'I have known about Jersey paedophiles for 15 years,' says award-winning journalist | Mail Online: "
'I have known about Jersey paedophiles for 15 years,' says award-winning journalist
By EILEEN FAIRWEATHER"
The award-winning journalist who exposed terrible abuse in Islington children's homes now reveals horrifying links to sinister discoveries at Jersey's Haut de la Garenne.
I met the frightened policeman at an isolated country restaurant, many miles from his home and station. Detective Constable Peter Cook had finally despaired, and decided to blow the whistle to a reporter.
He was risking his career, so made me scribble my notes into a tiny pad beneath the tablecloth.
He had uncovered a vicious child sex ring, with victims in both Britain and the Channel Islands, and he wanted me to get his information to police abuse specialists in London.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-523706/I-known-Jersey-paedophiles-15-years-says-award-winning-journalist.html#ixzz17I4JF2oD
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, December 5, 2010
Sherrie Questioning All: Is The Govt. trying to Find out, Who has What now? I ask, because - Child Services Interviewed My Child - Wanted to Know if We Had Solar Panels, Exactly Where We Go Camping and Hiking , If have Alternative Energy, If Food Stored, Then Came to my House! Updated Article on 12/3/10 with Video Clips From Interview
Sherrie Questioning All: Is The Govt. trying to Find out, Who has What now? I ask, because - Child Services Interviewed My Child - Wanted to Know if We Had Solar Panels, Exactly Where We Go Camping and Hiking , If have Alternative Energy, If Food Stored, Then Came to my House! Updated Article on 12/3/10 with Video Clips From Interview
I have been very hesitant about releasing what happened to me regarding Child Protective Services. But after discussing this with Dave Hodges, from the Commonsense Radio Show on Republic Broadcasting, he said I need to get this information out to the public.
This happened about one month ago now.
Here is how it all began.
I have been very hesitant about releasing what happened to me regarding Child Protective Services. But after discussing this with Dave Hodges, from the Commonsense Radio Show on Republic Broadcasting, he said I need to get this information out to the public.
This happened about one month ago now.
Here is how it all began.
NH court gives addicts second chances - NashuaTelegraph.com
NH court gives addicts second chances - NashuaTelegraph.com
Sunday, December 5, 2010
NH court gives addicts second chances
By LYNNE TUOHY
The Associated Press
PrintShare Comment
CONCORD – On the afternoon when Noah Grassie’s leg irons were removed in a federal courtroom, he was a convicted drug dealer and addict, a high school dropout who had never had a job or a driver’s license.
But U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante saw potential in the 20-year-old, and federal prosecutors signed off on Grassie’s participation in an intensive rehabilitation program that is one of only a handful of such programs in the federal court system.
Laplante dubbed it LASER docket – Law Abiding, Sober, Employed and Rehabilitated.
“Your days of hanging around the streets with your high school buddies are over, Mr. Grassie,” Laplante told him. “We’ve got to get you straightened out.”
Grassie joined two others in the program: a 19-year-old “mule” in the same Seacoast drug ring as Grassie and a 35-year-old mother and methedrine addict.
“This program is completely unique in the United States and you are the first three defendants to go through it,” Laplante told them.
Unlike other federal re-entry programs that offer intensive treatment after a convict has completed a prison sentence, LASER uses the prospect of a reduced sentence and chance to turn a life around prior to sentencing. But a guilty plea is a prerequisite to participation in the program.
It takes 12 to 18 months to complete the program, with weekly court sessions, intensive treatment, frequent visits with a probation officer, employment and continued education.
Defendants whose charges involve violence, weapons, sale to minors, sex offenses or who are deemed to be kingpins of drug operations are exempt. So are those who lack transportation – a crucial element to making every treatment and court appointment.
“You can’t skate,” U.S. Attorney John Kacavas said.
Laplante holds weekly meeting with the participants, and invites them to challenge why he makes them budget their time or their money, instructs them to write essays on the biggest hurdle they’re facing or tells them to find a hobby.
