Mexico Drug Wars: Teen Girls Being Trained As Hitwomen
Recent arrests in Mexico call attention to a disturbing trend in the country's war on drugs: that teen girls are being trained as drug cartel assassins.
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, June 19, 2011
Happy Fathers Day to ALL Fathers and Grandfathers
Austin and Grampie-A special vist at St. Charles Childrens Home before Austin was adopted by strangers. NH DCYF and the Court's don't believe in Grandparent's raising their Grandchildren. There's NOT enough money to be made placing children with their Family. It's ALL about the Money!
Happy Fathers Day to ALL Fathers and Grandfathers
Hoping ALL Fathers and Grandfathers get to spend their day with their children and grandchildren. Hoping today is a truly special day for you and the children. The children you helped bring into this world, the children you love with all your hearts. The children that many fathers and grandfathers don't get to see, due to Parental Alienation, Grandparent Alienation and CPS and Court destruction. Please know that your children and grandchildren love you and think about you all the time. That no matter what the circumstance, you are a huge part of their lives. Nothing will ever break that bond. The children will never forget you, no matter how much brainwashing they are subjected to. Hopefully today you and your children and grandchildren will be re-united. If even with just a long awaited phone call.
Are you aware today is also Family Re-unification Day? Though not celebrated in New Hampshire due to the money hungry Court's and CPS. Not celebrated because New Hampshire doesn't believe in Re-unification. Only Family Destruction. Hopefully, whoever is raising your children and grandchildren, can show some compassion today and at least allow even that one little phone call that would mean so much. That one little phone call that would brighten your day, as well as the children's.
I feel for ALL of you. I know what you are going through. It's a truly horrible way to treat our fellow man and a truly horrible way to treat our children and grandchildren, who will ALWAYS have only one Father. Their REAL father. The Father who think's about them night and day. Who loves them unconditionally. Children bonded to that special Grandfather. The Grandfather who treated them as their own. Father's and Grandfathers who watched over them. Watched them grow. Treated them as the special children they are. The Fathers and Grandfathers who would give their lives for children and grandchildren. The children will NEVER forget. One day they will find their way back to you and ALL who have kept you apart will MAYBE realize the harm they've caused to you and the children they SUPPOSEDLY were protecting.
The Parental Alienation MUST stop. The traumatization of our children must stop AND the Family Destruction MUST stop. Children and grandchildren need their families as much as we need them. The tug of war the Court's and CPS have instigated MUST end. Our children are NOT all about money, even though the courts and CPS seem to think they are. These children are our flesh and blood, not a money market for the Courts and CPS. They are a blessing from God. He chose us to be parents and grandparents. A choice only HE can make, not the Courts OR CPS.
So hopefully today, "The Chosen Few", who hold our children and grandchildren in their grasp, will make it a special day for ALL the children and their Fathers and Grandfathers, either by phone or a visit, just to let them know they care and haven't forgotten them. Our world need's to show a little compassion. Today is the day that will really make a difference.
Happy Fathers Day. I really hope today WILL be your's and your children's and grandchildrens VERY special day!
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Last statement sent to Sentinel from self-immolation victim
Last statement sent to Sentinel from self-immolation victim - SentinelSource.com: Local News: self immolation, court st, fire, man on fire,
Editor's note: On Thursday morning, June 16, The Sentinel received a "last statement" via mail from a man who insinuated that he planned to set himself on fire in front of the Cheshire County Court House, and an explanation of why he intended to do so. Through further reporting, The Sentinel is confident this is from the victim of Wednesday afternoon's fire, although police have not yet received confirmation of his identity. The 15-page statement is printed in full, except for two redacted items: The names of the man's mother and his three children. Details will be posted as they become available.
Read more at the above link.
Editor's note: On Thursday morning, June 16, The Sentinel received a "last statement" via mail from a man who insinuated that he planned to set himself on fire in front of the Cheshire County Court House, and an explanation of why he intended to do so. Through further reporting, The Sentinel is confident this is from the victim of Wednesday afternoon's fire, although police have not yet received confirmation of his identity. The 15-page statement is printed in full, except for two redacted items: The names of the man's mother and his three children. Details will be posted as they become available.
Read more at the above link.
