CHILD TRAFFICKING… FOLLOW THE $MONEY$…

16 Responses to CHILD TRAFFICKING… FOLLOW THE $MONEY$…

1. W M says:

   July 10, 2011 at 11:15 am

   This is proof that greed never sleeps. Feel confident that they will reap what they sew, if not in this world then most certainly in the next.

   Reply
2. observer in the wings says:

   July 10, 2011 at 5:26 pm

   Yes it’s true, they reap what they sew, but I would love to see a change in the system NOW, change that protects the family unit, putting the Kangaroo court and their $profits$ out of existence, and everyone involved in anyway held accountable. So sad that children are being exploited in this manner. Hard to believe it is happening here in the land of the free! Anyone else want to add their comment? Would love to hear from others.

   Reply

3. Pingback: CPS GIVES-UP ON 10 YEAR OLD… SEPARATES HIM FROM 5 SIBLINGS! | ExposingTheRecord.org

4. Klacey J. Smith, Author of "Edie's Castle: Part One: Paula's Prophecy." says:

   August 8, 2011 at 12:00 pm

   You have confirmed what I have always known to be true, and such a situation spurred me on, with the encouragement of a previous high school teacher, and pre-law professors knowing my story, to write the books that contain our horrors. This department is totally corrupt, a massive waste of American dollars, think how many millions we would save to lower our deficit if we cut this useless commodity out, and filled with the most vicious, ethically bankrupt, and perjurous fools that I have ever had the misfortune to come across. My first book, “Edie’s Castle: Part One: Paula’s Prophecy,” comes out in late October, and is the first in a series of three that tells our horror story of this department and the judicial system as a whole. Where are the checks and bounds, that’s what I want to know?

   Reply

5. Pingback: FAMILY COURT REFORM… NON-NEGOTIABLE! IMMINENT! | ExposingTheRecord.org

6. Pingback: ExposingTheRecord.org

7. Pingback: CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES (RALEIGH, NC) RESPONSIBLE FOR ABUSE AND NEGLECT OF 7 SIBLINGS!!! | ExposingTheRecord.org

8. Anonymous says:

   September 3, 2011 at 9:04 am

   Why the HELL hasn’t anyone put together a nation wide CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT?????

   Reply
9. lolamartin says:

   September 10, 2011 at 6:55 pm

   North Carolina uses its DSS “Juvenile Petition” (AOC-J-130) and its “Order For Nonsecure Custody” (AOC-J-150) to execute a child stealing scheme.
   (AOC-J-150) is facially legitmate and correctly contains the six statutory criteria for removing children listed in NCGS § 7B-503(1-6).
   In contrast, the DSS Petition (AOC-J_130) is a paper fraud that contains the neglect “definitions” found in NCGS § 7B-101(15).
   The DSS Petition contains six alleged “neglect criteria” for removing children from the home. Four of the six alleged “criteria” do not statutorily exist in NCGS § 7B-503(1-6).
   The DSS Petition is used across the state to seize children on vague and statutorily unauthorized allegations of “neglect” (“neglect” meaning whatever a social worker says is “lack of proper care” or “injurious environment”).
   The conspirators file (AOC-J-130) while a coconspirator judge simultaneously issues (AOC-J-150) and checks the box beside NCGS §7 B-503(3).
   The simultaneous filings give the surface appearance children are being removed due to exigent circumstances when in fact they are being seized without any legal authority whatsoever.
   After the child is seized, the conspirators do away with the NCGS § 7B-503(3) “abuse” criteria they used to justify the seizure.
   The case is quietly switched into a “neglect” case using the definitions in the DSS Petition and § 7B-101(15).
   Most of the child removals in North Carolina are perpetrated using this scheme.
   NCGS § 7B-101(15) and NCGS § 7B-111(a)(1) are extrinsic fraud “sleeper” statutes that were planted within the Juvenile Code and are used by Defendants to steal children.
   The “sleeper” statutes cannot be (legally) used to seize children, but “activate” after the seizure in the “dispositional” phase so that the (illegally) seized children can be “adopted out.”
   North Carolina Interference Statute Circumvents the Bill of Rights
   NCGS § 7B-303 “Interference with investigation” (2001) allows the DSS to search any house and seize any child, anytime, anyplace, with out a warrants.
   There does not have to be any evidence whatsoever of child maltreatment for the DSS and the juvenile courts to invoke GS § 7B-303.
   The DSS routinely files fraudulent petitions alleging NCGS § 7B-303 “interference” so as to bring innocent families under juvenile court “jurisdiction.”
   Sworn testimony in the N.C. Stumbo case shows it is DSS policy and procedure to use an anonymous phone or some other trivial excuse to force an investigation into an entire family. Stumbo Victory Protects North Carolina Family From Social Worker Investigation.
   The importance of the North Carolina Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in the Stumbo case, which was handed down in July of 2003, became apparent when social workers took another North Carolina family to court after the parents declined to allow social workers into their home or to hold private interviews with their children. http://www.hslda.org/legal/state/nc/19990915Stumbo/default.asp
   The case began in August when the Department of Social Services (DSS) received a false report that the Boyds had removed their 9 year-old from public school to care for his younger siblings all day every day. The Boyds do not have a 9 year-old child and had instead left their 5 year-old in the care of a 12 year-old for a few hours after Mrs. Boyd had been unexpectedly admitted to the hospital. The Boyds have been legally homeschooling all of their children for over four years.
   The juvenile judge rejected the DSS petition, relying on Stumbo. In Stumbo, the Supreme Court held that some reports to DSS are so trivial that no investigation should be commenced at all. In the Boyd case, the judge ruled that while the report may have warranted an initial inquiry, the social workers should not have proceeded once they learned that the allegations were false and that the truth did not amount to neglect.
   “The juvenile judge understood that full-scale neglect investigations are intrusive and should not be conducted once the social workers learn that the report is completely false,” said Home School Legal Defense Association attorney, James R. Mason, who represented the Boyds. “Stumbo stands for the proposition that both common sense and the constitution apply to social worker investigations,” he added.