Defense attorney Jaye Rancourt, part of the team that began shaping the concept with Laplante in January 2009, said one incentive to succeed is the possibility of avoiding years behind bars.
“It’s difficult for people who come out of incarceration to find jobs,” Rancourt said. “The idea is not to cause that disruption. We’re trying to keep them in their environments and employed. These are people who committed crimes because of drug addictions. If we can cure that, they’re not going to commit crimes anymore. It’s a big undertaking.”
The program would not have been possible before January 2005, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the federal sentencing guidelines were advisory only, and could not hobble a judge’s discretion to mete out a shorter or no sentence.
David Sellers, a spokesman for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, said the only other federal drug court he’s aware of that is not a re-entry program is the one run by U.S. Magistrate Judge John Gormon at the federal court in Peoria, Ill.
Gormon said his program is more of a classic pretrial diversion program. If the defendant successfully completes treatment, the charges are dismissed. He said that even after the costs of treatment and more intensive probation, his program has saved the system about $3 million by keeping nearly 40 defendants out of federal prisons.
In New Hampshire, Arthur Wilson of Dover was admitted to the LASER program in late July. Asked before court why he wanted in, he replied, “Because I don’t want to die. I want to save my life.”
The program has now grown to six participants, including one who has already been knocked out by a drug possession arrest. None agreed to be interviewed. Some said through their lawyers that they were not yet confident of their success and feared jinxing themselves.
The program is a recognition of both the role drugs play in driving crime and that addiction can be staunched by intensive rehabilitation programs and close monitoring of offenders.
In fiscal year 2009, 45 percent of the 205 people sentenced in federal court in New Hampshire were convicted of drug offenses, according to U.S. Sentencing Commission statistics. And 83 percent of those convicts were dealing in highly addictive crack or power cocaine.
“This is a smarter way,” Kacavas said. “What we’ve done in the past doesn’t work. We keep building more and more prisons. We have the highest incarceration rate in the world and it doesn’t reduce crime.”
Costs of the program are absorbed by the district’s federal probation office, headed by Tom Tarr.
“We’re targeting people with long-standing addiction problems whose criminal activities relate to their addiction,” Tarr said. “That’s where the focus should be.”
Defense lawyers and probation officers involved in the program said the cooperation of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and Laplante’s commitment of time, are vital to the program. Before being appointed to the bench, Laplante prosecuted federal drug cases.
“He has a pretty good feel for what’s going on in the streets,” said Mark Sisti, one of the defense lawyers assigned to the program. “He’s not a pushover, but he’s fair.”
Rancourt said that, over the course of the past four months, she has watched the participants drop their distrust and embrace the support being offered them. “There’s a sense of pride in every little step,” she said.
They have landed jobs and, in some cases, promotions. Some talk in open court about tackling old credit problems and confronting family issues. Grassie is in school, working part-time and just started drivers education.
“You really get to see small steps in a progression which, hopefully, is going to be a life-changing event,” Rancourt said.
Comment from unhappygrammy:
What about recovering addict's with children? Recovering addict's who are court-ordered OUT of treatment in order to regain custody of their children, which is discriminatory and illegal?
Will the NH court's give them a second chance or will they still terminate parental right's, illegally?
According to the NH Statute: §§ 170-C:5; 169-C:24-a,
Circumstances That Are Not Grounds for Termination In NH are:
Alcohol or Drug Induced Incapacity
Abuse/Neglect or Loss of Rights of Another Child
Failure to Maintain Contact
Failure to Establish Paternity
Why are recovering addict's, who are parent's singled out to lose in the NH court system?
Sunday, December 5, 2010
NH court gives addicts second chances
By LYNNE TUOHY
The Associated Press
PrintShare Comment
CONCORD – On the afternoon when Noah Grassie’s leg irons were removed in a federal courtroom, he was a convicted drug dealer and addict, a high school dropout who had never had a job or a driver’s license.