Social Workers clearly to blame for everything, whichever way you look at it. funny satire story
The Spoof : Social Workers clearly to blame for everything, whichever way you look at it. funny satire story
A national survey today found conclusive evidence that just about everything that has gone wrong is due to the involvement of a social worker.
A national survey today found conclusive evidence that just about everything that has gone wrong is due to the involvement of a social worker.
Reunification Day celebrates return to parenthood
Reunification Day celebrates return to parenthood - JSOnline
Sunday will be Deryck Leonard's first real Father's Day in a few years.
He doesn't know if his sons have anything planned, but they'll be with him.
"They're a joy," he said about Deryck Jr., 8, and Demetrius, 3.
In 2008, Leonard's ex-girlfriend had custody of his sons and he visited on weekends. During the summer, Leonard's children were taken from their mother's home and placed in foster care. Leonard didn't know why, and Judge Marshall Murray, presiding judge of Milwaukee County Children's Court, said that because he was not responsible for their care, he wouldn't know all the details of why the children were removed.
Sunday will be Deryck Leonard's first real Father's Day in a few years.
He doesn't know if his sons have anything planned, but they'll be with him.
"They're a joy," he said about Deryck Jr., 8, and Demetrius, 3.
In 2008, Leonard's ex-girlfriend had custody of his sons and he visited on weekends. During the summer, Leonard's children were taken from their mother's home and placed in foster care. Leonard didn't know why, and Judge Marshall Murray, presiding judge of Milwaukee County Children's Court, said that because he was not responsible for their care, he wouldn't know all the details of why the children were removed.
Friday, June 17, 2011
A Report Which was Written by An Intern – Be Sure and Read the Part Highlighted in Bold « How Child Protection Services Buys and Sells Our Children
A Report Which was Written by An Intern – Be Sure and Read the Part Highlighted in Bold « How Child Protection Services Buys and Sells Our Children
The paragraph highlighted in bold is very scary, in that DFCS is allowed to use heresay in the hearing. This is what causes most of the parents problems. The fact that the hersay is allowed as fact in a hearing. Also it plainly states that all the lawyers, judges etc are in bed together to see that the parent is the guilty party. Just another piece of proof that the State is buying and selling our children illegally.
Barton Clinic Summer 2008 Intern Report
Intern: Natalece Washington
Assignment: Jackson County Juvenile Court Attorney GAL Division
School: University of Georgia School of Law
As an intern in the Juvenile Court of Banks, Barrow, and Jackson Counties I worked with a Child Advocate Attorney who is appointed by the court pursuant to statute O.C.G.A. §15-11-6 (b) that requires that all children in Juvenile Court be represented by council and § 15-11-9 (b) that requires a Guardian ad litem to be appointed in order to protect the interest of the children whose interests may be in conflict with their parents’ interests. The Judge presiding over the Piedmont Judicial Circuit has enacted a standing order that requires a staff attorney who is assigned to the court’s Child Advocate Division to serve as an attorney- Guardian ad litem in all deprivation actions of the Juvenile Courts of Banks, Barrow, and Jackson Counties. At the start of the internship I identified the main goals of the Child Advocate Attorney. First, we investigate the child’s or sibling group’s situation. Next, we advocate in court hearings for what we have found to be in the best interest of the child. Finally, we monitor the child’s ongoing best interest for as long as they remain in care or as long as they are in a placement that must be reviewed by the court periodically.
Generally, in our office the child advocate attorneys follows the Best Interest model. This means that it is our strategic goal to always secure outcomes that are in the child’s best interest. During my internship, I only experienced one instance of conflicting roles. A teenager’s desires were in conflict with the Child Advocate Attorney’s best interest recommendation. Because of this conflict another attorney was appointed to follow the client-directed model of representation and represent the child’s wishes. I learned that this happens rarely and that this situation was unique because of the child’s age and competence.
Early into the summer I learned the models of representation to achieve the goals of the child advocate. However, there were many practical aspects of the task of child representation that could only be gained from work in the field. Efficiency, camaraderie among professionals in the Juvenile Court, and lawyering skill and savvy to work with an ever-changing group of babies, toddlers, pre-teens, and teenagers are the essential practical components of child advocacy.