   Parents violate NCGS § 7B-303 by “refusing to allow the director to observe or interview the juvenile in private” (seizure of the child without a warrant).
   Parents violate NCGS § 7B-303 by refusing to allow the director to arrange for an evaluation of the juvenile by a physician or other expert” (seizure of the child without a warrant).
   An “evaluation” is by nature a preliminary investigative tool, indicating there has not yet been a determination of any maltreatment of the child.
   The statute gives the Director unlimited power to demand an “evaluation of the juvenile” without regard to guilt or innocence.
   In practice, the parent and child have no power to refuse.
   The last definition of a violation in NCGS § 7B-303 is “or other conduct that makes it impossible for the director to carry out the duty to investigate” (giving the DSS Director arbitrary and unfettered discretion to determine whether the statute has been violated).
   NCGS § 7B-303(f) subjects parents to criminal penalties for not obeying the DSS: “An order entered pursuant to this section is enforceable by civil or criminal contempt as provided in Chapter 5A of the General Statutes.”
   In practice, NCGS § 7B-303 gives parents two choices: (a) give up their fundamental rights and those of their children; or (b) go to jail.
   In 2005 the state of North Carolina changed the title of NCGS § 7B-303 from “interference with investigation” to “interference with assessment.”
   The minor cosmetic word change in the title of NCGS § 7B-303 did not affect its practical implementation. The statute maintains its original elements and criminal sanctions, and continues to be implemented statewide by North Carolina social workers to circumvent the Bill of Rights.

