Isabella Brooke Knightly and Austin Gamez-Knightly
In Memory of my Loving Husband, William F. Knightly Jr. Murdered by ILLEGAL Palliative Care at a Nashua, NH Hospital
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Small Justice: U.S. Courts Harm Children, $ Buys 'Justice'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0LILd0wtbU&feature=player_embedded
CIVIL LIBERTIES WITHOUT EXCEPTION: NCCPR’s Due Process Agenda for Children and Families
CIVIL LIBERTIES WITHOUT EXCEPTION:
NCCPR’s Due Process Agenda for Children and Families
By Richard Wexler, NCCPR Executive Director
August, 2008
INTRODUCTION
Suppose, when he was attorney general, John Ashcroft had proposed anti-terrorism
legislation with the following provisions:
Special anti-terrorism police could search any home without a warrant – and
stripsearch any occupant -- based solely on an anonymous telephone tip. Any occupant of
the home could be detained for 24 hours to two weeks without so much as a hearing – and
they’ll probably be detained far longer because, in the special anti-terrorism court set up by
this legislation, all the judges are afraid to look soft on “terrorists.”
At that first hearing the detainees may – or may not – get a lawyer just before the
hearing begins, and they almost never get effective counsel.
At almost every stage, the standard of proof is not “beyond a reasonable doubt”
or even “clear and convincing” but merely “preponderance of the evidence,” the lowest
standard in American jurisprudence, the same one used to determine which insurance company
pays for a fender-bender.
And in most states, all the hearings and all the records are secret.
Had Ashcroft proposed such legislation, civil libertarians would have been in an
uproar. Yet this is, in fact, the law governing child welfare. And sadly, many who in other
circumstances are quick to defend civil liberties either stand silent or support it.
The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform believes the only way truly to
protect children is to demand civil liberties without exception. There can be no true child
protection when a government agency is given virtually unchecked power, almost no accountability,
and operates in secret.
That is why enacting meaningful due process protections for families is at least as
important as improving the “services” they receive from child welfare agencies.
Since 2000, NCCPR has issued reports on 13 state or local child welfare systems.
Below are some of the due process recommendations from these various reports.
RECOMMENDATION 1:
TRANSPARENCY
All court hearings in child
maltreatment cases and almost all
documents should be subject to a
“rebuttable presumption” of openness.
Hearings and records would be
closed only if the lawyer for the parents
or the guardian ad litem for the child
could persuade the judge, by clear and
convincing evidence, that opening a given
record or portion of a hearing would
cause severe emotional damage to a child.
The judge then would keep closed
only the minimum amount of material
needed to avoid the damage.
The people who work for child protective
services agencies are not evil. But
even the best of us would have trouble coping
with nearly unlimited power and no
accountability. One caseworker allegedly
told some parents: “I have the power of
God.” It’s alarming if he said it. But what’s
DUE PROCESS AGENDA/2
even more alarming is: It’s true. Caseworkers
for CPS agencies do have the power of
God.
“[Opening family courts]
has been 100 percent positive
with no negatives … Our
worst critics will say it was the
best thing we ever did. Their
fears were unfounded … I
wish other states would do it.”
--Jonathan Lippman,
Chief Administrative Judge,
State of New York
To give a young, inexperienced
worker the power of God, send her out on
what she is convinced is a Godly mission to
rescue innocent children from the scum of
the earth -- knowing that there will be no
penalty for removal and hell to pay if she
leaves the child home and something goes
wrong -- and then expect her to exercise
self-restraint is more than can be expected of
most human beings. Rarely is the power of
God accompanied by the wisdom of Solomon.
The power must be checked by accountability.
Accountability is not possible
in secret. Nor is accountability possible
simply by hiring people with more expertise
and assuming they will do the right thing.
It’s not supposed to work that way in
a democracy. That is why it is so urgent that
all court hearings and almost all records in
child welfare cases be presumed open.
An exception would be made to the
presumption of openness for portions of
documents that name people who reported
child abuse in confidence. Even then, however,
if a parent claims to be a victim of
harassment, that parent should be allowed to
ask a judge to review the record and, if the
judge agrees there has been harassment,
open this record as well, and give the accused
the right to sue. (See Recommendation
9).
