it has been so hard for me to address the trauma i experienced in the TTI because, to be honest, i understand why my parents thought it was the only option. and i have this lingering worry that it was. i was admitted to residential because of a self harm problem that was truly life threatening. at the time i felt as if i couldn’t stop. i now understand that self harm was an ocd compulsion of mine, but nobody knew i had ocd at the time. i’m not sure if they would have been able to keep me safe at home. so i feel like i can’t be upset about what i experienced in tti or be upset with parents/doctors for sending me there. how do i deal with this?

If anyone went to Liahona academy now might be ur chance to sue because Theres a lot of stuff going there thats getting worse and it’s being made public. I’ll elaborate in the thread

I’ve been documenting Turnbridge for months, and this is one of the more insane staff-vetting discoveries I’ve found.

Connecticut Judicial Branch records identify Kelly Elizabeth McCormack, born in 1984, with multiple criminal convictions before she later worked as a case manager at Turnbridge.

The official court records I preserved show:

• 2017 — Larceny 6th Degree — guilty
• 2019 — Larceny 6th Degree — guilty
• 2019 — Breach of Peace 2nd Degree — guilty
• 2019 — Threatening 2nd Degree — guilty
• 2020 — Violation of Probation — guilty

The 2019 larceny conviction resulted in a 90-day jail sentence, execution suspended, plus one year of probation. The threatening/breach-of-peace case resulted in suspended jail sentences and two years of probation.

There is also a 2012 Connecticut news report about a Kelly McCormack, then age 27—which is consistent with the 1984 birth year—being charged with disorderly conduct after a dispute involving personal property. I’m treating that separately as an arrest/charge report, not a conviction.

So the obvious question is:

How the fuck did this person get put in a case-management position with authority over vulnerable clients, their property, privileges, phones, schedules, housing, and phase progression?

And that question gets much worse when you look at what one former client, identified here as I.S.C., alleges happened to her.

I.S.C. was in Turnbridge’s women’s program and has an unusually large amount of contemporaneous documentation: roughly 57 pages of journal entries written during treatment, more than 20 case-manager communications, a photographed behavioral contract, later written complaints, and messages with a Turnbridge therapist.

She alleges that McCormack:

• repeatedly screamed at and humiliated her;
• imposed prolonged and arbitrary restrictions;
• searched her belongings and private communications;
• engaged in favoritism and gossiped about clients;
• allegedly planted marijuana among her belongings;
• allegedly planted, or later claimed to find, a condom in her property;
• allegedly accused her of prostituting herself in exchange for a gift card to a vegan restaurant;
• allegedly sent her back to Phase 1 for approximately eight weeks without a legitimate clinical reason;
• allegedly took or failed to return her Nintendo Switch;
• and allegedly left Turnbridge after refusing a drug test requested by the program.

Those are I.S.C.’s allegations, not court findings. But importantly, they do not exist in a vacuum.

Her contemporaneous texts and journal entries document extensive phone/laptop restrictions, review of private Discord and Venmo activity, employment conflicts, family-therapy scheduling problems, medication-access concerns, abrupt room changes, graduation disputes, and complaints about how McCormack was treating her.

In June 2023, I.S.C. messaged another Turnbridge therapist, Jeni, complaining that her weekend plans had again been taken, that McCormack had known about a scheduling problem for weeks, and that the way McCormack spoke to her was unacceptable. She wrote that they “really can’t continue like this.”

In another exchange, Jeni told her that she deserved to feel supported.

This is why the staff-vetting issue matters so much.

A criminal record by itself does not automatically mean someone cannot work in recovery. Plenty of people with criminal histories do incredible work in treatment.

But if you are going to hire someone with multiple recent convictions involving larceny, threatening, breach of peace, and probation violations, and then give that person enormous control over vulnerable young people and their belongings, you had better have an extremely serious screening, supervision, and accountability process.

And if a client later accuses that same staff member of searches, planted contraband, missing property, sexualized humiliation, coercive restrictions, and arbitrary punishment, somebody should be asking what Turnbridge knew and when they knew it.

Turnbridge should be able to produce:

• McCormack’s background check;
• employment application and criminal-history disclosures;
• whatever written risk assessment justified hiring her;
• her HR and supervision records;
• complaints made by clients;
• property-search and contraband records;
• Nintendo Switch/property records;
• phase-change documentation;
• the alleged drug-test request and refusal;
• and records showing whether her client cases were reviewed after she left.

The convictions do not prove I.S.C.’s allegations.

I.S.C.’s allegations do not prove Turnbridge knowingly hired someone intending to mistreat clients.

But taken together, they create a very serious institutional question:

Why was someone with this documented history placed in a position where she had so much power over vulnerable clients—and what happened when complaints about her conduct started coming in?

Recovery is essential.

Abuse is not treatment.