The Juvenile Court’s efficiency is a top priority in the Piedmont Judicial Circuit. One method the judge uses to ensure efficiency is the Pre-Trial Conference. This is a time for all parties to come together to decide on the particulars of an Adjudicatory hearing. Another effort to maintain court efficiency is timely appointment of council. Parents who are a part of deprivation actions have the legal right to an attorney. If they are without the state requisite income to hire an attorney, the Public Defender’s office will have one appointed for them. In the Piedmont Judicial Circuit, parents often decide that they can use an attorney’s services only after the original shelter care proceeding. Unbeknownst to a pro se parent, the shelter care hearing allows hearsay and can be damaging because the judge hears this information when he is first introduced to the case. I have learned that skilled parent attorneys, when appointed before the shelter care hearing, often consent to waive the shelter care hearing- stipulating deprivation- and make plans to advocate for their client in the Adjudicatory hearing that is governed by the rules of evidence. Often after experiencing the damaging effects of a shelter care without legal representation, parents opt to have council in subsequent proceedings. This creates backlog and the judge will have to continue any case scheduled prior to appointment of council. In this circuit, the judge never neglects to tell the parents of their right to an attorney early, at the start of a shelter care hearing. Unfortunately, despite his good effort, their change of heart is often unavoidable.
Surprisingly, there is high level of camaraderie among the attorneys, service providers, DFCS, DJJ, and placement representatives in our deprivation proceedings. The child advocates are frequently in friendly negotiations with parent’s attorneys and the SAAG to achieve the best interest outcome. Although all attorneys involved have a distinct agenda, there is no embittered power struggle among them. Perhaps it is simply professional courtesy. Whatever the cause, I believe it is their relationships and discussion that clarify the issues of a case and each party’s desired outcome. I think this is the best environment for a child client who is often present in the courtroom during proceedings that directly effect his or her welfare. This camaraderie may not exist in a metropolitan environment. I have heard that there is more hostility between parties. I believe this may be do to the greater number of players involved. In this circuit, we deal with the same parent’s attorneys, private attorneys, SAAGs, and Child Advocates. There are not any surprises. We know who and what to expect and they are all familiar with the culture of the court. This probably differs from more populated counties.
Finally, a high level of technique and savvy is required to deal with child clients. Getting documented information from agencies, placements, schools, and doctors is relatively easy since we are equipped with a court order that requires that all reasonable requests be granted. Any requests found to be unreasonable must be challenged in writing before the court. What seems to be more difficult is getting information from a child. Child advocates interview children frequently. As an intern testing my interview skills I found myself often quite uncomfortable. I would often stutter and choose my words all too carefully. This only confused the child and discredited me as a professional. Children seemed to respond best when the interviewer is comfortable. So as the summer progressed I felt more at ease talking to kids about their home situations and desires and made more progress in that manner. When I watch my supervisor interview children it is as if she is working from a checklist of the perfect questions to ask. She does this all while playing with the child or casually speaking to a teenager, never note taking. Her casual nature seems to help the interviewee put their guard down just long enough for her to uncover the information that she needs. My supervisor assures me that interviewing skills are developed with time and practice.
I have notably learned this summer that the Attorney Child Advocates are expected to be much more than attorneys. They are social workers, counselors, therapists, pharmacology students, and friends to their clients. They perform each of these roles as they advocate for their clients best interest. Throughout the internship we’d visit clients’ homes, schools, relatives, and service providers and conduct social worker-like investigations. Child Advocates often act as a check on DFCS personnel. I appreciate the work of the Child Advocate for this reason. The leg work and time put into investigation are our own “reasonable efforts” to ensure the child’s best interest are being met. If you are advocating for a child to go live in their grandmother’s home and you have never met grandmother, visited her home, or spoken with her to learn of her consent to this plan, then you are advocating blindly.
Child advocates often are skilled in identifying a need for counseling or specialized treatment. They see problems and often know when a child is at their breaking point needing someone to talk to or therapy to keep them from harming themselves or others. As lay pharmacology students, child advocates often know just what a child’s diagnoses are just by viewing their list of prescribed medications. I have also learned that if parents are on certain mood regulating drugs, then children are potentially suffering from the same mental health issues. In what might be considered their most important role, child advocates are the familiar friendly face that a child can see consistently in and out of court. In our court, children sit by their attorney when present. Unless it is a shelter care hearing, they have already talked to their attorney and had an opportunity to develop a relationship with someone not involved with DFCS who represents them. Unfortunately, a child’s tears dampen many court proceedings. The child’s attorney, not only represents them, but also helps them through this period of fear or frustration. Because this attorney wears so many hats the job is a little overwhelming. However, looking forward to the end result makes the multi-tasking worthwhile.
