http://newsok.com/abuse-charges-dropped-for-open-court-activist/article/3409855


         Abuse charges dropped for open-court activist in Claremore


         Buzz up!





                 BY RANDY ELLIS

                 Published: October 17, 2009







     CLAREMORE — The Rogers County district attorney’s office Friday
dismissed a domestic abuse charge against a Claremore man who gained statewide
notoriety last year by successfully battling local judges over public access to
courtrooms.



Rogers County District Attorney Gene Haynes said he reluctantly dismissed the
abuse charge against David Starkey, 49, because the alleged victim stopped
cooperating with prosecutors.
The woman first wrote out a statement describing how Starkey had
allegedly battered her, Haynes said. He said the woman stuck to her
story at the preliminary hearing but then stopped cooperating and began
working with Starkey’s attorneys to try to defeat the case.
"It’s very common in domestic abuse cases for the victim to back out,”
Haynes said.
Starkey, however, denied abusing the woman and charged his arrest was
retaliation for operating a Web site, www.rogerscountygrandjury.com,
where he has been pushing for a grand jury investigation of criminal
justice abuses in the county.
He described the purported abuse victim as his common law wife and said
they are now separated. Starkey said her injuries resulted from a fight
she got into before she got home, which had witnesses, and a "panic
attack gone awry.”
The woman has filed an Oklahoma Bar Association complaint against Assistant
District Attorney Jenny Sanbrano, alleging the prosecutor threatened to have the
state Department of Human Services take away her son if she didn’t testify the
way prosecutors wanted, Starkey said.
"That’s nonsense,” Haynes said.
Starkey said he experienced abuse first hand in the way authorities handled his
case.
"I had a tooth knocked out in the patrol car,” Starkey said, alleging he was
roughed up even though he says he didn’t resist.
Starkey also said Claremore police officers destroyed a digital audio
recorder he had running when they entered his home and then claimed
they didn’t have any audio recordings from officers’ body microphones
that could have documented the destruction.
Tom Kimble,
one of Starkey’s attorneys, said there were at least five officers in
the house and he found it "inconceivable” that none of them had their
body microphones running.
Starkey said a district attorney’s investigator also gave court
testimony inconsistent with a recording of a conversation the
investigator had with a private investigator working for Starkey.
Starkey obtained a second preliminary hearing in his case after
successfully protesting that a Rogers County judge had improperly
excluded members of the public from the courtroom.
Haynes said the judge limited access because of the small size of the courtroom.
Prosecutors left open the possibility of refiling the criminal charge,
but Haynes said he "seriously doubts” that will happen unless the
alleged victim has a dramatic change in attitude.
Kimble said Starkey may file a civil lawsuit because of the way his case was
handled.

Read more:
http://newsok.com/abuse-charges-dropped-for-open-court-activist/article/3409855#\
ixzz0UDU5i2Ha


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work
in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for
non-profit
research and educational purposes only. GRG [Ref.http://www.law. cornell.edu/
uscode/17/ 107.shtml]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I live with my roomates and their 5 year old son. The five year old went to
school and was complaining about his but hurting and a child in his class
noticed a small bruise and told the teacher. The female teacher called the boy
into her office and told him to take his pants off. No one else was in the room
except for those two and she saw bruises and reported them to DHR. DHR then said
the bruises were huge and all over his thighs and butt. The boy told his teacher
his daddy whooped him with a belt. DHR came to our home and told the mom that
everything would be ok and she would talk to her supervisor. The next lady that
came out said they were taking the child out of the home. The father said No i
will leave let him stay he just got enrolled and settled into a new school
(kindergaden). The father left and is now staying with his dad. The mom got a
call today telling her that if the dad does not cooperate with DHR they were
taking the child away. He is allowed visitation with the mom supervising. But
not allowed in the house at night. Also they are setting the father with a
curfew he has to be in his fathers house by 8:30 at night after working all day
with lights out. Also If DHR calls his fathers house and he isnt there when they
call they said they will remove the child. It sounds to me that they are
controlling the father. The child came home yesterday and we asked him to see
the bruises and they are the size of a penny mabye 3 of them. When the mother
asked well how am i supposed to punish him because time out doesnt work, the
worker said.. Well mam i dont know thats what the classes are for. This child
does not behave. He back talks and is rude. He made his mother cry today. He
then came in the house and said i can do what i want because no one can spank
me. We put him in his room and he will stay there, until dinner. I am so angry
because i went through foster care i know what DHR is like and they are ripping
this family apart. The father is so upset he is talking suicidal!

FYI



While accidents do happen anywhere, I find it strange that one can kill
anyone with a car and all the police cares is 3 things: that you had a
valid driver license and car insurance, plus you where not drunk. If you
meet those 3 conditions, then it is deemed and accident. Well, the
transportation industry is one of the main engines of modern
civilization and thus they are almost exempt of any wrongdoing.



So, theorically someone could get rid of someone else using a car and
get away with it. He could use a car as a weapon, run them over and then
claim you lost control of the car, or your foot got struck on the pedal.



http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/08/25/2009-08-25_acs_under_fire\
_in_foster_death.html
<http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/08/25/2009-08-25_acs_under_fir\
e_in_foster_death.html>



http://www.telemundo47.com/noticias/20535071/detail.html
<http://www.telemundo47.com/noticias/20535071/detail.html>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Yahoo! Alerts

Yahoo! News -
My Alerts -
Edit Alert





Wednesday, August 19, 2009  9:45 PM PDT











          Sponsored Link
















			 Man Continues Fight For Parental Rights

			 KCCI 8 Des Moines
			  Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:01 PM PDT

			 The Iowa Court of Appeals has ruled against a man who fathered a child with a
woman, but said he was denied his parental rights.









































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

NJ and elsewhere, we NEED to come together on this and show there is local
support for this to go to the NJ Supreme court, this is a matter of
constitutionality, due process, and protection of the family unit. This even
goes beyond gender issues as I know of situations where even women have FRO's on
them for frivilous reasons......

I want to gather local support for this in the first press release,
and national support within a month. Please send me a direct email if your
group supports this ruling and we want it to go to the supreme court.