   The Secret Files of the Conspirators

   The North Carolina child trafficking criminal enterprise seizes, holds, and adopts out children using SECRET FILES that only the child trafficking conspirators are allowed to see.
   All 100 DSS agencies in the state maintain and use the secret files to seize, hold, and “adopt out” children.
   The North Carolina Administrative Code (“NCAC”) documents the secret files as official state policy at 10A NCAC 70A.0112.
   Administrative rule NCAC70A.0113 prohibits parents from access to the secret files being used to kidnap their children. Everyone else involved in the alleged “case” (kidnapping) is allowed unfettered access to the files.
   The secret files are extensive and cover every aspect of the state’s DSS “case” against the family.
   The North Carolina DHHS Manual warns social workers not to reveal the contents of the secret files to parents because then the parents would know what they were dealing with and what the false allegations were that needed defending and parents would be able to appeal:
   “When families receive other social services, they have appeal rights among which are the right to examine the case record. If the parent were allowed to examine the CPS record, confidential information such as the child’s statements or the identity of the reporter could be obtained.” (NCDHHS Manual Chapter VIII-1424).
   Among the secret file “evidence” that the DHHS does not want parents to be able to appeal are “the child’s statements.”
   The secret files of the child traffickers make it impossible for North Carolina parents and children to defend themselves.
   North Carolina Seizes Children Statewide With No Pre-Deprivation Due Process
   In 2003, Mecklenburg County Department of Social Services (“DSS”) Attorney Tyrone Wade was deposed in the N.C. case of Yinka Fasinro vs Mecklenburg County.
   Wade admitted in the deposition that pre-deprivation juvenile court hearings do not exist in Mecklenburg County or anywhere in the State of North Carolina.
   100% of children seized by the state of North Carolina are seized with ex parte nonsecure orders and receive no due process notice or opportunity to respond prior to the seizure.
   How Mecklenburg County Steals Children
   Beginning in the mid-1980’s and continuing to the present, the Enterprise implemented a child trafficking and child kidnapping scheme using the closed and secretive Mecklenburg County “Juvenile Courts” and “CPS” system as a front. Hiding behind the juvenile court “cloak of confidentiality” the operation seizes, holds and “adopts out” children without any pre-deprivation or post-deprivation due process of law.
   Mecklenburg County Child Trafficking Scheme Eliminates AOC Juvenile Forms
   The North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts (“AOC”) issues official forms to be used by every DSS and juvenile court in the state. Each AOC form has numbers and letters identifying the form.
   Beginning no later than the early 1990’s the enterprise replaced the official state AOC juvenile forms with paper frauds, including a fake “non-secure custody order” and a fake “summons.” (See Attached Exhibit Pages)
   The enterprise has used the fraudulent juvenile forms to fraudulently and illegally seize thousands of children over the past two decades.
   “Child/Human Trafficking is one of the fastest growing crimes in the world. Child/ human trafficking is the world’s second largest criminal enterprise, after drugs”. “U.S. State Department”. http://sctnow.org/index.aspx?parentnavigationid=5812
   “The global market of child trafficking at over $12 billion a year with over 1.2 million child victims”. “UNICEF”
   “As many as 2.8 million children run away each year in the US. Within 48 hours of hitting the streets, one-third of these children are lured or recruited into the underground world of prostitution and pornography”. “The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children”
   “The average age of entry for children victimized by the sex trade industry is 12 years.” “U.S. Department of Justice”
   “Approximately 80% of human trafficking victims are women and girls and up to 50% are minors.” “U.S. State Department”
   “The average number of victims for non-incestuous pedophiles who molest girls is 20, for pedophiles who prefer boys 100!” “ The Association For the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA)”
   “300,000 children in the U.S. are at risk every year for commercial sexual exploitation.” “ U.S. Department of Justice”
   “600,000 – 800,000 people are bought and sold across international borders each year; 50% are children, most are female. The majority of these victims are forced into the commercial sex trade.” “U.S. Department of State, 2004, Trafficking in Persons Report, Washington, D.C”.
   “An estimated 14,500 to 17,500 foreign nationals are trafficked into the United States each year. The number of U.S. citizens trafficked within the country is even higher, with an estimated 200,000 American children at risk for trafficking into the sex industry.” “ U.S. Department of Justice Report to Congress from Attorney General John Ashcroft on U.S. Government Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons”
