Scout Manalo Direct

Please state your name for the court.

My name is Scout Manalo.

Scout, what do you do for work?

“I am a liscenced clinical psychologist in the state of buckeye. I practice as a court-approved psychologist as well as operating my own private practice.”

 

How long have you been practicing?

I have been practicing in the state of buckeye for thirteen years.

What education do you have in this field?

I have a Bachelor of Science in Nueroscience from the state of Buckeye. Additionally, I have a Ph.D in Clinical Psychology from Case Western Reserve University Halle Rose School of Medicine. My concentration is in child and adolescent psychology.  I wrote my dissertation on children with low-grade tumors, and specifically how they regulate emotions through peer and adult relationships.

 

How else do you apply your knowledge?

I give continuing-education training for school counselors and juvinelle staff on the psychological effects of isolation in children and adolescents.

Dr. Manalo, how did you get involved with this case?

The plaintiff has brought me here to testify on the behalf of Logan Ricci. I am being compensated for my time here today, but I am only here to describe what I saw and read and what science says. My statement here today is purely factual.

Is this your first interaction with the plaintiff?

Actually, it isn’t. I first met Logan in the spring of 2025. I was his court-approved therapist during his parents divorce. I met with his entire family multiple times, and I developed a very strong therapeutic rapport.

What did you cover in these sessions?

We mostly worked through his parent’s divorce. I taught Logan many coping mechanisms like art, running, and gardening. Most importantly these sessions gave me an important level of a baseline on Logan’s mental state.

How did you see Logan during these sessions?

These sessions showed Logan as a quiet, somewhat anxious teenager who wanted to fit in very badly. He was typical in mood and behavior, cooperative, and showed no violent tendencies, depressive symptoms, or disciplinary problems. 

Were you present during Logan’s time in the centering and reset space?

I was not. My first encounter with Logan was after I hired by the prosecution in August. My first evaluation session with him was on September 1st. I later had a follow up on September 8th. I reviewed several pieces of evidence in preparing my opinion on the case. I reviewed CYRC’s policy manual on the Centering and Reset Space, a diagram of the room, a time log documenting Logan’s activity, Zander Cohen’s incident report, the facility schedule, roommate complaints, and the signed agreement.

How did you form your opinions if you weren’t present?

I formed my opinion based on the evidence I reviewed and my two sessions with Logan himself. My understanding and expert opinion comes from the facilities own records, and I strive to be as objective and honest as I humanely can.  

Dr. Manalo, from an expert’s standpoint, what are your thoughts on the centering and reset space?

The policy as written has no major issues. It says the space should be used voluntarily unless someone presents a serious saftey concern to themselves or others. The response is required to be proportionate and have daily mental health contact and continuing training. Clinically, these things prevent the room from being solitary confinement. However, in practice, this space had abrupt cancellation of therapy, and lack of meaningful socialization, and it could be argued whether or not Logan’s time here was actually even voluntary.

What do you mean by saying it could be argued whether or not Logan’s time in the CYRC was voluntary?

Well, in the record log, Ashton Horvath led a conversation with several options that included loss of recreation time and privileges, roommate remediation, and apology letters. Logan rejected all of these options, and only then was the opportunity to go to the centering and reset space presented and the form was signed.

So, if he signed the form, what makes you say it could have been involuntary?

Consent is a tricky area in adolescent psychology. Logan is a sixteen year old who had also just been removed from a hostile environment to which he had an acute stress reaction. His options were the Centering and Reset space, or being put back in an environment that they had just moments earlier told staff they felt unsafe in. Additionally, Officer Kaminsky was standing nearby fully prepared to restrain them. These situations can complicate whether or not Logan even felt like had an option.

Dr. Manalo, what is your opinion on the daily therapy sessions?

I am completely in support of the daily therapy sessions as they are written in the policy. However, the facts show that daily therapy sessions didn’t happen. The staff at CYRC ended up handing Logan self-guided worksheets. This is not direct contact. A packet can’t ask follow up questions, or notice when someone is upset. The policy was not followed regarding these sessions, and it ended up harming Logan.

And, doctor, can you tell me your expert opinion on Logan not interacting with others when the opportunity was given?

I think it’s extremely important. It tells us that it could just be Logan not wanting to be more social, but in my opinion the more likely answer is that Logan was withdrawn and that was the injury of the centering and reset space. A 16-year-old spent a week desperate for human contact and had stopped seeking it by the end of the week.

What would you describe this behavior as?

In my clinical opinion, this is learned withdrawal that is often seen in isolated adolescents and youths. The depravation of human contact reinforces to youth that the connection is unavailable, so they stop seeking the attention alltogether.

What did you notice about Logan during your September evaluation?

He was struggling, and I noticed this immediately. Logan presented with flattened affect, which is a mood trait, poor sleep quality, difficulty concentrating, and social withdrawal. His mood and all together attitude was severely affected by this time in the CYRC.

Is there anything else that contributed to your evaluation of Logan?

Logan confided a lot in me. He described the experiences of getting his meals through a slot in the door, being walked past others and unable to speak, and did his schoolwork in a lab, spaced out from others, and wasn’t allowed to talk to anybody else.

What was your diagnosis for Logan?

I diagnosed Logan with an acute stress response. This event had affected Logan, not just with his personality, but his entire mental health struggled from it.

Dr. Manalo, is this opinion relying solely on your observations?

No. I rest my opinions on my observations, but also developmental science which is well established and backed up with peer reviewed literature. 

And what of that developmental science is relevant here?

It is incredibly important that adolescents rely on external supports like friends and trusted adults. Removing these supports is like taking someone’s umbrella during a thunderstorm. This is why isolation is more harmful to youths than adults. The young brain needs to find a way to calm itself, and this is why even courts recognize children as constitutionally and developmentally different. A recent study showed that as little as 24 hours in solitary confinement results in auditory and visual hallucinations, depressive thoughts, and self harm ideation. This study was conducted on adults. Multiply the time spent by 7 timers as much in the study, and apply it to a 16-year-old’s brain. Harm is inevitable.

So what’s your expert opinion on Logan’s placement?

Logan was placed in solitary confinement in function, regardless of name. Logan’s account and the exhibits prove the policy was not followed. Every deviation was reasonable and not inherently malicious, but combined together, they deprived Logan of meaningful interaction for a week. Harm on a nervous system and it’s development doesn’t require intent. In an understaffed facility, it’s hard to keep it from turning into a glorified de-facto isolation-fest. The facility knew or should have known these risks.

If there was a “next time”, how would Logan be affected?

I believe Logan may not bounce back as quickly. The fear he has already experienced and the lack of effective safeguards have already proven to be damaging once. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to ask Logan not be put in this situation again.

So, Dr. Scout Manalo, can you share your final and expert opinion on the damage caused to Logan in this case?

It is in my clinical opinion I believe Logan suffered an acute stress reaction directly caused by his time in the take five space that did damage to his psyche and well being.

And lastly, Doctor, what is your expert opinion on the take-five space?

I would consider it to be solitary confinement in practice and not in name. Safeguards and precautions failed which resulted in a harmful isolation environment and an adolescent had to pay the price for it. The policies mean nothing when the practice and application do nothing.