http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=4222


Women’s advocates and the state Attorney General’s office are criticizing a
new court ruling which will make it harder for women to get restraining orders
against their male partners. Star-Ledger columnist Fran Wood, in her recent
op-ed “Don’t soften protection for women,” called New Jersey’s Domestic
Violence Prevention Act “one of the best statutes in the country,” and said
the new ruling could “diminish the ability of domestic violence victims to get
the protection they need.”
>Certainly abused women need protection and support, but there are many
troubling aspects of the DVPA’s restraining order provisions that merit
judicial and/or legislative redress.
>Under the DVPA, it is very easy for a woman to allege domestic violence and get
a restraining order (aka “protection order”). New Jersey issues 30,000
restraining orders annually, and men are targeted in 4/5ths of them. The
standard is “preponderance of the evidence” (often conceptualized as
51%-49%), and judges almost always side with the accusing plaintiff.
>Under the DVPA, the accuser need not even claim actual abuse. Alleged verbal
threats of violence are sufficient, even though it’s almost impossible for the
accused to provide substantive contradictory evidence.
>The restraining order boots the man out of his own home and generally prohibits
him from contacting his own children. Men are cut off from their possessions and
property, and some end up in homeless shelters. Yet most have never even had a
chance to defend themselves in court. In recognition of the gravity of these
orders, the Hudson County judge, Francis B. Schultz, found the current standard
of proof unconstitutional, however, and required the stricter “clear and
convincing evidence” standard in the case before him. His ruling was not
binding on other judges, but will likely be appealed, which could lead to a
decision with a broader impact…
>Opponents of the ruling point to the relatively rare instances where men have
killed their female partners as evidence of why the current law should stand.
While these cases are heart-wrenching, they do not constitute a viable argument
against the new ruling.
>For one, the new ruling does not eliminate restraining orders, but merely
requires a proper evidence standard for their issuance. Moreover, it is highly
questionable whether restraining orders protect genuinely abused women. A
violent spouse intent on killing his ex is not going to be deterred from doing
so out of fear of violating his restraining order. In many domestic violence
killings, a restraining order was already in place. In general, a restraining
order is only enforceable against a law-abiding, non-violent man.
>Jane Hanson, executive director of Partners for Women and Justice in Montclair,
argues that Superior Court Judge Francis B. Schultz is wrong in ruling that the
DVPA violates parents’ “fundamental” right to “be with or maintain their
relationship with their children.” Yet when a restraining order is issued,
fathers can be (and sometimes are) arrested for calling their own children on
the phone or going to their Little League games.
>Moreover, by removing the father from the home, a custody precedent is set with
mom as primary caregiver and dad as occasional visitor—a precedent which harms
fathers’ ability to gain joint custody of their children in divorce
proceedings.
>Wood calls the current law on restraining orders “an efficient system.” We
disagree. Yes, the system is efficient in separating men from their children and
their homes. However, it is hardly efficient in delivering justice.
Unfortunately, the New Jersey Appellate Division recently overturned the
decision. I asked David Heleniak, the attorney who represented Anibal Crespo, to
write up a description of what happened for our readers, and it’s below.
Heleniak writes:
In Crespo v. Crespo, the New Jersey Appellate Division overturned the June 18,
2008 ruling of Francis Schultz, who vacated the final restraining order (FRO)
entered against defendant Anibal Crespo. Judge Schultz vacated the FRO entered
pursuant to the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act because the standard of
proof provided by the Act, the preponderance of evidence standard as opposed to
the clear-and-convincing standard, violated the defendant’s right to due
process. (He also noted that the Act’s “practice and procedure” components
violate the separation of powers doctrine, but this finding had no affect on his
decision to vacate the FRO and will not be discussed here.)
>Characterizing the competing private interests at stake as “victims’
interests in being protected from domestic violence against defendants’
liberty interests in being free to say what they wish and go where they
please,” and describing the governmental interest at stake as “interest in
eliminating domestic violence and in affording immediate and effective
protection to victims of domestic violence,” the Appellate Division concluded
that the relevant case law does not require “a burden of persuasion that more
effectively eliminated the chance of a mistaken adjudication at the steep price
of permitting countless more meritorious claims to be lost at the hands of the
clear-and-convincing standard.”
>Lawrence Lustberg, who submitted an amicus brief on behalf of the New Jersey
Coalition for Battered Women, told the New Jersey Law Journal he was pleased
that in addition to overturning Judge Schultz’s decision, “the court
performed a full due process rights analysis.” They did nothing of the sort.
In footnote seven of their decision, the court stated: “Defendant has also
argued that the Act improperly converts what is a criminal prosecution into a
civil proceeding, damages his reputation, and interferes with his right to raise
his children, to speak freely with his wife and children, and to enjoy the
marital home. We find these arguments to have insufficient merit to warrant
discussion in a written opinion.” The rights of defendants shrugged off in
that statement were obviously not taken into account when the panel weighed the
competing interests in their standard of proof analysis. Likewise, they missed
an important point of the
  defendant’s Second Amendment argument, which is that defendants should not be
deprived of a fundamental right as the result of a summary hearing in front a
family court judge who is likely to be biased against them and mandated to apply
the mere preponderance standard.
>The panel left open the issues of whether the lack of notice and the right to
counsel could be grounds to vacate an FRO, but decided in the case before it the
record did not indicate prejudice and therefore those grounds were inapplicable.
It embraced the trial level decision Depos v. Depos, which held that defendants
do not have a right to discovery in FRO hearings. Finally, on the issue of jury
trials, it ruled that because an FRO action is at root an action in equity, the
right to a jury does not attach.
>Because the case involves significant Constitutional issues, there is a good
chance the New Jersey Supreme Court will take it.

 I am not a psychiatrist or a lawyer. I relate all my statements to my personal
experience and research.


Enlighten the people, generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind
will vanish like spirits at the dawn of day.

Thomas Jefferson




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- On Wed, 7/15/09, Zena Crenshaw <zcrenshaw@...> wrote:













[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Was interested in reading about others with a  Human bite mark on toddler, and
if CPS finds it child abuse, or playing.Who gets child if abuse is found in
court.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello to the newcomers,

If you would like your free 58-page copy with over 300 cited rulings, send me a
private email to Admin@...  and put in the subject line
"Request for Handbook", I will email you one.  In the supplemental case law I
used in the state Supreme Court this past March.  DCF has to stop threatening
parents to gain cooperation.  The federal judge in Loudermilk v. Arpaio, No. CV
06-0636-PHX-EHC ruled that coerced cooperation is unlawful and unconstitutional.
Parents do not have to let DCF in and DCF can not threaten parents with police
or court order.  DCF needs a lawful warrant just like the police.  The court
ruled that DCF agencies are an arm of the state like police and are government
officials and subject to the full weight of the Constitution.

Connecticut DCF Watch
National Civil Rights Advocates For Families
P.O. Box 9775
Forestville, CT 06011-9775
860-833-4127
Admin@...
www.connecticutDCFwatch.com

P.S. For a FREE copy of our Parental Rights handbook with over 300 rulings, send
us an email with "Request for free handbook" in subject line.  There is also a
FREE manual on "reasonable efforts" at our web site.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On May 22, 2009 a Corpus Christi TX judge sentenced Grizelda
       Lopez-Hess, 38, to 90 days in jail. I wonder if she’s out yet. She plead
       guilty to making a false report of abuse.
       According to reporter Mary
       Ann Cavazos, Grizelda Lopez-Hess phoned the Texas Department of Family
       and Protective Services on October 9 to make a false report of
“indecency
       with a child”. She accused Ricardo Jimenez of molesting his
girlfriend’s
       daughter, claiming she learned about the abusive situation from her
       daughter, a friend of the supposed child victim.
       But Grizelda Lopez-Hess doesn’t even have a daughter! She made the
       whole thing up! And she was an investigator for the Children’s Advocacy
       Center - a former CPS caseworker, child-taker, and supervisor! What a
       manipulator!
       The victim of this lie, Ricardo Jimenez, is called upon to testify as
       an expert witness, and this false allegation has already been brought up
       in criminal cases wherein he’s been asked to testify as an expert. But
       this was not Grizelda Lopez-Hess’ motivation for making such a sick and
       dreadful false accusation of child abuse.
       Grizelda Lopez-Hess said she made the false accusation in retaliation
       against Ricardo Jimenez’ girlfriend, Misty Guajardo. Grizelda Lopez-Hess
       blamed Misty Guajardo for a job transfer forced on Lopez-Hess’ husband.
       But county officials said that the job transfer (a demotion?) was done
       because Grizelda Lopez-Hess and her husband did yet another dirty deed:
       they tipped off a suspect in a criminal case. The suspect and his family
       members testified that indeed they had been tipped off by Grizelda
       Lopez-Hess and her husband.
       Grizelda Lopez-Hess plea bargained. She was to get a two year prison
       sentence, but that was changed to three years probation and the 90 days in
       jail. Plus she has to pay a fine and complete 100 hours of community
       service and attend anger management classes.
       Hess’ husband tried to get her off easy. He testified that Grizelda
       Lopez-Hess would be in danger because while she was in a holding cell two
       fellow prisoners recognized her as a child-taking CPS agent! But she went
       to jail anyway and was to be isolated from the other prisoners. Solitary
       confinement for 90 days? I hope she’s still serving the entire 90 day
       sentence and that she’s had plenty of time to think about what it means
to
       LIE and falsely accuse people of child abuse.
       So there you have it, folks… the truth coming out about a really bad
       character that the county used against American families. The put Grizelda
       Lopez-Hess in a position of power and she used it to knowingly harm and
       harass decent people.
       This is the tip of the iceberg! There are THOUSANDS of false
       accusations happening in this country… and it is time for all these
lying
       idiots to get investigated, prosecuted, and IMPRISONED. Forget jail! One
       year isn’t enough to pay for all the massive amounts of grief they’ve
       caused!
       Every child taken away from a parent due to a false accusation of child
       abuse is a child that is being abused by the government child protective
       services agency and its agents.
       So now you have my opinion. What’s yours? What would be the proper
       sentence for a child protective services social worker who knowingly makes
       a false accusation of child abuse or neglect?
       Source: Former
       CPS Supervisor to Spend 90 Days in Jail by Mary Ann Cavazos, published
       on June 1, 2009 at Caller.com.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I have one question, why are you expressing politcal and religious views on this
group??? I am new to the group and was under the impression it was a
child/abuse/ neglect forum. I would rather discuss those issues and not be
subjected to opinions.  Lisa