   “Investigators and researchers estimate the average predator in the U.S. can make more than $200,000 a year off one young girl.” “NBC Report by Teri Williams”
   “An average serial child molester may have as many as 400 victims in his lifetime.” “Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Study”
   “Child pornography is one of the fastest growing crimes in the United States right now. Nationally, there has been a 2500% increase in arrests in 10 years.” “ FBI”
   “The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which helps to identify and locate children in pornography photos and videos, says it’s staff reviewed more than 10.5 million images in 2009 alone.”
   “Reports of exploited children grow every year, in 2009, the National Center of Missing and Exploited Children received more than 120,000 reports on its cyber tip line. In 2010, the number grew to over 160,000 with the vast majority being from child pornography.” http://sctnow.org/index.aspx?parentnavigationid=5812
   “Conscience Shocking” Extrinsic Fraud Scheme Eliminates Post Deprivation Due Process Hearings Mandated by NCGS § 7B-506
   It is well established in federal and state law that, although exigent circumstances may allow children in some cases to be removed from their parents without a pre-deprivation hearing in all cases there must be a prompt-post-deprivation hearing.
   NCGS § 7B-506 “Hearing to determine need for continued nonsecure custody” mandates that:
   “(a) No juvenile shall be held under a nonsecure custody order for more than seven calendar days without a hearing on the merits or a hearing to determine the need for continued custody…
   (b) At a hearing to determine the need for continued custody, the court shall receive testimony and shall allow the guardian ad litem, or juvenile, and the juvenile’s parent, guardian, custodian, or caretaker an opportunity to introduce evidence, to be heard in the person’s own behalf, and to examine witnesses. The State shall bear the burden at every stage of the proceedings to provide clear and convincing evidence that the juvenile’s placement in custody is necessary.”
   388. The post-deprivation hearings mandated by NCGS § 7B-506 do not exist in Mecklenburg County. They have been eliminated through the extrinsic fraud scheme set forth below.
   Fraudulent “Juvenile Summons”
   The first step in the Mecklenburg County child trafficking scheme to eliminate NCGS § 7B-506 hearings is to eliminate notice of the hearings.
   The North Carolina Juvenile Code at NCGS § 7B-406 “Issuance of summons” mandates the following:
   (a) “Immediately after a petition has been filed alleging that a juvenile is abused neglected, or dependent, the clerk shall issue a summons to the parent, guardian, custodian, or caretaker requiring them to appear for a hearing at the time and place stated in the summons. A copy of the petition shall be attached to each summons. A summons shall be on a printed form supplied by the Administrative Office of the Courts and shall include:
   (1) Notice of the nature of the proceeding;
   (2) Notice of any right to counsel and information about how to seek the appointment of counsel prior to a hearing;
   (3) Notice that, if the court determines at the hearing that the allegations of the petition are true, the court will conduct a dispositional hearing to consider the needs of the juvenile and enter an order designed to meet those needs and the objectives of the State; and
   (4) Notice that the dispositional order or a subsequent order:
   a. May remove the juvenile from the custody of the parent, guardian, or custodian.
   b. May require that the juvenile receive medical, psychiatric, psychological, or other treatment and that the parent participate in the treatment.
   c. May require the parent to undergo psychiatric, psychological, or other treatment or counseling for the purpose of remedying the behaviors or conditions that are alleged in the petition or that contributed to the removal of the juvenile from the custody of that person.
   d. May order the parent to pay for treatment that is ordered for the juvenile or the parent.”
   The “printed form supplied by the Administrative Office of the Courts” mandated by NCGS § 7B-406 is state form AOC-J-142 entitled “Juvenile Summons and Notice of Hearing.”
   As shown above, the fraudulent “Juvenile Summons” removes all notice of the statutorily mandated NCGS § 7B-506 post-deprivation due process hearing and instead falsely tells parents that the upcoming hearing is only “to appoint counsel” and to “set a date for (a) hearing.”
   Failure to issue a proper summons does not affect subject matter jurisdiction, and respondents waive any objection to personal jurisdiction by simply appearing at the hearing.
   In re K.J.L., 363 N.C. 343 (6/18/09), DSS obtained custody of the child, no summons was ever properly issued because the summons was not signed by a clerk or assistant or deputy clerk and the parents appeared. The parents appealed from a subsequent order terminating their parental rights, arguing that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. (See Attached Exhibits pages ).