Because of the court’s expectation that every child be effectively served and the heavy case loads that come along with that expectation there is a need to check that everyone’s job is being completed adequately. There are means to review cases periodically, outside the setting of a hearing to ensure that kids are having all of their needs met. The Citizens Panel Reviews provide a way to review cases that hadn’t been to court for a while. It makes the child advocate review the file and have a chance to meet with and discuss issues with other agencies. The community gets to participate to observe their tax dollars at work or to identify when some child is getting short changed.
The paragraph highlighted in bold is very scary, in that DFCS is allowed to use heresay in the hearing. This is what causes most of the parents problems. The fact that the hersay is allowed as fact in a hearing. Also it plainly states that all the lawyers, judges etc are in bed together to see that the parent is the guilty party. Just another piece of proof that the State is buying and selling our children illegally.
Barton Clinic Summer 2008 Intern Report
Intern: Natalece Washington
Assignment: Jackson County Juvenile Court Attorney GAL Division
School: University of Georgia School of Law
As an intern in the Juvenile Court of Banks, Barrow, and Jackson Counties I worked with a Child Advocate Attorney who is appointed by the court pursuant to statute O.C.G.A. §15-11-6 (b) that requires that all children in Juvenile Court be represented by council and § 15-11-9 (b) that requires a Guardian ad litem to be appointed in order to protect the interest of the children whose interests may be in conflict with their parents’ interests. The Judge presiding over the Piedmont Judicial Circuit has enacted a standing order that requires a staff attorney who is assigned to the court’s Child Advocate Division to serve as an attorney- Guardian ad litem in all deprivation actions of the Juvenile Courts of Banks, Barrow, and Jackson Counties. At the start of the internship I identified the main goals of the Child Advocate Attorney. First, we investigate the child’s or sibling group’s situation. Next, we advocate in court hearings for what we have found to be in the best interest of the child. Finally, we monitor the child’s ongoing best interest for as long as they remain in care or as long as they are in a placement that must be reviewed by the court periodically.
Generally, in our office the child advocate attorneys follows the Best Interest model. This means that it is our strategic goal to always secure outcomes that are in the child’s best interest. During my internship, I only experienced one instance of conflicting roles. A teenager’s desires were in conflict with the Child Advocate Attorney’s best interest recommendation. Because of this conflict another attorney was appointed to follow the client-directed model of representation and represent the child’s wishes. I learned that this happens rarely and that this situation was unique because of the child’s age and competence.
Early into the summer I learned the models of representation to achieve the goals of the child advocate. However, there were many practical aspects of the task of child representation that could only be gained from work in the field. Efficiency, camaraderie among professionals in the Juvenile Court, and lawyering skill and savvy to work with an ever-changing group of babies, toddlers, pre-teens, and teenagers are the essential practical components of child advocacy.
The Juvenile Court’s efficiency is a top priority in the Piedmont Judicial Circuit. One method the judge uses to ensure efficiency is the Pre-Trial Conference. This is a time for all parties to come together to decide on the particulars of an Adjudicatory hearing. Another effort to maintain court efficiency is timely appointment of council. Parents who are a part of deprivation actions have the legal right to an attorney. If they are without the state requisite income to hire an attorney, the Public Defender’s office will have one appointed for them. In the Piedmont Judicial Circuit, parents often decide that they can use an attorney’s services only after the original shelter care proceeding. Unbeknownst to a pro se parent, the shelter care hearing allows hearsay and can be damaging because the judge hears this information when he is first introduced to the case. I have learned that skilled parent attorneys, when appointed before the shelter care hearing, often consent to waive the shelter care hearing- stipulating deprivation- and make plans to advocate for their client in the Adjudicatory hearing that is governed by the rules of evidence. Often after experiencing the damaging effects of a shelter care without legal representation, parents opt to have council in subsequent proceedings. This creates backlog and the judge will have to continue any case scheduled prior to appointment of council. In this circuit, the judge never neglects to tell the parents of their right to an attorney early, at the start of a shelter care hearing. Unfortunately, despite his good effort, their change of heart is often unavoidable.