But U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante saw potential in the 20-year-old, and federal prosecutors signed off on Grassie’s participation in an intensive rehabilitation program that is one of only a handful of such programs in the federal court system.
Laplante dubbed it LASER docket – Law Abiding, Sober, Employed and Rehabilitated.
“Your days of hanging around the streets with your high school buddies are over, Mr. Grassie,” Laplante told him. “We’ve got to get you straightened out.”
Grassie joined two others in the program: a 19-year-old “mule” in the same Seacoast drug ring as Grassie and a 35-year-old mother and methedrine addict.
“This program is completely unique in the United States and you are the first three defendants to go through it,” Laplante told them.
Unlike other federal re-entry programs that offer intensive treatment after a convict has completed a prison sentence, LASER uses the prospect of a reduced sentence and chance to turn a life around prior to sentencing. But a guilty plea is a prerequisite to participation in the program.
It takes 12 to 18 months to complete the program, with weekly court sessions, intensive treatment, frequent visits with a probation officer, employment and continued education.
Defendants whose charges involve violence, weapons, sale to minors, sex offenses or who are deemed to be kingpins of drug operations are exempt. So are those who lack transportation – a crucial element to making every treatment and court appointment.
“You can’t skate,” U.S. Attorney John Kacavas said.
Laplante holds weekly meeting with the participants, and invites them to challenge why he makes them budget their time or their money, instructs them to write essays on the biggest hurdle they’re facing or tells them to find a hobby.
Defense attorney Jaye Rancourt, part of the team that began shaping the concept with Laplante in January 2009, said one incentive to succeed is the possibility of avoiding years behind bars.
“It’s difficult for people who come out of incarceration to find jobs,” Rancourt said. “The idea is not to cause that disruption. We’re trying to keep them in their environments and employed. These are people who committed crimes because of drug addictions. If we can cure that, they’re not going to commit crimes anymore. It’s a big undertaking.”
The program would not have been possible before January 2005, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the federal sentencing guidelines were advisory only, and could not hobble a judge’s discretion to mete out a shorter or no sentence.
David Sellers, a spokesman for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, said the only other federal drug court he’s aware of that is not a re-entry program is the one run by U.S. Magistrate Judge John Gormon at the federal court in Peoria, Ill.
Gormon said his program is more of a classic pretrial diversion program. If the defendant successfully completes treatment, the charges are dismissed. He said that even after the costs of treatment and more intensive probation, his program has saved the system about $3 million by keeping nearly 40 defendants out of federal prisons.
In New Hampshire, Arthur Wilson of Dover was admitted to the LASER program in late July. Asked before court why he wanted in, he replied, “Because I don’t want to die. I want to save my life.”
The program has now grown to six participants, including one who has already been knocked out by a drug possession arrest. None agreed to be interviewed. Some said through their lawyers that they were not yet confident of their success and feared jinxing themselves.
The program is a recognition of both the role drugs play in driving crime and that addiction can be staunched by intensive rehabilitation programs and close monitoring of offenders.
In fiscal year 2009, 45 percent of the 205 people sentenced in federal court in New Hampshire were convicted of drug offenses, according to U.S. Sentencing Commission statistics. And 83 percent of those convicts were dealing in highly addictive crack or power cocaine.
“This is a smarter way,” Kacavas said. “What we’ve done in the past doesn’t work. We keep building more and more prisons. We have the highest incarceration rate in the world and it doesn’t reduce crime.”
Costs of the program are absorbed by the district’s federal probation office, headed by Tom Tarr.
“We’re targeting people with long-standing addiction problems whose criminal activities relate to their addiction,” Tarr said. “That’s where the focus should be.”
Defense lawyers and probation officers involved in the program said the cooperation of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and Laplante’s commitment of time, are vital to the program. Before being appointed to the bench, Laplante prosecuted federal drug cases.