   The court of appeals, held that failure to issue a summons deprived the trial court of subject matter jurisdiction in the underlying case and that the order giving DSS custody of the child (and standing to file the termination action) was void.
   The Supreme Court, reversed and remanded the decision overruling a series of decisions of the court of appeals, held that the failure to issue a summons implicates only personal jurisdiction, not subject matter jurisdiction. (See Attached Exhibits pages ).
   The Supreme Court found that… “Even without a summons, a court may properly obtain personal jurisdiction over a party who consents or makes a general appearance, . . .”
   According to the North Carolina Court System “Failure to issue a proper summons does not affect subject matter jurisdiction, and respondents waive any objection to personal jurisdiction by appearing at the hearing”. (See Attached Exhibit Pages).
   After eliminating all notice of the NCGS § 7B-506 hearing, the conspirators move to the next step: the total elimination of the hearings themselves.
   Extrinsic Fraud Eliminates NCGS § 7B-506 Hearings
   Mecklenburg County holds no NCGS § 7B-506 due process hearings as mandated by law. Instead there is a quick “hearing to appoint counsel” and “set a date for (a) hearing.”
   Because the fraudulent “Juvenile Summons” eliminates NCGS § 7B-406 notice and because only conspirators are allowed into the “hearings” parents are totally unaware that: (a) they are being deprived of statutorily mandated NCGS § 7B-506 due process; and (b) their children are being illegally held in violation of NCGS § 7B-506.
   Fake “Court Orders” Claim Parents “Consented” to State Seizure of Their Children
   After denying parents a NCGS § 7B-506 seven day hearing, the conspirators plant into the “file” one of their paper frauds entitled “Initial (7-Day) Order” that falsely claims:
   “An INITIAL (7-DAY) HEARING was held pursuant to NCGS § 7B-506 on _______, _________. The Court finds by CLEAR and CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT:…”
   The “Initial (7-Day) Order” falsely checks off a box stating the child continues to be held because: “The parent consented to the non-secure custody.”
   Parents are not allowed to see the “Initial (7-Dy) Order” and so never discover the fraud. (See Attached Exhibits Pages)
   The “Initial (Seven-Day) Order” alleges to contain additional findings of fact, conclusions of law, and judicial orders based on a hearing that never took place.
   NCGS § 7B-506(e) mandates that after the initial seven day hearing “..a subsequent hearing on continued custody shall be held within seven business days of that hearing…and pending a hearing on the merits, hearings thereafter shall be held at intervals of no more than 30 calendar days.”
   To fraudulently eliminate the NCGS § 7B-506 (e) hearings, the conspirators insert in their “Initial (7-Day) Order” (on a back page in an obscure location) that: “The right to a hearing within seven days to determine the need for continued nonsecure custody will be waived unless it is appropriately asserted.”
   The statutorily mandated burden on the state to have NCGS § 7B-506(e) hearings because they are not aware of the existence of the “Initial (7-Day) Order” or its secret “requirement.”
   422. Extrinsic Fraud Denies Right to Counsel
   Instead of notifying parents of their right to counsel as mandated by NCGS § 7B-406(b)(2), Mecklenburg County secretly “court appoints” attorneys for parents before any hearings take place and without the parents’ knowledge or consent.
   424. The “court appointed” attorneys come from a pool of hand-picked conspirators joined in the Mecklenburg County child trafficking criminal enterprise.
   The court appointed attorneys are joined in perpetrating the NCGS § 7B-506 “seven day hearing” fraud. They prevent parents from discovering and exercising their due process rights and thereby getting their children back at the seven day hearing.
   Conspirator guardian ad litem (“GAL”) attorneys are “court appointed” to the children without parental knowledge or consent and without the parents being found “guilty” of anything.
   The fraud makes the children “clients” of the GAL conspirator attorneys. “Attorney-client privilege” is then invoked by the child traffickers to completely cut the children off from their parents, the family attorney, and everyone else outside the criminal enterprise.
   The North Carolina GAL manual contains form letters notifying parents that children are not allowed to talk to their parent’s attorney “even if the child wants to.”
   A second form letter from the NC GAL manual to the family attorney states: “Further, the Guardian ad Litem and I specifically prohibit…you, or any agents or anyone on behalf of any attorney involved in this case…from having any contact whatsoever with my client or discussing this case with him/her in any manner.”