-----Original Message-----
From: Rev.Chuck Riley <crbaumia2@...>
To: child_neglect_abuse@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, Jun 11, 2009 3:59 pm
Subject: [child_neglect_abuse] JUST MORE QUESTIONS








We are today MOSTLY standing by and watching our communities, State and Nation
be "swept under the rug"! Not ever have I seen things continue to head in
absolutely the wrong direction and with NO END in sight!

It appears that those who are called (loosely) our "leaders" have lost control
of our Security, Our Children's Education, Our Fair Trade agreements, our
Nation's Sovereignty, Our Civil and Individual Rights, Our businesses and
corporations and OF COURSE…of course our Economy!!

IS IT a coincidence that the harder the liberals, left wingers and ACLU fight to
keep God out of our lives and off of our lips…even to the extent of proposing
to write God out of our Constitution, the more our Country and our citizens seem
to be falling apart?

I know…the "war" against Christians, Values and Morality in this country is
the NOT the only reason for today's issues…but I still must wonder! Remember
when right was right, wrong was wrong and Sin was Sin and not just accepted
because it is politically correct????

I surely DO NOT un
derstand how the current governor of the once GREAT State of Michigan figures
that if she cuts EVERY viable dollar from programs such as our children's
healthcare, education, police departments, fire departments, etc…etc…and yet
increases each dollar that goes to welfare programs and DSH departments who have
been operating on their own "anti-family" financial agenda for more than 30
years that our State will become "stronger" in the future? Stronger WHAT????

I surely DO NOT understand how ANYONE thinks that hurting our States and our
Nations small businesses Via taxation and "Mandating" employer paid healthcare
whether it is affordable or not…putting increased restraints on American
companies and manufacturers will increase jobs or even save jobs from being
moved overseas to countries who will welcome them with open arms and dollars (or
Euros!!)

The other day, a fellow Veteran said to me that we should form a Militia, take
up arms and "take back" country…but ya know with the amount of apathy which
our average American has, I find it hard to believe we could fill a Korean made
Mini Van with enough "Patriots" to make a difference!?!

Has ANYONE ELSE noticed that the Illegal Aliens have been fighting harder in
THIS country to keep our country whole than most Americans???

And REALLY…who is this Obama, what does he REALLY want? What country does the
ACLU represent??? Who are these members of congress who BELIEVE that "we work
for them" and WHY DO WE KEEP REELCTING THEM????

I thin
k I should a been a Cowboy….!








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

http://amiablyme.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/former-cps-director-sentenced-to-10-ye\
ars-for-child-molestation/


						 is 90 Days enough for a Lying Social Worker Who destorys a life?




						 July 24, 2009...11:07 am
						 Former CPS director sentenced to 10 years for child molestation


															 Jump to Comments


														 JACOB
JONES | THE DAILY WORLD Gary E. Anderson, a former supervisor with
Child Protective Services, was sentenced to a minimum of 10 years in
prison Friday after pleading guilty to first-degree child rape and
molestation.
Judge rejects recommendation of 1 year in jail and treatment
  Gary E. Anderson leaned into the podium, his head lowered and the blue jail
jumpsuit draping off his thin frame.
The
67-year-old former Child Protective Services director told the court he
did not understand how he could spend 36 years of his life defending
children, including his own, and now stand guilty of raping a
9-year-old girl and molesting another girl of the same age.
“I’ve
broken a sacred trust not only with these children, but those who love
them,” he said Friday. “I broke their hearts. … I am sorry for what
I’ve done.”
Anderson
pleaded guilty to first-degree child rape and first-degree molestation
last year for “numerous” times when he touched the two girls
inappropriately, according to court records. He admitted his conduct in
a plea agreement recommending an alternative sentence of one year in
jail as well as sex offender therapy and supervision upon release.
Superior
Court Judge Mark McCauley rejected the recommended Special Sex Offender
Sentencing Alternative on Friday, saying Anderson deserved prison
despite pleas from the victims’ families to grant treatment.
“I
have really struggled with this decision,” the judge said. “There was
such a trust. There are multiple victims. His conduct went on for
years.”
McCauley
sentenced Anderson to a minimum of 10 years to life in prison with
annual reviews to determine whether he can ever be released.
Anderson’s eyes dropped to the table. His supporters in the audience wept
softly.

“These
crimes, from my point of view, are horrific crimes,” McCauley said,
noting he had given substantial prison sentences to other offenders who
never even touched a child.
The
judge said the victims and their families have to live with the
consequences of Anderson’s actions for the rest of their lives. He said
he is also concerned about any chance Anderson could re-offend, despite
his age.
“I just can’t in good conscience grant a (sentencing alternative),”
McCauley said.
Court
records stated Anderson first acknowledged he had touched the girls
inappropriately when confronted by their parents in January of 2008. He
was charged with raping one girl and molesting the other.
The
state Department of Social & Health Services said he worked for
Child Protective Services for 36 years and retired in 2000. He
supervised social workers, but rarely interacted with children.
Anderson was arrested in March of 2008 and unanswered questions about other
possible victims delayed his sentencing for months.
Deputy prosecutor Katie Svoboda said everyone involved should be better off with
the long case finished.
“It took a lot of work,” she said. “This is a hard case and a hard call
(by the judge).”
Svoboda
had joined the defense in recommending the alternative sentence with
therapy, but said a prison sentence was “well-warranted.”
Defense
attorney Brett Purtzer called a polygraph examiner and a
psychotherapist to the stand Friday to testify about Anderson’s chances
of benefiting from treatment.
“If
Mr. Anderson is not an individual that qualifies for (the alternative
sentence),” Purtzer argued, “then that person does not exist.”
The
attorney presented several letters of support for Anderson and one of
the victim’s parents asked the court to allow for treatment instead of
prison.
Anderson
said he had taken full responsibility and wanted the chance to
understand why he had done such things. He believed the alternative
sentence and treatment would give him that chance.
“This (sentencing alternative) truly is a privilege,” McCauley told him.
“There’s no right to go through this treatment.”
[ I'd like you to
ask yourself, what Foundation are you donating to? Most of the
Foundations (if not all) that you are donating to, fund this sort of
behavior and give Grants to CPS, such as United Way just as an example.
Foundations have become the small business of the modern generation by
government officials, Judges, an those within the DHHS organization;
either directly or indirectly.. so next time you Donate.. ask
yourself.. who are YOU hurting?.. I will do an article on Foundations
one day, hopefully soon]


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On 8/15/09 several  of us in Flint are producing a Mark Farner Concert. We are 3
blocks from Michgians Back to the Bricks Classic Car Cruise.
http://backtothebricks.org/
150,000 people were there last year. We have a football stadium all day with 10
local bands, vendors and drink.
http://www.ticketmaster.com/event/080042E7BC8F3BE1
see:

http://flintrevival.com/

This is how I am spending my summer vacation.

