California Court Rules Medical Marijuana Is No Reason To Take A Child Away | The Weed Blog:
There aren’t many things that make me sadder than hearing stories about parents having their children taken away. Unfortunately, that was the case with a family in California in May 2011. The family was reported for being marijuana consumers with a child in the residence, which resulted in a visit from the California Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS). During the visit, the child in question’s parents provided information that they were medical cannabis patients. After a battle with DCFS, the child was placed into protective custody.
Read More:
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 9, 2012
Married Detroit judge allegedly slept with child-support plaintiff, let her help choose ex-husband's sentence
Married Detroit judge allegedly slept with child-support plaintiff, let her help choose ex-husband's sentence | The Daily Caller:
A Wayne County, Michigan Circuit Court judge is on administrative leave following a report that he impregnated a woman who was a plaintiff in a child-support case before him, and allowed her to help choose the sentence he would impose on her ex-husband.
Read more:
A Wayne County, Michigan Circuit Court judge is on administrative leave following a report that he impregnated a woman who was a plaintiff in a child-support case before him, and allowed her to help choose the sentence he would impose on her ex-husband.
Read more:
Saturday, December 8, 2012
NH McCarthy ruling - paralyze's domestic violence victims
DMVC Productions = Results: NH McCarthy ruling - paralyze's domestic violence victims:
This article written by Jennifer Chase when she was a third-year student at Franklin Pierce Law Center; depicts what Felix Frankfurter may have been referring to when he said "Judicial judgment must take deep account of the day before yesterday in order that yesterday may not paralyze today." because this ruling paralyze's domestic violence victims to day.
Bar Journal - Summer 2006 for her references to case law and her sources click on the link below and you will find them at the bottom of her article; this is extremely well reasoned and points out flaws within the NH Judicial System.
McCarthy v. Wheeler: Double Jeopardy for Domestic Violence Victims?
By: Jennifer Chase
A single mother is threatened with harm or physically hurt one more time by the father of her child. She has endured the abuse for years, but this time because he is no longer living with them, and she finally summons the courage to call the police. She is unfamiliar with the law and finds out that to get immediate protection she needs to obtain a temporary protective order and then file a domestic violence petition.1 At the court house, fills out the necessary paperwork and is granted a temporary protective order.2 Once she has the order she feels safer, because now, maybe, the abuse will finally end.
This article written by Jennifer Chase when she was a third-year student at Franklin Pierce Law Center; depicts what Felix Frankfurter may have been referring to when he said "Judicial judgment must take deep account of the day before yesterday in order that yesterday may not paralyze today." because this ruling paralyze's domestic violence victims to day.
Bar Journal - Summer 2006 for her references to case law and her sources click on the link below and you will find them at the bottom of her article; this is extremely well reasoned and points out flaws within the NH Judicial System.
McCarthy v. Wheeler: Double Jeopardy for Domestic Violence Victims?
By: Jennifer Chase
I. Introduction
A single mother is threatened with harm or physically hurt one more time by the father of her child. She has endured the abuse for years, but this time because he is no longer living with them, and she finally summons the courage to call the police. She is unfamiliar with the law and finds out that to get immediate protection she needs to obtain a temporary protective order and then file a domestic violence petition.1 At the court house, fills out the necessary paperwork and is granted a temporary protective order.2 Once she has the order she feels safer, because now, maybe, the abuse will finally end.
Next, she finds out she has to go to court and have a hearing.3 She knows this is going to make the father angry. But she has the temporary order, so she knows the father will get into trouble if he violates it and she thinks this will deter him from harming or threatening her. A hearing date is scheduled, but there are unanticipated continuances. Then, and for reasons the victim does not understand, the order is dismissed. She has no protection, and to obtain the protection of a protective order, she has to start the process over again. Since the father is already angry that she has involved the court in the first place, does she dare go down that road again? If the court could not offer her protection the first time around, will pursuing the same course protect her, or further provoke the father?
Read More:
Hardin woman admits causing death of 3-year-old foster child
Hardin woman admits causing death of 3-year-old foster child:
COLUMBUS — A Hardin woman admitted Thursday that she caused the death of a 3-year-old foster child who was locked in a hot car.
COLUMBUS — A Hardin woman admitted Thursday that she caused the death of a 3-year-old foster child who was locked in a hot car.
Reps. ask feds about SD Indian foster care summit
Reps. ask feds about SD Indian foster care summit - News - Boston.com:
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) — Two Democratic congressmen sent a letter Friday to the head of the U.S. Department of Interior’s Office of Indian Affairs questioning why the government has not yet held a summit about Native American children in foster care in South Dakota.
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) — Two Democratic congressmen sent a letter Friday to the head of the U.S. Department of Interior’s Office of Indian Affairs questioning why the government has not yet held a summit about Native American children in foster care in South Dakota.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)