Surprisingly, there is high level of camaraderie among the attorneys, service providers, DFCS, DJJ, and placement representatives in our deprivation proceedings. The child advocates are frequently in friendly negotiations with parent’s attorneys and the SAAG to achieve the best interest outcome. Although all attorneys involved have a distinct agenda, there is no embittered power struggle among them. Perhaps it is simply professional courtesy. Whatever the cause, I believe it is their relationships and discussion that clarify the issues of a case and each party’s desired outcome. I think this is the best environment for a child client who is often present in the courtroom during proceedings that directly effect his or her welfare. This camaraderie may not exist in a metropolitan environment. I have heard that there is more hostility between parties. I believe this may be do to the greater number of players involved. In this circuit, we deal with the same parent’s attorneys, private attorneys, SAAGs, and Child Advocates. There are not any surprises. We know who and what to expect and they are all familiar with the culture of the court. This probably differs from more populated counties.
Finally, a high level of technique and savvy is required to deal with child clients. Getting documented information from agencies, placements, schools, and doctors is relatively easy since we are equipped with a court order that requires that all reasonable requests be granted. Any requests found to be unreasonable must be challenged in writing before the court. What seems to be more difficult is getting information from a child. Child advocates interview children frequently. As an intern testing my interview skills I found myself often quite uncomfortable. I would often stutter and choose my words all too carefully. This only confused the child and discredited me as a professional. Children seemed to respond best when the interviewer is comfortable. So as the summer progressed I felt more at ease talking to kids about their home situations and desires and made more progress in that manner. When I watch my supervisor interview children it is as if she is working from a checklist of the perfect questions to ask. She does this all while playing with the child or casually speaking to a teenager, never note taking. Her casual nature seems to help the interviewee put their guard down just long enough for her to uncover the information that she needs. My supervisor assures me that interviewing skills are developed with time and practice.
I have notably learned this summer that the Attorney Child Advocates are expected to be much more than attorneys. They are social workers, counselors, therapists, pharmacology students, and friends to their clients. They perform each of these roles as they advocate for their clients best interest. Throughout the internship we’d visit clients’ homes, schools, relatives, and service providers and conduct social worker-like investigations. Child Advocates often act as a check on DFCS personnel. I appreciate the work of the Child Advocate for this reason. The leg work and time put into investigation are our own “reasonable efforts” to ensure the child’s best interest are being met. If you are advocating for a child to go live in their grandmother’s home and you have never met grandmother, visited her home, or spoken with her to learn of her consent to this plan, then you are advocating blindly.
Child advocates often are skilled in identifying a need for counseling or specialized treatment. They see problems and often know when a child is at their breaking point needing someone to talk to or therapy to keep them from harming themselves or others. As lay pharmacology students, child advocates often know just what a child’s diagnoses are just by viewing their list of prescribed medications. I have also learned that if parents are on certain mood regulating drugs, then children are potentially suffering from the same mental health issues. In what might be considered their most important role, child advocates are the familiar friendly face that a child can see consistently in and out of court. In our court, children sit by their attorney when present. Unless it is a shelter care hearing, they have already talked to their attorney and had an opportunity to develop a relationship with someone not involved with DFCS who represents them. Unfortunately, a child’s tears dampen many court proceedings. The child’s attorney, not only represents them, but also helps them through this period of fear or frustration. Because this attorney wears so many hats the job is a little overwhelming. However, looking forward to the end result makes the multi-tasking worthwhile.
Because of the court’s expectation that every child be effectively served and the heavy case loads that come along with that expectation there is a need to check that everyone’s job is being completed adequately. There are means to review cases periodically, outside the setting of a hearing to ensure that kids are having all of their needs met. The Citizens Panel Reviews provide a way to review cases that hadn’t been to court for a while. It makes the child advocate review the file and have a chance to meet with and discuss issues with other agencies. The community gets to participate to observe their tax dollars at work or to identify when some child is getting short changed.
Abuse By Foster Parents « How Child Protection Services Buys and Sells Our Children
Abuse By Foster Parents « How Child Protection Services Buys and Sells Our Children
And If you Think This is Only for Palding County Think Again it is for Jackson County as well.
September 6, 2010yvonnemasonLeave a comment
You are under official notice and warning.