Terry Bankert

You're receiving this email because of you are a media member, DCSG member or a
friend of DCSG. Please confirm your continued interest in receiving email from
us.
 
You may if you no longer wish to receive our emails.



























Greetings!




We appreciate your support of equal rights for both parents.

Family services are stealing kids from innocent families and family courts rob
men of their kids every day.







Fatherless Day 2009

Study Eugenics on

www.YouTube.com

Understand the big picture.

Get invovled politically

while you still can.

The night cometh

when no man can work.



 
Video:

www.tinyurl.com/FatherlessDay2009

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCkQCv4Wp0A







www.CaptainTonyTaylor.com












Forward email



 
This email was sent to  by tony.taylor@....
Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy
Policy.

Email Marketing by
DCSG | Address for administrative mail: | Tony.Taylor@... | 726 Negely Ave
| Turtle Creek | PA | 15145-1233




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

We are today MOSTLY standing by and watching our communities, State and Nation
be "swept under the rug"!  Not ever have I seen things continue to head in
absolutely the wrong direction and with NO END in sight!

It appears that those who are called (loosely) our "leaders" have lost control
of our Security, Our Children's Education, Our Fair Trade agreements, our
Nation's Sovereignty, Our Civil and Individual Rights, Our businesses and
corporations and OF COURSE�of course our Economy!!

IS IT a coincidence that the harder the liberals, left wingers and ACLU fight to
keep God out of our lives and off of our lips�even to the extent of proposing to
write God out of our Constitution, the more our Country and our citizens seem to
be falling apart?

I know�the "war" against Christians, Values and Morality in this country is the
NOT the only reason for today's issues�but I still must wonder! Remember when
right was right, wrong was wrong and Sin was Sin and not just accepted because
it is politically correct????

I surely DO NOT understand how the current governor of the once GREAT State of
Michigan figures that if she cuts EVERY viable dollar from programs such as our
children's healthcare, education, police departments, fire departments,
etc�etc�and yet increases each dollar that goes to welfare programs and DSH
departments who have been operating on their own "anti-family" financial agenda
for more than 30 years that our State will become "stronger" in the future?
Stronger WHAT????

I surely DO NOT understand how ANYONE thinks that hurting our States and our
Nations small businesses Via taxation and "Mandating" employer paid healthcare
whether it is affordable or not�putting increased restraints on American
companies and manufacturers will increase jobs or even save jobs from being
moved overseas to countries who will welcome them with open arms and dollars (or
Euros!!)

The other day, a fellow Veteran said to me that we should form a Militia, take
up arms and "take back" country�but ya know with the amount of apathy which our
average American has, I find it hard to believe we could fill a Korean made Mini
Van with enough "Patriots" to make a difference!?!

Has ANYONE ELSE noticed that the Illegal Aliens have been fighting harder in
THIS country to keep our country whole than most Americans???

And REALLY�who is this Obama, what does he REALLY want? What country does the
ACLU represent???  Who are these members of congress who BELIEVE that "we work
for them" and WHY DO WE KEEP REELCTING THEM????

I think I should a been a Cowboy�.!

It should be realized the "interpretation" of the medical evidence, (or lack
thereof) in this case, is the same "interpretation" already being used in
Juvenile cases.





--- On Wed, 3/18/09, VOCALIOWA@... <VOCALIOWA@...> wrote:
From: VOCALIOWA@... <VOCALIOWA@...>
Subject: [witchhunt] father wrongfully convicted of abuse of his 17 year old
daughter
To: Witchhunt@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, March 18, 2009, 6:57 PM












             Witchhunt@yahoogrou ps.com <Witchhunt@yahoogrou ps.com>



Wrongfully accused adoptive dad.



Jeff and June Rumelhart



America's Most Wanted are: Jeff Rumelhart, age 11 and Paige age 13.  Who can
provide rescue?



Another family is in current severe difficulty.  Its not because they have
abused their children.  DHS has found that they can use the intake mechanism set
up for abuse cases and shuttle the family directly into Juvenile Court.  The
Juvenile court can act in total secrecy and do precisely what they please.  When
the mother complained, a gag order was imposed.  Judge Constance Cohen is the
Juvenile  judge.  Ann Soroka is the social worker.  The director of the Iowa
Department of Human Services, Eugene I. Gassow is a resident of Rhode Island and
works in Iowa.



This story is a complete turnaround from the kind of unfortunate child
protection cases on AMW.  This story shows how a system, carefully constructed
to protect those who are vulnerable to abuse, and how such a system can be
eroded and misdirected and set to destroy otherwise healthy families. To the
degree this deliberate misconduct on the part of public officials and child
protectors is destroying families, it also must be shown that it represents a
severe misuse of public funds which may be in short supply to protect those who
face real abuse issues.  False allegations of abuse can harm everyone in its
path.  "When accusation becomes guilt, that day freedom ceases."  Margaret
Thatcher.



When 17 year old, Ashley found that house rules were bothersome, she cried
"rape".  Her accusations amounted to 500-1000 times over a 5-6 year period.  Her
adoptive father was an electronics network instructor at DMACC.  Jeff was placed
on administrative leave without pay and ordered not to be in the presence of
children under ge18.  His minor children were ordered immediately into foster
care.  His accusing daughter was put into state supported independent living in
Carlisle, Iowa, where parental rules are not necessary.  Now she belongs to the
state.  She was enabled in her further accusation by state sponsored therapist,
guardian ad litem, and a therapist.



The father's arrest was in March 2008.  He did not come to trial until February
2009.  The record of the trial shows absolutely no basis upon which a criminal
charge can rest. The prosecutor ignored all kinds of evidentiary procedures and
presented expert witness after witness even when the witness knew nothing about
the case.  The prosecutor participated in the investigation, a violation of the
Brady bill.   Medical evidence showed absolutely no evidence of a crime.  This
paid witness, told the jury that it did not mean that a crime had not been
committed.  Jessica Sleiter stated that the hymen of a pubescent child can
repair itself or grow back in 72 hours.  This foolishness came from a nurse
practitioner in a state sponsored regional child protection center.  What it
implies is that the accused can be sent to prison if the medical report shows
damage and can be sent to prison if the medical report shows no damage.  
Gotcha!



There are a number of very important facets to the case which need close
attention.  The most critical one right now is a man who awaits sentencing on
April 7, 2009 for up to 35 years.  The husband is gone.  The children are in
foster care.  The mother faces termination of her parental rights.   She was
recently laid off of medical job because of her involvement in the system.  She
intends to go public with her story.  She has contacted the Iowa legislature.
Members of the general assembly are permitted to examine DHS records.



I video taped the 5 day trial under extended media coverage.   I have shown some
of the trial on local cable television.  John Harvey  515 282-2672    I cannot
speak of the Juvenile part of this case because, like the mother, I was given a
gag order.   When I asked for the written order I was refused.  I was told that
it would be in writing in the transcript of the session.  (This, of course, is
secret to everyone)



============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ======



The state filed five charges of child sexual abuse against Jeffrey Rumelhart, a
44 year old electronics network instructor at DMACC.  The charges involved a 17
year old adoptive daughter.  The defendant on February 26, 2008, was found
guilty of all counts.



At first glance, it would appear that the defendant must rise to prove a
negative - that is, to prove something did not occur.  Evidence was given that
ninety percent of the 500 to 1000 sex acts were committed in the middle of the
night in the computer room on the ground level of a four level home. The alleged
acts were from the age 11 and progressed from back rubs to fondling, to oral sex
and vaginal sex including "doggie" style deep penetration performance.  Jeff
Rumelhart pled not guilty to all counts and refused to play the plea bargain
game.   Rumelhart was totally cooperative with all attempts to search his home
including the dropped ceiling, his computer and DNA swabs when requested.  There
were no tangible items of evidence removed from the home.