   The conspirator GAL attorneys thereby isolate and hold the children hostage. No one besides the child traffickers ever again have access to the children.
   Extrinsic Fraud Eliminates Adjudication Hearings
   NCGS § 7B-802 states that: “Conduct of hearing.
   The adjudicatory hearing shall be a judicial process designed to adjudicate the existence or nonexistence of any of the conditions alleged in a petition. In the adjudicatory hearing, the court shall protect the rights of the juvenile and the juvenile’s parent to assure due process of law.”
   The conspirators eliminate adjudication hearings through a scheme called a “Dependency Mediation Agreement.”
   The “Dependency Mediation Agreement” is used against all families, including those whose children are not dependent.
   The conspirators terrorize parents by telling them they must sign the “Dependency Mediation Agreement” if they want to get their children back.
   After it is signed by the parents, the “Dependency Mediation Agreement” is subsequently presented as a “plea bargain” admission of guilt.
   The “plea bargain” eliminates the right to an adjudicatory (evidentiary) hearing and thereby covers up the previous illegal acts used by the conspirators to seize and hold children.
   The “Conscience Shocking” Bottom Line of the Extrinsic Fraud Scheme
   Using the above criminal scheme enables the child traffickers to:
   (a) Eliminate all pre-deprivation hearings with their exparte orders.
   (b) Eliminate all post-deprivation hearings with their fraudulent”Juvenile Summons” and “Initial (7-Day) Order.”
   (c) Eliminate all adjudicatory hearings with their fraudulent “Dependency Mediation Agreement.”
   The net effect of the child trafficking scheme is that children are seized and held in “state” custody indefinitely with NO DUE PROCESS WHATSOEVER AND WITH THE KIDNAPPERS NEVER HAVING TO PRODUCE ANY WITNESSES OR EVIDENCE.
   Mecklenburg County’s Paper Fraud “Nonsecure Custody Order”
   An official state juvenile non-secure custody form is issued by the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts (“AOC”) and is to be used statewide in all 100 counties. The form is AOC-J-150 entitled “Order For Nonsecure Custody.”
   The child traffickers replaced AOC-J-150 with one of their paper frauds entitled “Nonsecure Custody Order.”
   Mecklenburg County’s “Nonsecure Custody Order” appears on its face to list the six criteria for nonsecure custody in NCGS § 7B-503(a)(1-6). However, a closer reading shows that the wording and the criteria of NCGS § 7B-503(a)(3)has been fraudulently changed. The changes (in bold) read:
   “The juvenile is exposed to a substantial risk of physical injury or sexual abuse because the parent, guardian, or custodian has inflicted the injury or abuse; created the conditions causing the injury, abuse, or exposure; failed to provide, or is unable to provide, adequate supervision or protection; or”
   The order has a check box beside each of the six criteria listed.
   The fake nonsecure order fabricates “abuse criteria” that is not in the statute by adding “has inflicted the injury or abuse” and changing “likely to cause” to “causing.”
   The fake inserts two semicolons into the statute. The actual statute has no semicolons in its body.
   The insertion of the semicolons changes the statute from one continuous sentence dealing exclusively with risk o physical injury or sexual abuse nto three separate stand alone clauses.
   The last clause, “failed to provide, or is unable to provide, adequate supervision or protection” becomes a stand alone “neglect” clause.
   The changed “statute” adds a further false neglect indication by changing “injury or abuse” to “injury, abuse, or exposure.”
   The stand alone phrase “failed to provide, or is unable to provide, adequate supervision or protection” creates criteria so vague it allows Mecklenburg County to target and seize any child for “neglect” any time, for any reason, or for no reason.
   Mecklenburg County uses the fraud to seize children on a vast array of fabricated and fraudulent “neglect” criteria such as poverty, home schooling, male “control” of the family (also called “domestic violence”), failure to “cooperate” with DSS, etc.
   The inclusion of fabricated “abuse” and “neglect” criteria into the same “removal statute” also allows Mecklenburg County to seize children on vague allegations of neglect, manufacture fraudulent post-siezure “evidence” of abuse, and retroactively claim that abuse was the original allegation.
   Most of children seized from their parents by the Mecklenburg County DSS are seized with a fake “statute” that does not exist.
   Highest Levels of North Carolina Government Joined in the Enterprise
   The fake, fraudulent Mecklenburg County “Juvenile Court documents” are regularly sent up on appeal and reviewed by the North Carolina Court of Appeals and the North Carolina Supreme Court.
   The North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts (“AOC”) is the entity that issues the official AOC court documents. The AOC also over sees and regularly reviews the Mecklenburg County Juvenile Court and its fake, fraudulent documents.