Federal law provides that it is a crime to violate the Constitutional Rights of a citizen under the Color of Law.
You can be arrested for this crime and you can also be held personally liable for civil damages.
Attempting to coerce or deceive a citizen to surrender his Constitutional Rights is a Federal Crime. Federal Courts have
found that your ignorance of the law is no excuse.
18 USC §242 provides that whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any
person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States … shall be fined under this title orimprisoned not more than one year, or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap,aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
18 USC §245 provided that Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, intimidates or interferes with any person from
participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States; [or] applying for or enjoying employment, or any perquisite thereof, by any agency of the United States; shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, and if death results or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life or may be sentenced to death.
42 USC §1983 provides that every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any
State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.
This is your official warning that in April 2010 I requested to have my daughter Tamia M. Williams placed with her aunt L. Evette Johnson in Louisiana. After constant opposition and filing numerous complaints via email, actions to have ICPC transfer were finally initiated and a home evaluation on my sister was conducted in June 2010. This home evaluation and relative placement was completed and approved in July 2010 and submitted by the State of Louisiana back to the State of Georgia in August 2010.
I have had continuous threats made to me by several individuals that it doesn’t matter what I do that they are going terminate my rights regardless because of the many complaints that I have filed with different agencies. Upon speaking with Jan Bruce with the Governor’s Office I was told that she was under the understanding that the DFCS was severing my rights and that they did not have to have my child placed with relatives.
My child has unnecessarily been in DFCS custody since October 2008. Upon filing numerous complaints, I have had individuals tell me in my face that I am only making matters worst and they will severe my rights. To include Judge Sandra W. Miller who has subject me to alienation from my son because of several complaints that I have filed. In addition she has subject me to unfair hearings. Last year in July 2010 she ordered me to redo items on my case plan so that my child could remain in care while I was constantly being threatened that after 22 months my rights are going to be terminated. I filed a motion to have this judge recused and she retaliated once again by requesting that the agency prematurely file a motion to terminate my rights. This motion was filed in April 2010 and after constant notices from myself that they didn’t have grounds to terminate my rights; that the information contained in it was maliciously fabricated and that it was only done out of retaliation, the agency pulled/dismissed their TPR petition, but have maintained that it doesn’t matter because after 22 months they would file it again and terminate my rights.
Judge Sandra W. Miller previously represented the Paulding County Department of Family and Child Services as the agency’s SAAG Attorney. She is currently from the same law firm as the current SAAG Attorney as she has been for several years. This is a huge conflict of interest but this judge refuses to recuse herself and neither did she bother to disclose this on the record as required by law. I have been fighting to get my children returned to my custody and met with opposition not only from the agency, but from the assigned judge as well. Justice is suppose to be blind. It’s not blind in my case, it is conspiratorial and has about eight or more eyes. This judgel has continuously prevented me from filing appeals and retaliated against me for filing complaints. She is leading and coaching witness for the department and constantly prevents me from entering evidence even if I argue the legal grounds that allow this evidence to be admissible. I feel I am in a one sided court room with a judge who is only interested in severing my rights as another form of retaliation.
The agency maintains that they have not placed my child with her aunt yet because they are trying to allow my daughter a chance to get to know her own aunt before they move her there. There is no state policy, rule, or law that requires or enforces this. My daughter has been moved to four different foster homes and not one time where the agency interested in her getting to know these strangers before they moved her. My daughter knows her aunt (she may have not seen her in a while) but she knows her. This is just a ploy to try to buy them time so that they can push to terminate my rights because according to OCGA 15-11-103, this code does not require courts to give preference to family members in placing child following termination of parental rights.
Therefore, I am demanding that the Agency, It’s legal representation (Joseph Justice and Jennifer Zimmerman), and Paulding County Juvenile Court Judge (Sandra W. Miller) stop co-conspiring in your illegal efforts to unnecessarily hold my child in custody (child kidnapping) until you can attempt to falsely severe my rights. I am also asking that this agency and it’s co-conspirators cease all acts of fabrication of evidence, false testimony, and using the judicial system as a vehicle to carry out such illegal acts. If such acts continue legal action will proceed. This is your official and final warning and notice.
Sincerely,
Jennifer M.Williams
And If you Think This is Only for Palding County Think Again it is for Jackson County as well.