“He has a pretty good feel for what’s going on in the streets,” said Mark Sisti, one of the defense lawyers assigned to the program. “He’s not a pushover, but he’s fair.”
Rancourt said that, over the course of the past four months, she has watched the participants drop their distrust and embrace the support being offered them. “There’s a sense of pride in every little step,” she said.
They have landed jobs and, in some cases, promotions. Some talk in open court about tackling old credit problems and confronting family issues. Grassie is in school, working part-time and just started drivers education.
“You really get to see small steps in a progression which, hopefully, is going to be a life-changing event,” Rancourt said.
Comment from unhappygrammy:
What about recovering addict's with children? Recovering addict's who are court-ordered OUT of treatment in order to regain custody of their children, which is discriminatory and illegal?
Will the NH court's give them a second chance or will they still terminate parental right's, illegally?
According to the NH Statute: §§ 170-C:5; 169-C:24-a,
Circumstances That Are Not Grounds for Termination In NH are:
Alcohol or Drug Induced Incapacity
Abuse/Neglect or Loss of Rights of Another Child
Failure to Maintain Contact
Failure to Establish Paternity
Why are recovering addict's, who are parent's singled out to lose in the NH court system?
Filing for An Administrative Hearing in New Hampshire
Filing for an Administrative Hearing is SUPPOSED to be the norm, but if your state doesn't follow procedure, where do you turn to for help?
Just one of the states who do NOT allow Administrative hearing's for families screwed over by child protective services is New Hampshire. There may be more, but I have personally dealt with the NH Administrative Unit, which stated Administrative hearing's are NOT allowed to families dealing with DCYF. Specifically, where fraudulent home studies are completed, or shall I say, NOT completed by NH DCYF.The NH foster care training manual state's a person who has been given a negative home study can appeal the finding's and request a hearing.It's too bad DCYF and the Administrative Appeal's Unit work "hand in hand" along with the Judges of NH who do whatever DCYF tell's them to do. Even when a corrupt Supervisor goes against three caseworker's who advocate for a child's placement with his grandparent's, she falsify's information, where the true information is replaced by lies and takes ten month's to complete the "Incomplete Home Study",instead of the normal six month's, with only one visit to the grandparent's home, NO inspection, NO criminal background check and NO financial affidavit. When the grandparent's learn they can file an appeal, after reading over the foster care manual that the grandmother received while taking foster care classes to be allowed to take in her grandchildren, but was never allowed a foster care license by the corrupt Supervisor, because the grandmother will NOT kiss DCYF's butt's, they file for a hearing twice, only to be told they have "NO standing" and the appeal's unit does NOT allow hearing's for negative home studies. An e-mail by one of the DCYF Administrator's to the Administrator states, "The grandparent's were only afforded the home study to show them why placement of their grandson was not in his best interest's". Funny how the grandparent's were sent e-mail's from Maggie Bishop stating a home study would be done with the grandparent's in order for placement of their grandson. This was after MANY failed placement's in stranger's home's fell through. I guess DCYF really upped the ante on my grandson to make sure he wasn't placed in our home. This is the same woman who told me I should have let my daughter die and then asked,"Why isn't she dead?" This crude woman is in charge of an agency which is SUPPOSED to protect children? Give me a break! The only thing she has any clue on protecting is her blood money!
Since when is anyone afforded a Home Study to show why their home would NOT make a good placement? Doesn't the state of NH waste more than enough money kidnapping children from innocent parent's and placing them with foster stranger's who don't even meet state requirement's to become foster's? Aren't the Judges also at fault when they refuse to admit evidence proving innocence? Doesn't Federal and state mandates state DCYF MUST actively seek out relatives in the placement of children BEFORE foster placement? Isn't it in the best interest's of a child to be placed with family member's whom they have a close bond with? NOT in NH! NH DCYF would rather traumatize and drug a child to make him stop pleading to be with his grandparent's whom he lived with for most of his life.They would rather line their pocket's with the blood money of our children.