Only the lawyer for a parent and the
guardian ad litem for a child should be allowed
to request secrecy. CPS should not
even be allowed to ask for it. CPS has no
interest in secrecy other than as a way to
cover up its failings. If secrecy truly is
needed to protect a child, that’s what the
guardian ad litem is there to ask for.
The argument against opening hearings
and records is that it would embarrass
children.
That argument fails on several
counts:
• The alleged potential for trauma
does not explain why information is kept
secret even after a child has died.
• In the overwhelming majority of
cases there are no graphic details to report.
Most cases involve “neglect.” A child will
not be testifying about being beaten or raped
because that’s not the accusation.
• The most traumatic cases are likely
to involve not only child protection proceedings
but criminal cases as well. These hearings
already are public. Yet we have never
seen nor heard a single account of a child
saying that she or he was traumatized by the
fact that such a trial was public. Nor do we
know of any adult coming forward years
after the fact to complain of such trauma.
• At least 14 states have opened
child protection proceedings to the press and
the public. Two more let in reporters only.
In every one of these states, the same fears
were expressed. But a comprehensive nationwide
examination by the Pittsburgh
Post-Gazette found that none of the problems
materialized. Indeed, over and over,
one-time critics became converts.1
Read More:
http://www.nccpr.org/reports/dueprocess.pdf
NCCPR’s Due Process Agenda for Children and Families
By Richard Wexler, NCCPR Executive Director
August, 2008
INTRODUCTION
Suppose, when he was attorney general, John Ashcroft had proposed anti-terrorism
legislation with the following provisions:
Special anti-terrorism police could search any home without a warrant – and
stripsearch any occupant -- based solely on an anonymous telephone tip. Any occupant of
the home could be detained for 24 hours to two weeks without so much as a hearing – and
they’ll probably be detained far longer because, in the special anti-terrorism court set up by
this legislation, all the judges are afraid to look soft on “terrorists.”
At that first hearing the detainees may – or may not – get a lawyer just before the
hearing begins, and they almost never get effective counsel.
At almost every stage, the standard of proof is not “beyond a reasonable doubt”
or even “clear and convincing” but merely “preponderance of the evidence,” the lowest
standard in American jurisprudence, the same one used to determine which insurance company
pays for a fender-bender.
And in most states, all the hearings and all the records are secret.
Had Ashcroft proposed such legislation, civil libertarians would have been in an
uproar. Yet this is, in fact, the law governing child welfare. And sadly, many who in other
circumstances are quick to defend civil liberties either stand silent or support it.
The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform believes the only way truly to
protect children is to demand civil liberties without exception. There can be no true child
protection when a government agency is given virtually unchecked power, almost no accountability,
and operates in secret.
That is why enacting meaningful due process protections for families is at least as
important as improving the “services” they receive from child welfare agencies.
Since 2000, NCCPR has issued reports on 13 state or local child welfare systems.
Below are some of the due process recommendations from these various reports.
RECOMMENDATION 1:
TRANSPARENCY
All court hearings in child
maltreatment cases and almost all
documents should be subject to a
“rebuttable presumption” of openness.
Hearings and records would be
closed only if the lawyer for the parents
or the guardian ad litem for the child
could persuade the judge, by clear and
convincing evidence, that opening a given
record or portion of a hearing would
cause severe emotional damage to a child.
The judge then would keep closed
only the minimum amount of material
needed to avoid the damage.
The people who work for child protective
services agencies are not evil. But
even the best of us would have trouble coping
with nearly unlimited power and no
accountability. One caseworker allegedly
told some parents: “I have the power of
God.” It’s alarming if he said it. But what’s
DUE PROCESS AGENDA/2
even more alarming is: It’s true. Caseworkers
for CPS agencies do have the power of
God.
“[Opening family courts]
has been 100 percent positive
with no negatives … Our
worst critics will say it was the
best thing we ever did. Their
fears were unfounded … I
wish other states would do it.”
--Jonathan Lippman,
Chief Administrative Judge,
State of New York
To give a young, inexperienced
worker the power of God, send her out on
what she is convinced is a Godly mission to
rescue innocent children from the scum of
the earth -- knowing that there will be no
penalty for removal and hell to pay if she
leaves the child home and something goes
wrong -- and then expect her to exercise
self-restraint is more than can be expected of
most human beings. Rarely is the power of
God accompanied by the wisdom of Solomon.