   Reply
10. lolamartin says:

    September 10, 2011 at 7:17 pm

    Caseworkers and social workers are sometimes found guilty of fraud. They withhold evidence. They fabricate evidence and they seek to terminate parental rights. However, when charges are made against them, the charges are ignored. Separation of families is growing as a business because local governments have grown accustomed to having taxpayer dollars to balance their ever-expanding budgets.
    Child Protective Service and Juvenile Court can always hide behind a confidentiality clause in order to protect their decisions and keep the funds flowing. There are no open records, no court watches are allowed, no jury and Child Protective Service and Juvenile Court is being paid to take children.
    There are state employees, lawyers, court investigators, court personnel, and judges. There are psychologists, and psychiatrists, counselors, caseworkers, therapists, foster parents, adoptive parents, and on and on. All are looking to the children in state custody to provide job security.
    Social workers are the glue that holds “the system” together that funds the court, the child’s attorney, and the multiple other jobs including North Carolina Division of Social Service’s Attorney.
    The Adoption and the Safe Families Act, set in motion by President Bill Clinton, offered cash “bonuses” to the states for every child they adopted out of foster care. In order to receive the “adoption incentive bonuses” local child protective services need more children.
    They must have merchandise (children) that sell and you must have plenty of them so the buyer can choose.
    Some counties are known to give cash bonuses for each child adopted and an additional cash bonus for “special needs” children.
    Everyone involved in receiving the federal monies work hard to keep the federal dollars flowing.
    There is also double dipping. The funding continues as long as the child is out of the home. When a child in foster care is placed with a new family then “adoption bonus funds” are available.
    When a child is placed in a mental health facility and is on numerous drugs per day, like most of the children are, more funds are involved.
    There are no financial resources, no financial gains what so ever and therefore no real drive to unite a family and help keep them together.
    There is no incentive for social workers to return children to their parents quickly after taking them.
    No one in protective services will ask to end it, because they are all in the system together and a system with no leader and no clear policies will always fail the children.
    There is extreme waste in government spending that is forced upon the same tax payer who had their children unlawfully and unconstitutionally taken.
    The “Policy Manuel”, and NCGS Chapter § 7B is considered “the last word” for Child Protective Service and Juvenile Court. It is too long, too confusing, poorly written and does not take the law into consideration.
    If the lives of children were improved by removing them from their homes, there might be a greater need for protective services, but today most of the children taken are not safer, but placed in harm’s way.
    Many fostered and adopted Children, have been raped and impregnated in foster care and heads of Child Protective Service have been arrested because of child molestation. Parents are told if they want to see their children or grandchildren, they must divorce their spouse. Many, who are under privileged, feeling they have no option, will divorce and then just continue to live together because parents will do anything to get their children home with them.
    Fathers, who are the non-custodial parents are oftentimes treated as criminals without access to their own children and have child support payments strangling the very life out of them.
    Tax dollars are being used to keep this gigantic system afloat, yet the victims, parents, grandparents and especially the children, are charged for the system’s services.
    Grandparents from all over the State of North Carolina are trying to get custody of their grandchildren.
    NC Social Services claims relatives are contacted, but there are cases that prove differently.
    Grandparents who lose their grandchildren to strangers have lost their own flesh and blood. The children lose their family heritage and grandparents, and parents too, lose all connections to their heirs.
    Deliberate and Systematic Destruction, of Patriarchal Christians and Establishment of the New State Religion of Feminism
    The North Carolina child trafficking scheme relies on a pervasive extrinsic fraud scheme that operates under the generic term “domestic violence.”
    Alleged “domestic violence” is one of the fraudulent “neglect criteria” used to steal children in the North Carolina child stealing scheme.
    The term “domestic violence” is a code phrase for a radical lesbian/feminist agenda being used as a tool in western society to destroy the traditional family.
    The stated goal of radical feminism is to destroy “the patriarchy” (feminist term for male “control”) by taking children away from parents and raising them in state custody.
    The United States Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS”) enforces the feminist agenda, as shown by the following statement of Dr. Mary Jo Bane, former Assistant Secretary for Children and Families, United States Department of Health and Human Services: “In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them.”
    Article II of the International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of genocide states:
    In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such:
    (a) Killing members of the group;
    (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
    (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
    (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
    (e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
    North Carolina enforces USDHHS radical feminist agenda by using “domestic violence” allegations within its CPS system to seize children from families that practice Christian “patriarchal” religious beliefs.
    There is no statutory authority in North Carolina for seizing children for “domestic violence.”
    Furthermore, using “domestic violence” allegations to seize children is specifically prohibited by the North Carolina DHHS Manual’s “Screen Out Tool” which states that domestic violence is “not a CPS issue.”
