and that she had no control while a captive of Brian Mitchell, whom she knew as
―Emmanuel, and Mitchell‘s wife, who says that a divine revelation told her husband to take
seven more wives.‖ Elizabeth was reported by her family to be perfectly normal now, albeit
sometimes slightly distracted, and pursuing her normal daily routine. They say that they do
not want to press her to tell the story of her captivity, and in this they are following the
advice of Patricia Hearst, who was abducted by the Symbionese Liberation Army almost
three decades ago.
Confronted by police when they located her, after more than two months, Elizabeth denied
her identity until confronted by her own picture, when she simply said: ―Thou sayest‖ (Jesus
reply when Pilate asked him if he was king of the Jews). She said at first that Mitchell and
his wife were her parents. (Nick Madigan, New York Times, Internet, 3/17/03 Rebecca
Boone, AP, Internet, 3/14/03)
Famous kidnapping victim Patricia Hearst explained Elizabeth‘s failure to escape her
captors: ―Because you have been so abused and so robbed of your free will and so
frightened that you believe ...you come to a point where you believe any lie your abductor
has told you. You don‘t feel safe. You think that either you will be killed if you reach out to
get help. You believe that your family will be killed. You‘re not even thinking about trying to
get help anymore. You‘ve in a way given up. You have absorbed this new, you know,
identity that they‘ve given you. You‘re just surviving. You‘re not even going to say that,
Smart may at some point feel anxiety over her separation from Mitchell. (Catherine S.
Blake, AP, Internet, 3/19/03)
Cult Expert on Smart Case
Chico State University (CA) sociologist Janja Lalich, an assistant professor and cult expert
who was once a member of a left-wing political cult, says that mind control is the reason
Elizabeth Smart did not run away from her abductors. ―When you get caught in that
reality, you start to adopt that reality,‖ she said. ―Obviously [those caught in a cult] don‘t
have the same freedom of choice we do out in the real world.‖ Lalich adds that Smart‘s
recovery will be difficult. ―I think when somebody goes through an experience like that it‘s
very traumatizing and hard to process.‖ (Devin Davis, The Orion, CA State University-
Chico, Internet, 3/26/03)
Understanding What Happened to Elizabeth Smart
Was Elizabeth Smart ―brainwashed,‖ and does she need to be ―deprogrammed,‖ or was
she a victim of the ―Stockholm‖ syndrome, where hostages begin to identify with their
captors? University of Vermont psychiatrist David Fassler says that Smart‘s failure to try to
escape doesn‘t mean she was brainwashed. She may have been threatened with harm if she
cried out, and so pursued an unconscious survival strategy of trying to win the goodwill of
her captors. (Jeffrey Kluger, Time Magazine, Internet, 3/24/03)
Steven Hassan [a cult exit counselor], who has studied cults and mind-control behavior for
many years, believes that Elizabeth became very suggestible because she was in mortal
fear and disoriented in her new situation, which made her open to Mitchell‘s undue
psychological influence, dependent on him, and obedient.
Trauma psychologist Dr. Elizabeth Carll [sic] thinks, rather, that Elizabeth Smart‘s case
exhibits Stockholm syndrome: after a time the captive bonds with the captor when it is
clear that pleasing the captor will promote survival.
Both Hassan and Carll believe that Elizabeth‘s transition back to normalcy will be difficult,
especially because she is living in a ―fishbowl.‖ (CBS News, Internet, 3/13/03)
Elizabeth‘s family believes that she was, indeed, brainwashed—but not sexually violated—
and that she had no control while a captive of Brian Mitchell, whom she knew as
―Emmanuel, and Mitchell‘s wife, who says that a divine revelation told her husband to take
seven more wives.‖ Elizabeth was reported by her family to be perfectly normal now, albeit
sometimes slightly distracted, and pursuing her normal daily routine. They say that they do
not want to press her to tell the story of her captivity, and in this they are following the
advice of Patricia Hearst, who was abducted by the Symbionese Liberation Army almost
three decades ago.
Confronted by police when they located her, after more than two months, Elizabeth denied
her identity until confronted by her own picture, when she simply said: ―Thou sayest‖ (Jesus
reply when Pilate asked him if he was king of the Jews). She said at first that Mitchell and
his wife were her parents. (Nick Madigan, New York Times, Internet, 3/17/03 Rebecca
Boone, AP, Internet, 3/14/03)
Famous kidnapping victim Patricia Hearst explained Elizabeth‘s failure to escape her
captors: ―Because you have been so abused and so robbed of your free will and so
frightened that you believe ...you come to a point where you believe any lie your abductor
has told you. You don‘t feel safe. You think that either you will be killed if you reach out to
get help. You believe that your family will be killed. You‘re not even thinking about trying to
get help anymore. You‘ve in a way given up. You have absorbed this new, you know,
identity that they‘ve given you. You‘re just surviving. You‘re not even going to say that,