The power must be checked by accountability.
Accountability is not possible
in secret. Nor is accountability possible
simply by hiring people with more expertise
and assuming they will do the right thing.
It’s not supposed to work that way in
a democracy. That is why it is so urgent that
all court hearings and almost all records in
child welfare cases be presumed open.
An exception would be made to the
presumption of openness for portions of
documents that name people who reported
child abuse in confidence. Even then, however,
if a parent claims to be a victim of
harassment, that parent should be allowed to
ask a judge to review the record and, if the
judge agrees there has been harassment,
open this record as well, and give the accused
the right to sue. (See Recommendation
9).
Only the lawyer for a parent and the
guardian ad litem for a child should be allowed
to request secrecy. CPS should not
even be allowed to ask for it. CPS has no
interest in secrecy other than as a way to
cover up its failings. If secrecy truly is
needed to protect a child, that’s what the
guardian ad litem is there to ask for.
The argument against opening hearings
and records is that it would embarrass
children.
That argument fails on several
counts:
• The alleged potential for trauma
does not explain why information is kept
secret even after a child has died.
• In the overwhelming majority of
cases there are no graphic details to report.
Most cases involve “neglect.” A child will
not be testifying about being beaten or raped
because that’s not the accusation.
• The most traumatic cases are likely
to involve not only child protection proceedings
but criminal cases as well. These hearings
already are public. Yet we have never
seen nor heard a single account of a child
saying that she or he was traumatized by the
fact that such a trial was public. Nor do we
know of any adult coming forward years
after the fact to complain of such trauma.
• At least 14 states have opened
child protection proceedings to the press and
the public. Two more let in reporters only.
In every one of these states, the same fears
were expressed. But a comprehensive nationwide
examination by the Pittsburgh
Post-Gazette found that none of the problems
materialized. Indeed, over and over,
one-time critics became converts.1
Read More:
http://www.nccpr.org/reports/dueprocess.pdf
RICO In A Nutshell
Contents
Introduction: The Mafia as a Helpful Context
What constitutes a RICO violation?
Section 1962(c) Claims
Defendant Persons
Enterprise
Enterprise / Racketeering Activity Distinction
Person / Enterprise Distinction
An Enterprise Engaged in or Affecting Interstate Commerce
Defendants' Operation or Management of the Enterprise
The Pattern
Relatedness
Continuity
Multiple Schemes and the Pattern
Racketeering Activity
Mail and Wire Fraud
Bank Fraud
Extortion
The Obtaining of Property from Another And Threats of Physical Violence
The Issue of Consent
Extortion under Color Of Official Right
Extortion vs. Legitimate Exercise of Government Power
Other Predicate Acts Related to Extortion
Civil Remedies under Section 1964
Injured "by reason of" a Violation of Section 1962
Intervening Factors
Non-predicate Acts
Independent Contributing Factors
Directly Injured Third-party Victims
Mail Fraud, Wire Fraud, and Bank Fraud - Reasonable Reliance
Injury to Business or Property
Equitable Relief
SECTION 1962(a) & (b) CLAIMS
Association-in-Fact Enterprises Under Sections 1962(a) & (b)
Injury "by reason of" a Section 1962(a) Violation
Injury "by reason of" a Section 1962(b) Violation
CONSPIRACIES TO VIOLATE RICO - SECTION 1962(d)
RICO'S STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
Limitations Period
Accrual of a Civil RICO Claim
Early Conflicting Accrual Rules
The Supreme Court's Effort to Resolve the Conflict
Tolling Doctrines
New and Independent Injuries
CONCLUSION
Read More to click into link's at:
http://www.ricoact.com/ricoact/nutshell.asp#constitutes
Introduction: The Mafia as a Helpful Context
What constitutes a RICO violation?