With the defendant's plea of not-guilty, the burden of proof fell on the state
to prove every element of each charge beyond a reasonable doubt.   In opening
argument it was shown that the case is basically the child's word against he
father's word.  However, the prosecuting attorney pointed out "But, we have the
condom!"  The condom was considered the key evidence for the prosecution.



At 11:36 AM on February 26, 2009, a jury of 12 was charged with deliberating the
case.  They were given 43 jury instructions.  They were served lunch in the jury
room.  Apparently they were able to reach an early tentative decision as to
guilt.  In approximately one hour 40 minutes, the jury took out time to ask the
judge to explain the difference between second degree guilt and third degree. 
They were told to read their manual.  In an estimated additional three and one
half hours, just prior to 10 AM on the next day the jury notified the court
attendant that they had reached a verdict.  It took nearly an hour to assemble
the parties.  The verdict was read.  The defendant was immediately handcuffed
and ushered to Polk County Jail without bond.



The are some of the overwhelming doubts which should have been sufficient to
ensure justice.



Doubt  marker 1  (A 17 year old child who alleged to have been abused almost
every day for five years without detection)



The 17 year old accuser told her secret of hundreds of sex acts nearly every
day.  The matter was not secret in 2005 when the Richard Erickson, her
biological father reported child sexual abuse to authorities.  Upon
investigation the child denied that she was being abused.   Her tale of abuse
started each time with her adoptive father arising from the bed he shared with
his wife on the fourth level of the rural ome.  He was said to have descended
three flights of stairs to take his adoptive daughter from her waterbed shared
with a younger sister.  According to the prosecution, he would take her to his
computer room, lock the door and commit sex acts.  It was said that his descent
on the stairs sounded like a herd of elephants.  His dog followed him everywhere
in the home and would scratch the door if it was locked.  Three children
testified about the very close relationship between the Husky and her master.



One must give attention to whether hundreds of such night time ventures could
have been taken without a single detection.  A reasonably prudent person would
not accept this preposterous account at face value unless supported with
substantial collateral evidence.   Justifiable doubt is present regarding the
defendant's stealth movements around the house.  This is reason to discount the
accusations and to rule not-guilty on this set of doubts alone.



Doubt marker 2  (Father was said to hide condoms in a ceiling space)



The alleged victim said that the defendant would use a condom during the sex
acts.  Ashley told authorities that the adoptive father would push up a ceiling
tile and extract a condom from a box.   Upon investigation, detectives found a
thick layer of dust indicating that nothing had been placed there.  Certainly
nothing could have been removed from that spot without detection.



The accuser has advanced an accusation which failed the validity test. If the
child is inconsistent with her account which is verifiable, should doubt arise
regarding those parts for which validity tests are not available?  The dust
speaks soundly with solid evidence regarding the believability of the accuser. 
A serious problem with validity on important pieces of the accuser's story is
justifiable cause to discount her accusation and to rule not-guilty.



Doubt marker 3   (Key evidence was the condom)



On or about January 23, 2008, between the hours of 9 and 10 PM, according to the
statement of the alleged victim, her adoptive father had sex with her. 
According to her story, this was said to be in exchange for his agreement to fix
her car.  This was not a stealth venture during the night.  This was when all
family members were awake.  The prosecution stated, for some reason this time he
chose to tie the end of the condom and later toss it in a ditch in rural Polk
County.  The child said he drove mother's van and headed for Wal Mart in Ankeny
to get a battery for her car.  She did not know whether they drove north or
south.  She recounted that her father threw the condom out of the left side of
the vehicle, nearly missing a mail box with the van.   At this time she grabbed
the steering wheel to regain control.   Later, in March, the child was
accompanied by three friends on a condom walk, approximately 4 miles southwest
of the Rumelhart home in
  Elkhart.   On NE 38th just 528 feet south of a farmstead driveway, the child
with great exuberance, found the condom.  Matt "top dog" Davenport, a Polk
County detective arrived at the scene about one half hour after the civilian
detectives arrived.  There were several versions of who was present, where and
when.  Davenport picked up the condom and placed it in a paper sack.  He failed
to seal it. He said he took digital pictures of the scene.  He reported that the
images did not come out.  It must be noted that this lead detective did not call
for a competent photographer to return to the scene to get the pictures to
complete the official evidence mission. Davenport, the lead detective, reported
that he did not know that there was an evidence protocol.



The deterioration of the latex condom appeared to be greater than that expected
for such a product.  The weather exposure was barely two months from the January
23, 2008.  The utter failure of the detective to observe a strict protocol,
clearly demonstrates the vulnerability of the evidence to have been planted or
otherwise subject to contamination.  The evidence sat on the detective's desk
until he managed to get a DNA swab from the defendant.  At that point both items
were delivered to the state lab in Ankeny in the same sack.   More significant
than what was alleged to have been found, was the absence of evidence.  There
was no evidence of female DNA on the condom submitted to the state lab.



There is no legal principle which would permit one to conclude sexual activity
based on a failure to observe an appropriate protocol for evidence gathering and
securing; the presentation of a grossly deteriorated condom found in a remote
ditch by the accuser, and failure to display female DNA evidence.  In any case,
the origin of the condom is without proper foundation.  We have only the tale
told by the accuser.  That tale is inconsistent in that it told about where
condoms were hidden -  the investigation did not support the accuser's tale.



Following disclosure of the child's accusations of sexual abuse, it took
Davenport about two weeks to launch a search for the condom.  In violation of
Brady provisions, Davenport's search for this essential exhibit was commenced
only after Polk County Assistant Attorney Steven Foritano had requested that the
lead detective Davenport pursue the item. The first move made by lead Detective
Davenport in the launch to discover the condom, was initiated when the Detective
called Eula Burton to transport the child to the scene.  Despite the fact that
the child said she did not know whether she had traveled north or south from her
Elkhart home two months prior, testimony indicated that the child directed
Burton to the precise spot and the accuser found the condom within minutes.  A
prudent juror would exercise caution regarding testimony of the accuser and her
ability to locate a condom.



As impressive as a report of a DNA analysis might be, the report does not
replace or repair significant defects of the key evidence.



The detective reported that he did not know that there was an evidence protocol.
The product arising from the activities of a bungling public official is not the
stuff of which good evidence is made.  Knowledge of the location of the condom
was in the sole hands of the one making the accusations. The evidence was
compromised, the evidence was not sealed, the evidence sack had more than one
case number on it and the location from which it was taken was not properly
documented.  The evidence was not delivered to the crime lab until two weeks
later.



One must not send a man to prison based upon evidence incompetently gathered by
the accuser, where the chain of evidence was severely compromised and where the
crime scene was not  competently preserved and documented.  Sufficient evidence
requires more than an impressive DNA test evaluation.  Scrupulous attention to
protocol is a part of a responsible prosecution and a proper judicial system. 
Somehow this condom was given to the jury as a basis to find Jeff Rumelhart
guilty of sexually abusing his child.



The deterioration of the latex condom appeared to be greater than that expected
for such a product.  The winter exposure was barely over two months from the
January 23, 2008 date.  The utter failure of the detective to observe a strict
protocol clearly shows the vulnerability of the evidence to be planted or
otherwise contaminated.  The evidence sat on the detective's desk until he was
motivated to get a DNA swab from the defendant.  At that point both items were
delivered to the state lab in Ankeny.  More significant than what was alleged to
have been found, was the absence of evidence.  The lab report showed there was
no evidence of female DNA on the condom.