September 6, 2010yvonnemasonLeave a comment
You are under official notice and warning.
Federal law provides that it is a crime to violate the Constitutional Rights of a citizen under the Color of Law.
You can be arrested for this crime and you can also be held personally liable for civil damages.
Attempting to coerce or deceive a citizen to surrender his Constitutional Rights is a Federal Crime. Federal Courts have
found that your ignorance of the law is no excuse.
18 USC §242 provides that whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any
person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States … shall be fined under this title orimprisoned not more than one year, or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap,aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
18 USC §245 provided that Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, intimidates or interferes with any person from
participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States; [or] applying for or enjoying employment, or any perquisite thereof, by any agency of the United States; shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, and if death results or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life or may be sentenced to death.
42 USC §1983 provides that every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any
State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.
This is your official warning that in April 2010 I requested to have my daughter Tamia M. Williams placed with her aunt L. Evette Johnson in Louisiana. After constant opposition and filing numerous complaints via email, actions to have ICPC transfer were finally initiated and a home evaluation on my sister was conducted in June 2010. This home evaluation and relative placement was completed and approved in July 2010 and submitted by the State of Louisiana back to the State of Georgia in August 2010.
I have had continuous threats made to me by several individuals that it doesn’t matter what I do that they are going terminate my rights regardless because of the many complaints that I have filed with different agencies. Upon speaking with Jan Bruce with the Governor’s Office I was told that she was under the understanding that the DFCS was severing my rights and that they did not have to have my child placed with relatives.
My child has unnecessarily been in DFCS custody since October 2008. Upon filing numerous complaints, I have had individuals tell me in my face that I am only making matters worst and they will severe my rights. To include Judge Sandra W. Miller who has subject me to alienation from my son because of several complaints that I have filed. In addition she has subject me to unfair hearings. Last year in July 2010 she ordered me to redo items on my case plan so that my child could remain in care while I was constantly being threatened that after 22 months my rights are going to be terminated. I filed a motion to have this judge recused and she retaliated once again by requesting that the agency prematurely file a motion to terminate my rights. This motion was filed in April 2010 and after constant notices from myself that they didn’t have grounds to terminate my rights; that the information contained in it was maliciously fabricated and that it was only done out of retaliation, the agency pulled/dismissed their TPR petition, but have maintained that it doesn’t matter because after 22 months they would file it again and terminate my rights.
Judge Sandra W. Miller previously represented the Paulding County Department of Family and Child Services as the agency’s SAAG Attorney. She is currently from the same law firm as the current SAAG Attorney as she has been for several years. This is a huge conflict of interest but this judge refuses to recuse herself and neither did she bother to disclose this on the record as required by law. I have been fighting to get my children returned to my custody and met with opposition not only from the agency, but from the assigned judge as well. Justice is suppose to be blind. It’s not blind in my case, it is conspiratorial and has about eight or more eyes. This judgel has continuously prevented me from filing appeals and retaliated against me for filing complaints. She is leading and coaching witness for the department and constantly prevents me from entering evidence even if I argue the legal grounds that allow this evidence to be admissible. I feel I am in a one sided court room with a judge who is only interested in severing my rights as another form of retaliation.
The agency maintains that they have not placed my child with her aunt yet because they are trying to allow my daughter a chance to get to know her own aunt before they move her there. There is no state policy, rule, or law that requires or enforces this. My daughter has been moved to four different foster homes and not one time where the agency interested in her getting to know these strangers before they moved her. My daughter knows her aunt (she may have not seen her in a while) but she knows her. This is just a ploy to try to buy them time so that they can push to terminate my rights because according to OCGA 15-11-103, this code does not require courts to give preference to family members in placing child following termination of parental rights.
Therefore, I am demanding that the Agency, It’s legal representation (Joseph Justice and Jennifer Zimmerman), and Paulding County Juvenile Court Judge (Sandra W. Miller) stop co-conspiring in your illegal efforts to unnecessarily hold my child in custody (child kidnapping) until you can attempt to falsely severe my rights. I am also asking that this agency and it’s co-conspirators cease all acts of fabrication of evidence, false testimony, and using the judicial system as a vehicle to carry out such illegal acts. If such acts continue legal action will proceed. This is your official and final warning and notice.
Sincerely,
Jennifer M.Williams
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)