Section 1962(c) Claims
Defendant Persons
Enterprise
Enterprise / Racketeering Activity Distinction
Person / Enterprise Distinction
An Enterprise Engaged in or Affecting Interstate Commerce
Defendants' Operation or Management of the Enterprise
The Pattern
Relatedness
Continuity
Multiple Schemes and the Pattern
Racketeering Activity
Mail and Wire Fraud
Bank Fraud
Extortion
The Obtaining of Property from Another And Threats of Physical Violence
The Issue of Consent
Extortion under Color Of Official Right
Extortion vs. Legitimate Exercise of Government Power
Other Predicate Acts Related to Extortion
Civil Remedies under Section 1964
Injured "by reason of" a Violation of Section 1962
Intervening Factors
Non-predicate Acts
Independent Contributing Factors
Directly Injured Third-party Victims
Mail Fraud, Wire Fraud, and Bank Fraud - Reasonable Reliance
Injury to Business or Property
Equitable Relief
SECTION 1962(a) & (b) CLAIMS
Association-in-Fact Enterprises Under Sections 1962(a) & (b)
Injury "by reason of" a Section 1962(a) Violation
Injury "by reason of" a Section 1962(b) Violation
CONSPIRACIES TO VIOLATE RICO - SECTION 1962(d)
RICO'S STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
Limitations Period
Accrual of a Civil RICO Claim
Early Conflicting Accrual Rules
The Supreme Court's Effort to Resolve the Conflict
Tolling Doctrines
New and Independent Injuries
CONCLUSION
Read More to click into link's at:
http://www.ricoact.com/ricoact/nutshell.asp#constitutes
What is ASFA/CAPTA part 4 of 4
What is ASFA/CAPTA part 4 of 4
Marilyn Harrison
In part 3 we were discussing a massive beauricratical organization originally created by Mondale, then fortifided by ASFA and CAPTA, what amounts to a warehousing system of America’s children.
Question; has CPS (Child Protective Services) grown to proportions that scares average citizen’s into submission. Have workers taken it upon themselves to bypass the “Constitution” and the laws of the United States in general, is this protection?
Read our articles CPS comparison to slavery & Foster Care System can it be salvaged
Do workers no longer believe the reason CPS was created in the first place, “The Best Interests of the Child”, America’s children are being used as pawns in a huge chess game, controlled by the rule makers to be changed as needed?
Read More: http://www.examiner.com/foster-families-in-national/foster-parents-did-you-know-what-is-asfa-capta-part-4-of-4
Marilyn Harrison
In part 3 we were discussing a massive beauricratical organization originally created by Mondale, then fortifided by ASFA and CAPTA, what amounts to a warehousing system of America’s children.
Question; has CPS (Child Protective Services) grown to proportions that scares average citizen’s into submission. Have workers taken it upon themselves to bypass the “Constitution” and the laws of the United States in general, is this protection?
Read our articles CPS comparison to slavery & Foster Care System can it be salvaged
Do workers no longer believe the reason CPS was created in the first place, “The Best Interests of the Child”, America’s children are being used as pawns in a huge chess game, controlled by the rule makers to be changed as needed?
Read More: http://www.examiner.com/foster-families-in-national/foster-parents-did-you-know-what-is-asfa-capta-part-4-of-4
What is ASFA/CAPTA, part 3 of 4
What is ASFA/CAPTA, part 3 of 4
Marilyn Harrison
In part 2 we had just made a statement; "they create bonuses for adopting children out of the Foster Care System thereby, attracting the wrong element of our society. No, money is not a valid reason to want to be a foster parent, in essence this is an ad for a huge garage sale for which America's children the items for sale".
However, they would never throw this program out. Billions and billions of dollars are made from this program by the organization in charge of the garage sales, CPS. The system foster care payments come from your social security fund for the fiasco emerging from the cluttered shed. You are supporting government funding for kids from Title IV-E section of the Social Security Act, social security funds. Health & human services laws SEC. 423-426. [42 U.S.C. 623]
Your examiners note: biological parents you really need to read law 430 in which it states on the website listed above in which it states;
“To prevent child maltreatment among families at risk through the provision of supportive family services”.
“To assure children's safety within the home and preserve intact families in which children have been maltreated, when the family's problems can be addressed effectively”.