There is no legal principle which would permit one to conclude sexual activity
based on a failure to observe an appropriate protocol for evidence gathering and
securing; the presentation of a grossly deteriorated condom found in a remote
ditch by the accuser, and displaying no female DNA evidence.



The use of the condom as evidence poses a sweeping multitude of significant
problems.  The serious deterioration of the condom cannot be adequately
explained by its exposure in a ditch from January 23, 2008 to its discovery on
or about March 23, 2008.  There is conflicting evidence as to whether the condom
was thrown in the fall of 2007 or on January 23, 2008.  One must ponder how a
child would be able find the condom so rapidly. Of the four civilians traveling
to the crime scene, it was Ashley Rumelhart who lone reported finding the
condom.  Evidence shows that no attempt was made to follow any sort of protocol
regarding the condom.  (except "don't touch it).  At no time was the evidence
sealed and locked in a cabinet. It was placed in a paper sack where it rode
around in his vehicle and sat on his desk until sometime later when swabs were
taken voluntarily from Jeff Rumelhart and tossed into the same sack and
delivered to the state crime lab.  A condom
  with no female DNA conveys absolutely nothing to a jury whose single focused
task Is to evaluate guilt or innocence in a sexual abuse case.   The state knew
the condom had no female DNA on it when it moved to trial.  This is outright
undeniable fraud on the court.  There is no legal principle which would permit
one to conclude sexual activity based on a failure to observe an appropriate
protocol for evidence gathering and securing; the presentation of a grossly
deteriorated condom found in a remote ditch by the accuser, and displayed no
female DNA evidence.



A DNA lecture by an expert witness is admittedly, an impressive report.  A  DNA
analysis adds absolutely nothing to the science in this case.  It shows that
substance taken from a condom matches DNA cooperatively submitted by the father.
It cannot be asserted that this condom had been involved with sexual contact
with any female because no female DNA was present.  It cannot be assumed that
the female DNA was missing because of exposure.  There was no evidence entered
to show that the female DNA would be totally venerable to the elements.  It
would be perfectly appropriate to consider that no female had contact with this
condom. The DNA testimony and report does not replace or repair significant
defects of the key evidence.



There is no verifiable independent support for the presence of a condom bearing
only Jeff's DNA.  The DNA may have been planted in much the same way as done in
a popular movie called Crush.  This movie was shown at the Rumelhart home.  The
accuser testified that she did not see the movie.  While it is not direct
evidence and one cannot connect the dots, it is one way of explaining how the
condom, bearing her adoptive father's DNA appeared a few weeks later by the
accuser.



If the ditch had been full of such condoms, a prudent juror could not possibly
connect the discovered item with any statutory misconduct.



Doubt marker 4   (Accuser determined that no one would believe her story.  She
enlisted a younger child Courtney Dorothy, to lie in court.)



The 17 year old accuser believed that other people would not believe that she
was a victim of sexual abuse.  She convinced a 14 year old friend at Sunshine
Open Bible Church to tell authorities that she had overhead the adoptive father
proposition his child.  If the accuser is so unsure of her believability,
certainly all others must exercise great caution in their evaluation of that
evidence.  Courtney Dorothy told the jury that before defense could get her
scheduled for a deposition, she decided to tell the prosecution the truth.



Doubt marker 5  (A child's genital exam for which no medical evidence of abuse
is documented, is no longer a valid defense to one accused of child sexual
abuse!).  Jennifer Sleiter, a nurse practitioner on staff at Regional Child
Protection Center at Blank Children's Hospital, told the jury that the results
of a full detailed genital examination revealed no medical evidence that sexual
abuse occurred.  She went on to say that following puberty the hymen elasticity
is sufficient to grow back in 72 hours.  The state was attempting at this point
to prove its case by the absence of expert highly technical magnified
observation.   The accused faced an accusation in which the hymen was torn or
broken or missing, the prosecution would claim victory.  If the opposite is true
the prosecution would claim victory.



Here are a few categories in which doubt was abundantly present.  The jurors
failed to recognize overwhelming cases in which doubt should have been
encountered, deliberated and a verdict brought forth which reflected the way our
jury system empaneled with 12 reasonably intelligent individuals.



John Harvey   Court Room TV recording



17 hrs  Extended Media Coverage



1102 21st Street    VOCALIOWA@MCHSI. COM



Des Moines, Iowa  50311   (515) 282-2672



Might it be possible for HSLDA to do an amicus on this case on



retrial. PCR or appeal?



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Flint Southwestern High School Reunion Site:
--------------------

Just doing my part to promote the 40th . Flint Southwestern Class of 1969.
P.O.ox 7698 Flint MI 48507.Contact Tom Spoden at tspoden@.... or
attorneybankert@...

Click the link below to Join:
http://flintsouthwestenreunion.ning.com/?xgi=7KDww4S

If your email program doesn't recognize the web address above as an active link,
please copy and paste it into your web browser

--------------------

Members already on Flint Southwestern High School Reunion Site
Allison (Al) Hester, Kittie "Ramoie" Covert, Lorri  Cross, Fred Watson, angela
billups(clarke)

--------------------

About Flint Southwestern High School Reunion Site
The community of influential SW graduates

898 members
5372 photos
478 songs
36 videos
193 discussions
22 events
54 blog posts

--------------------

To control which emails you receive on the corner, or to opt-out, go to:
http://flintsouthwestenreunion.ning.com/?xgo=wRYcFqFJ6NOViANnUyrCNuPj4p/Qza-12sB\
w-SpgeDkTyeqlIjlwp-Dyuh0JrmLJ6FBN9AveGk0

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Note to Oklahomans:
 
 
#1 DoesOk. law allow this to happen here?
#2 Does this help bring credibility to the post at a Topix forum which stated
that the issue these benefits as well as others, like Indian Children's benifits
and where they're going was discussed in the legislative hearings last year but
not made public?
#3 Does this and the fact that "ghost children", (used to collect benefits) were
exposed by a a financial audit of the Office of Juvenile Affairs enough reason
for a financial audit of DHS?
#4 Does this raise questions regarding the dismissal of claims related to foster
care funding and payments in the current class action lawsuit against DHS? If
these issues hadn't been dismissed any information would have become public
record in court documents.
#5 Why is it we're told over and over that DHS needs more funding but
accountability for those funds isn't discussed?
 



http://www.firststar.org/news/johngdecision.asp

MAJOR COURT VICTORY FOR FOSTER CHILDREN
    
      

North Carolina Court Rules State Must Act in Best Interest of
  Child in Handling Foster
  Children's Social Security Benefits

(November 5, 2007) The North Carolina Court of Appeals today ruled that the
state does not have the legal authority to divert the Social Security benefits
of foster children to reimburse itself for the cost of their foster care when it
is not in the best interest of the children.

“This case has national implications and is a major victory for foster
children across the country,” said Amy Harfeld, Executive Director of First
Star, a national organization dedicated to fighting for the rights of America's
abused and neglected children, and who filed an amicus curae brief in
collaboration with Sullivan & Worcester LLP on the case. “It is unconscionable
for the state to dip into the pockets of these most vulnerable children in order
to balance their budgets. This ruling is a step in the direction of banning the
practice of intercepting foster children’s benefits to reimburse states for
the costs
  of foster care- costs that they are mandated to cover in any event.”

The issue is the focus of growing legislative and legal battles in the Congress
and in the courts. States across the country have been maximizing their own
revenues by diverting the social security benefits of foster children – in
some cases even after these children have aged-out of the system and are left
with little or no financial or social support. The states claim they have a
right to the money to help offset the cost of foster care. Child advocates claim
this money should be used to meet the needs of the children. According to the
Child Welfare League of America, 25% of foster youth reported experiencing
homlessness within four years of exiting foster care.