The picture above is of my grandson, doped up on Adderall, thank's to DCYF. This is the only way they know how to handle a child who yearn's for his family. I think they need to find a new line of work since they don't know how to do the job's their being paid to do. In New Hampshire, there is NO such thing as "Family Preservation" and there is NO "Family Reunification". In New Hampshire, all there is is "Family Destruction", thank's to NH DCYF and the NH Court's and evidently, the Administrative Appeal's Unit.
If you're lucky enough to have an Administrative Appeal's Unit in your state which doesn't work "hand in hand" with child protective services, go for it. If not, you're in the same boat as I am. Screwed over by the State!
unhappygrammy
Just one of the states who do NOT allow Administrative hearing's for families screwed over by child protective services is New Hampshire. There may be more, but I have personally dealt with the NH Administrative Unit, which stated Administrative hearing's are NOT allowed to families dealing with DCYF. Specifically, where fraudulent home studies are completed, or shall I say, NOT completed by NH DCYF.The NH foster care training manual state's a person who has been given a negative home study can appeal the finding's and request a hearing.It's too bad DCYF and the Administrative Appeal's Unit work "hand in hand" along with the Judges of NH who do whatever DCYF tell's them to do. Even when a corrupt Supervisor goes against three caseworker's who advocate for a child's placement with his grandparent's, she falsify's information, where the true information is replaced by lies and takes ten month's to complete the "Incomplete Home Study",instead of the normal six month's, with only one visit to the grandparent's home, NO inspection, NO criminal background check and NO financial affidavit. When the grandparent's learn they can file an appeal, after reading over the foster care manual that the grandmother received while taking foster care classes to be allowed to take in her grandchildren, but was never allowed a foster care license by the corrupt Supervisor, because the grandmother will NOT kiss DCYF's butt's, they file for a hearing twice, only to be told they have "NO standing" and the appeal's unit does NOT allow hearing's for negative home studies. An e-mail by one of the DCYF Administrator's to the Administrator states, "The grandparent's were only afforded the home study to show them why placement of their grandson was not in his best interest's". Funny how the grandparent's were sent e-mail's from Maggie Bishop stating a home study would be done with the grandparent's in order for placement of their grandson. This was after MANY failed placement's in stranger's home's fell through. I guess DCYF really upped the ante on my grandson to make sure he wasn't placed in our home. This is the same woman who told me I should have let my daughter die and then asked,"Why isn't she dead?" This crude woman is in charge of an agency which is SUPPOSED to protect children? Give me a break! The only thing she has any clue on protecting is her blood money!
Since when is anyone afforded a Home Study to show why their home would NOT make a good placement? Doesn't the state of NH waste more than enough money kidnapping children from innocent parent's and placing them with foster stranger's who don't even meet state requirement's to become foster's? Aren't the Judges also at fault when they refuse to admit evidence proving innocence? Doesn't Federal and state mandates state DCYF MUST actively seek out relatives in the placement of children BEFORE foster placement? Isn't it in the best interest's of a child to be placed with family member's whom they have a close bond with? NOT in NH! NH DCYF would rather traumatize and drug a child to make him stop pleading to be with his grandparent's whom he lived with for most of his life.They would rather line their pocket's with the blood money of our children.
The picture above is of my grandson, doped up on Adderall, thank's to DCYF. This is the only way they know how to handle a child who yearn's for his family. I think they need to find a new line of work since they don't know how to do the job's their being paid to do. In New Hampshire, there is NO such thing as "Family Preservation" and there is NO "Family Reunification". In New Hampshire, all there is is "Family Destruction", thank's to NH DCYF and the NH Court's and evidently, the Administrative Appeal's Unit.
If you're lucky enough to have an Administrative Appeal's Unit in your state which doesn't work "hand in hand" with child protective services, go for it. If not, you're in the same boat as I am. Screwed over by the State!
unhappygrammy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)