Read More:http://www.examiner.com/foster-families-in-national/foster-parents-did-you-know-what-is-asfa-capta-part-3-of-4
Marilyn Harrison
In part 2 we had just made a statement; "they create bonuses for adopting children out of the Foster Care System thereby, attracting the wrong element of our society. No, money is not a valid reason to want to be a foster parent, in essence this is an ad for a huge garage sale for which America's children the items for sale".
However, they would never throw this program out. Billions and billions of dollars are made from this program by the organization in charge of the garage sales, CPS. The system foster care payments come from your social security fund for the fiasco emerging from the cluttered shed. You are supporting government funding for kids from Title IV-E section of the Social Security Act, social security funds. Health & human services laws SEC. 423-426. [42 U.S.C. 623]
Your examiners note: biological parents you really need to read law 430 in which it states on the website listed above in which it states;
“To prevent child maltreatment among families at risk through the provision of supportive family services”.
“To assure children's safety within the home and preserve intact families in which children have been maltreated, when the family's problems can be addressed effectively”.
Read More:http://www.examiner.com/foster-families-in-national/foster-parents-did-you-know-what-is-asfa-capta-part-3-of-4
What is ASFA/CAPTA part 2 of 4?
What is ASFA/CAPTA part 2 of 4
By Marilyn Harrison
In part 1 we were quoting G. Miller, who was the former Chairman of the federal Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families an official at the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare then reluctently admitted to Miller that the government really, and at that time, had no idea where many of the nation’s 500,000 foster children were living.
Is that not typical? He then went on to admit that they were not even sure what services these children were receiving, if any, or if any efforts were being made to reunite them with their families.
Although this figure too varries from one government entity to another, does anyone have an accurate figure as to how many children are actually in the Foster Care System nationwide? The figure that we are offering you was from a publication many years ago, now that figure has risen to an astounding 870.,000 although the CPS counts 343,000 children in the foster care system. Have we lost close to a half million children then?
Read More:http://www.examiner.com/foster-families-in-national/foster-parents-did-you-know-what-is-asfa-capta-part-2-of-4
By Marilyn Harrison
In part 1 we were quoting G. Miller, who was the former Chairman of the federal Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families an official at the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare then reluctently admitted to Miller that the government really, and at that time, had no idea where many of the nation’s 500,000 foster children were living.
Is that not typical? He then went on to admit that they were not even sure what services these children were receiving, if any, or if any efforts were being made to reunite them with their families.
Although this figure too varries from one government entity to another, does anyone have an accurate figure as to how many children are actually in the Foster Care System nationwide? The figure that we are offering you was from a publication many years ago, now that figure has risen to an astounding 870.,000 although the CPS counts 343,000 children in the foster care system. Have we lost close to a half million children then?
Read More:http://www.examiner.com/foster-families-in-national/foster-parents-did-you-know-what-is-asfa-capta-part-2-of-4
Mother sues state for racketeering for Kidnapping Her Children
Mother sues state for racketeering
Starletta Banks displays pictures of her children. She hasn’t seen them since 2000.
She says officials kidnapped her children
By Diane Bukowski
The Michigan Citizen
DETROIT — Starletta Banks has not seen her three children, Darius, now 11, Danielle, now 7, and Darren, now 5, since the year 2000, but she says she is determined to have them come home again to her loving arms.
“It’s been devastating,” said Banks. “It’s been hard holding jobs and eating and sleeping. You can’t even imagine the Christmases and birthdays I’ve spent. When we get them back, whenever that is, it will be Christmas because I’ve gone on buying presents for them all this time.”
Read More:
http://michigancitizen.com/mother-sues-state-for-racketeering-p1904-75.htm
Starletta Banks displays pictures of her children. She hasn’t seen them since 2000.
She says officials kidnapped her children
By Diane Bukowski
The Michigan Citizen
DETROIT — Starletta Banks has not seen her three children, Darius, now 11, Danielle, now 7, and Darren, now 5, since the year 2000, but she says she is determined to have them come home again to her loving arms.
“It’s been devastating,” said Banks. “It’s been hard holding jobs and eating and sleeping. You can’t even imagine the Christmases and birthdays I’ve spent. When we get them back, whenever that is, it will be Christmas because I’ve gone on buying presents for them all this time.”
Read More:
http://michigancitizen.com/mother-sues-state-for-racketeering-p1904-75.htm
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)