Some estimates have placed the amount of money diverted from these children at
more than $100 million. States are aggressively targeting this money hiring
outside companies to help them identify foster
  children who are, or who should be, receiving Social Security benefits. The
consultants track down these eligible children, help them secure Social Security
benefits and then help the states divert the benefits – keeping a piece for
themselves.

The North Carolina case revolved around a teen-aged boy – identified only as
John G. – who was abandoned by his crack-addicted mother at the age of 3 and
orphaned as a result of his adoptive father’s death when he was 4. He lived in
a succession of foster homes where he was routinely beaten and forced to sell
drugs.

He was receiving Social Security survivor benefits, which were being used to pay
the mortgage on his adoptive father’s home, which he was bequeathed. However,
Guilford County’s Department of Social Services (DSS) intercepted those
benefits, selecting itself as John G’s representative payee. DSS directed John
G’s benefit payments into its own accounts instead of using them
  to make monthly mortgage payments. When the state began to divert the benefits,
the boy went into default on the mortgage. In spite of that, North Carolina
officials refused to release the boy’s money.

In December 2005, the district court ordered DSS to use John’s benefits to
make the monthly mortgage payments to save his house. DSS, however, continued to
resist using John’s money to help him keep his house, and appealed arguing
that a state court judge did not have jurisdiction.

The Court of Appeals rejected the state’s arguments and said that “nothing
in the concept of our federal system prevents state courts from enforcing rights
created by federal law.”  The Court’s decision also stated that DSS’s
“interpretation of [the federal statute] takes the statute out of context and
is an improper attempt to fashion a shield into a sword to be used against the
intended beneficiary of the law….”

John G. was
  represented by Legal Aid of North Carolina (LANC) attorney Lewis Pitts and the
Guilford County Guardian ad Litem program. First Star filed a “friend of the
court” brief on John G’s behalf.

“This case underscores the importance of having legal representation for
foster children while they are in the system to protect their interests, rights
and property,” Harfeld said. “Children who are represented by well-trained,
client directed attorneys in dependency hearings receive the best care and have
a much stronger chance for success in the short and long term."

In April, First Star released a national report showing that nearly half of U.S.
states fail to provide adequate traditional legal representation for abused and
neglected foster children, leaving them without a voice during judicial
proceedings that profoundly impact their futures.

The first-of-its-kind study found "glaring anomalies" in how states protect the
legal
  rights of foster children, leading to substandard levels of service and
unacceptable outcomes in most states. Fifteen states received failing grades and
six more received D's in the "National Report Card on Legal Representation of
Children." Only five states received A's. To view a copy of the report, visit
www.firststar.org . 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In child_neglect_abuse@yahoogroups.com, "cobaltbleu02" <cobaltbleu02@...>
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I need everyones help to petition and lobby in a change from
> the "Gestapo" better know as Child Protective Services (CPS). Their
> abuse of power has got to stop... They CPS has abused the faith of
> people all over America. CPS has sabotaged so many homes, families
> and children with lies, manipulation, malice and corruption.
>
> If you want a change in CPS, then we have to fight for it... We are
> being denied our constitutional rights. The children are suffering
> the most in the hands of CPS.
>
> PLEASE! Forward your e-mail address so I can e-mail my petition to
> you
> and we can all band together for the love, concern and true safety
> and protection of our children.
>
> Many Americans do not know the tactics that are being used by CPS...
> We need to make the nation aware and change what is going on.
>
> My website will soon be up "PARENT'S AGAINST CHILD PROTECTIVE
> SERVICES AUTHORITY ABUSE" in the mean time you can e-mail me at
> pacpsaa@...
>
> Dee
>.Hi my email is mariancobb38@... babies were stolen by cps under
false acusations of neglect.... I MISS THEM SO MUCH... M aybe you can help me to

my daughters children were tsken from on dec 16 the baby fell hit his head and
needed surgery he is 10 months old i have the 2yr old were are at thre trial
staage with cps and dont know what to expect i have hired a attorney for my
daughter.. but it just keeps getting worst. there have never been any signs of
abuse even ths children doctors have stated that they cps hacve no doctor
willing to testify under oath that there was abuse so i dont know how they can
keep pursuing this with evidence. the baby is fine now. please help

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

New   York, January  7th, 2008



Dear Social Justice Advocate:



I am proud to announce that I have been invited to be the keynote
Speaker at the Annual Convention of the Queens County Libertarian Party.
The theme that I will be talking about is:



Is our present Child Welfare System violating multiple Amendments of the
US Constitution in addition to many Articles of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights?



Come and Find Out!



From the Queens Libertarian Party website:

The Annual Convention of the Libertarian Party of Queens County will be
held on Saturday, January 10, 2009 at 10:30 a.m. SHARP at Bohemian Hall.

The Annual Convention meeting will be preceded by a brief Executive
Committee meeting and will be followed by a General Membership Meeting
at 11:00 a.m. featuring a Guest Speaker.



http://libertarian.meetup.com/326/ <http://libertarian.meetup.com/326/>



Also see http://ronpaul.meetup.com/5/ <http://ronpaul.meetup.com/5/>



I did have the opportunity to be the Speaker at the monthly meeting of
the Manhattan Libertarian Party on Monday, August 13, 2007, and I spoke
about a similar topic. See http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/194269/
<http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/194269/>



Please, join me on January, 10th, 2009 at 11:00am at the Bohemian Hall
in Astoria. I would like you to participate in the conversation.



Bohemian Hall
29-19 24th Avenue, Astoria, NY 11102

Train N or W to Astoria Blvd. in Queens



In Freedom





Rolando Bini �" Executive Director

Parents in Action

For Leadership and Human Rights

PROTECTING, PRESERVING AND STRENGTHENING FAMILIES

http://ww.parentsinaction.net <http://ww.parentsinaction.net/> ,
rolando@...

347-624-4830



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

This was sent to me by another advocate who would like to see this story
forwarded everywhere.��Please forward to as many as possible.�
�
Isnt it time to FORCE our government to stop harvesting our beloved children?
�
Please register and� comment on this story!�
�http://www.king5.com/topstories/stories/NW_010609INV_grandparents_foster_care_T\
P.44743f48.html
�
�
�Investigators: Trial could lead to loss of grandchild forever | Top Stories
| KING5.com | News for Seattle, Washington_
�
�
�
Time to flood this guys email box. He's the director at DSHS. Thomas Shapley,
Director shapltr@...; 360-902-8007




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I wonder if the ACLU is going to take this case and fight the state for
violating the father's civil rights?







Mich. dad told to pay for child's birth or wed mom - Yahoo! News

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090119/ap_on_re_us/marry_or_pay

============================================================
Yahoo! News
http://news.yahoo.com/


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello,

I need everyones help to petition and lobby in a change from
the "Gestapo" better know as Child Protective Services (CPS). Their
abuse of power has got to stop... They CPS has abused the faith of
people all over America. CPS has sabotaged so many homes, families
and children with lies, manipulation, malice and corruption.

If you want a change in CPS, then we have to fight for it... We are
being denied our constitutional rights. The children are suffering
the most in the hands of CPS.

PLEASE! Forward your e-mail address so I can e-mail my petition to
you
and we can all band together for the love, concern and true safety
and protection of our children.

Many Americans do not know the tactics that are being used by CPS...
We need to make the nation aware and change what is going on.

My website will soon be up "PARENT'S AGAINST CHILD PROTECTIVE
SERVICES AUTHORITY ABUSE" in the mean time you can e-mail me at
pacpsaa@....

Dee

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise therof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the
press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances.

The Bill of Rights: First Amendment

Legally Kidnapped

The Central Registry of Child Welfare Fraud

Fraud Hotline







----- Forwarded Message ----
From: a_poor_misguided_soul <Patism66@...>
To: FixCPS@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 6:08:36 PM
Subject: [FixCPS] Poke The Drunk Driving Commissioner In The Eye


I made this game using Susan Hamilton the Connecticut DCF Commissioner
who was recently arrested for drunk driving.

My high score so far is 24, anybody going to beat it?

http://legallykidna pped.blogspot. com/2009/ 01/poke-drunk- driving-commissi
oner-in-eye. html






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

January 23, 2009

Child Abuse Hot Line Call Placed Against DCF Commissioner

Staff Writers
Connecticut DCF Watch

Hartford, CT - A call was placed today with the Department of Children and
Family hot line against present DCF Commissioner, Susan Hamilton for her resent
DWI arrest in North Haven, CT.

The caller was incensed that Susan Hamilton proclaims that she is interested in
protecting children yet by her behavior of being drunk behind the wheel she put
at risk the children of Connecticut and possibly her own children in the past.

The caller also stated that he was concerned that Hamilton has a history of
DWI/drug abuse and had her own children in the car in the past.  We do not know
if Hamilton was also under the influence of medications or illegal drugs but
alcohol is a drug.  This was the first time she got caught drinking and driving.

Governor M. Jodi Rell needs to remove Hamilton from her present position
immediately without pay and make it permanent there after because Hamilton put
at risk the children of Connecticut as well as the residents of the state.

The Governor, DCF and Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal can not and should
not sweep this under the rug and allow DCF put Hamilton under the process all
parents have gone through.  Hamilton needs to be drug tested and her home be
turned upside down by unlicensed social workers.


Connecticut DCF Watch
National Civil Rights Advocates For Families
P.O. Box 9775
Forestville, CT 06011-9775
860-833-4127
Admin@...
www.connecticutDCFwatch.com

P.S. For a FREE copy of our Parental Rights handbook with over 300 rulings, send
us an email with "Request for free handbook" in subject line.  There is also a
FREE manual on "reasonable efforts" at our web site.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

�� Did anyone hear about a motion being filed or a hearing being held regarding
these issues?Does it appear strange that two major issues which relate to
possible fraud that most if not all involved in a case would be aware of are
suddenly dismissed?�� The subject of federal funding continues to be ignored as
if it doesn't exists, but less known are the mentioned "third party beneficiary
rights". At question here are SSI payments, Indian benefits, and other payments
due children in certain situations. There should be clear records of any of
these payments, and how much the children really received.
�� Here again just like the legislatures failure to insist on a financial audit
of DHS we once again see how the subject of DHS and $$$$$$$ appears to be swept
under the rug. The first question I have is did the feds involved on their side
of the funding look into this, if so where are the reports? Or did those here
involved in the lawsuit provide evidence, (or lack of) that led to the dismissal
of these two causes?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\
---------------------------

Judge Dismisses Part of
DHS Suit
posted 01/21/09 11:07 am



NewsChannel 8 - Judge
Dismisses Part of DHS Suit



Tulsa, OK - A federal
judge has dismissed portions of a civil rights lawsuit brought by a
national child advocacy group accusing Oklahoma of victimizing its
foster children.



In a ruling entered
Monday, U.S. District Judge Gregory K. Frizzell tossed two of five
causes of action brought by Children's Rights, the New York-based
group that filed the lawsuit last year against the Oklahoma
Department of Human Services on behalf of nine foster children.



The two actions
dismissed dealt with alleged violations of the federal Adoption
Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 and third-party beneficiary
rights stemming from that federal law.



Earlier this month,
however, Frizzell refused to dismiss the bulk of the suit dealing
with the civil rights of the children, and gave the plaintiffs until
early March to spell out exactly what type of relief they were
seeking from the court.







In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work

in this message is
distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit

research and educational
purposes only. GRG [Ref.http://www.law. cornell.edu/ uscode/17/
107.shtml]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Susan Hamilton's reckless behavior showed a callus disregard of the safety
of children and families.  Ms. Hamilton should be fired for such behavior
and the State of Connecticut needs to further investigate to see if she has
transported her own children under the influence of alcohol.  DCF is
compelled to investigate one of their own.  Connecticut DCF Watch

--------------------
Conn. DCF head charged with drunken driving
--------------------

Associated Press

January 23 2009

NORTH HAVEN, Conn. -- The commissioner of the Department of Children and
Families has been arrested on a charge of driving under the influence of
alcohol, state police said Friday.

The complete article can be viewed at:
http://www.courant.com/news/local/statewire/hc-ap-ct-commissioner-duicjan23,0,67\
41465.story

You can make comment at the web site.

Visit Courant.com at http://www.courant.com

Divorce is expensive financially and emotionally. Our national economy
has had some affect on the number of divorces filing. Possibly it
affects the rate of voluntary dismissal of cases filed. Most dramatic
is that lost equity in investment to include the family home combined
with loss of jobs leaves the separating couple with little assets a lot
of debt and great difficulty in caring for children. My experience in
this practice area has made me a better referral source for the public
and private resources helping those in need. The old middle class may
find that this is the first time they have needed assistance.

A recent Flint Journal Article talks about this topic.
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2009/01/stay_or_go_economy_mak
ing_it_h.html

http://oig.hhs.gov/fraud/hotline/
Lets flood this dept with emails, letters, phone calls. Not just one or the
other, do them all!!

If we all follow the same structure, this is sure to get attention!!!

In the first week of January:
1) Send snail mail certified so they know we mean buisness. (Also so they cannot
deny the recieved the letter)
2)�Follow up with an email with the same exact letter you sent via USPS

In the second week in January:
1) Call them and check on the status of your letter (lets hope they are too busy
with the influx of complaints to get to it (act suprised when/if this is so))
2) Use key phrases like: "my child(ren) really need your help" �"Lack of due
process" "The (judge,caseworker,GAL, FOC, mediator) needs to be held
accountable"........ Any other suggestions are welcome to be spread amongst
groups........

In the third week of January:
1) Call them again, dont sound desperate, just treat this like your checking up
on the status of a job application. Talk proffesionally, and dont get upset with
the person answering the phone. If we wind up arguing with them we lose any
chance of them taking us seriously. Remember IF this goes well they will have
alot more work in front of them then they are used to.

In the fourth week of january:
1) Check on your original complaint, again be polite and proffesional. IF they
get angry or upset with you keep your calm and ask to speak with a supervisor.
2) Resend your original email and certified letter via snail mail. (If they dont
acknowledge they recieved your complaint, or they have not started on it yet)

If they have not gotten to your complaint, DON'T GIVE UP!!!!!! Repeat Repeat
Repeat untill they do.



http://oig.hhs.gov/fraud/hotline/


Website leaders, please post this on your sites/blogs GET THE WORD OUT!!!!

Everyone, please send this to every group/individual you are involved with!!!!
The more people involved in this activity the better the outcome will be!!!!




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Main_Page

Everyone needs to start reviewing each one's particular state.  Star posting. 
Start a conversation.  Start a wiki page.  There is one already called "Child
Welfare Fraud".  This site is linked to the following site:

http://usavotes.org/

Click your state and join.  Then create your own page and blog.  Open these
discussions to the world and not to a moderated forum of exclusive membership. 
You will be able to present your own legislation and comment on current bills. 
You will be directly linked with your elected, and all elected officials.  After
you have created your blog, put in the hyperlink/html for Legally Kidnapped so
the public is routed to a main hub of information.  All of your blogs will be
connected through this site.  Cut and paste the html format to your newly
created webpages and blogs:

<a href="http://www.LegallyKidnapped.blogspot.com">Legally Kidnapped</a>

<a href="http://sites.google.com/site/cpsfilessite/">The Central Registry of
Child Welfare Fraud</a>


This is how to reform child welfare:  Let the world know.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]