    The USDHHS and North Carolina’s CPS and “domestic violence” programs use the radical lesbian/feminist definition of “domestic violence”:
    “Battering is an intentional act used to gain power and control over another person.” (From the official Charlotte-Mecklenburg website)
    “Domestic violence is really all about power and control, I think even more than hitting.” (Karen Thompson of Mecklenburg County’s United Family Services).
    “We believe that patriarchy and gender inequality play a central role at both the personal and societal level in creating and maintaining domestic violence…We believe it is vital to understand and eliminate all forms of oppression including sexism, racism and homophobia.” (N.C. Coalition Against Domestic Violence).
    There is no North Carolina statute that authorizes the seizure of children for “patriarchy” and “gender inequality” or because of sexism, racism and homophobia.
    Seized Christian children and their parents are forced into state “re-education” brain washing programs to destroy the children’s belief system and replace it with the official state belief system of feminism.
    Mecklenburg County’s feminist state re-education programs are the “Mecklenburg County Women’s Commission” and “NOVA.”
    Women’s Commission and NOVA are official government agencies/programs that receive millions of dollars in county and DSS funding and have offices at the DSS and in the Mecklenburg County Courthouse.
    Women’s Commission and NOVA work in formal partnership with a Mecklenburg County non-profit agency called United Family Services.
    The agencies have shared space for staff and services, shared strategic planning, and shared staff training.
    Marie White of the Women’s Commission and Karen Parker Thompson of United Family Services are also on the Board of Directors of a group called the North Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence (“NCCADV”).
    The NCCADV is linked to the Mecklenburg County website.
    The NCCADV website states “The mission of NCCADV is to create social change through the elimination of the institutional, cultural, and individual oppressions that contribute to domestic violence.”
    The NCCADV is the state arm of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (“NCADV”).
    NCADV goals include: “organize for collective power…” and “work for major societal changes.”
    The group says domestic violence results from “societal abuse of power.”
    The NCCADV has a “Lesbian/Bisexual Women’s Caucus” links to a radical feminist site entitled “North Carolina Women United” (“NCWU”).
    The NCWU site urges visitors to subscribe to its email list to “connect to the feminist movement in North Carolina.”
    The NCWU site states that “Batterer intervention programs” are designed to “help him/her adopt a different world view…”
    NCWU membership includes radical feminist and homosexual groups such as the National Abortion Rights Action League, the NC Chapter of the National Organization for Women (“NOW”), Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina, and Equality NC.
    Equality NC is a self-proclaimed “statewide advocacy organization that works to secure equal rights and justice for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender North Carolinians.”
    NCWU links to the radical feminist NOW website which in turn links to “Hothead Paisan Homosexual Lesbian Terrorist”; “Club for Radical Feminists”; and “Young Radical Wimmin”.
    NCCADV states that it “…coordinates public policy related to battered women..Staff and volunteers also sit on a variety of state committees…These include: Victim’s Services Committee of the Governor’s Crime Commission, the N.C. Public Health Alliance on Domestic Violence, N.C. Women United, the Covenant for North Carolina’s Children, and the Governor’s Commission on Domestic Violence.”
    NCCADV states that it “…works closely with the Council for Women, Department of Social Services, Legal Services of N.C….and the North Carolina Medical Society…”
    The Charlotte-Mecklenburg website lists as “characteristics of batterers”: “He is jealous, He blames others for his faults, He blames circumstances for his problems, He demonstrates unpredictable behavior, He always asks for another chance, He says he’ll change, He plays on his partner’s guilt/love, He is tenacious, He is closed minded, His way is the only way, He will seem charming to outsiders.”
    The above definitions of “domestic violence” include centuries-old elements of the common human experience. (Even “charm” becomes “domestic violence”). The definition makes all men “guilty” and allows CPS to arbitrarily seize any child.
    The conspirators attack and destroy families using a malicious scheme entitled NOVA.
    The Charlotte-Mecklenburg website states “Nova is a yearlong psycho-educational program based on the widely acknowledged Duluth and ADA Curriculums.
    Mecklenburg County’s Marie White has stated: “The NOVA program, first of all to get into the NOVA program almost all of the participants are court ordered or sent though Youth and Family Services…The groups run, the perpetrators are in for a year.”
    The time required to complete the NOVA program coincides exactly with that statutorily mandated by federal law before the state can “terminate parental rights” and “adopt out” children.
    Simply ordering a father into the NOVA program constitutes an automatic “death sentence” for his family.
    The “Duluth Curriculum” used by Mecklenburg County’s NOVA program is based on an assessment tool called “The Power and Control Wheel.” Under the wheel’s section entitled “Using Male Privilege” are the following “domestic violence” definitions:
    (a) Treating her like a servant
    (b) Making all the big decisions
    (c) Acting like the “King of the Castle”
    (d) Being the one to decide men’s and women’s roles
    The Charlotte-Mecklenburg website lists “future predictors” of “domestic violence” as:
    “Does he have strong traditional ideas about what a man should be and what a woman should be? Does he think a woman should stay at home, take care of her husband, and follow his wishes and orders? In other words, does he act like women are second class citizens?
    The Charlotte-Mecklenburg website declares that one of the “characteristics of batterers” is “He believes in rigid gender roles.”
    The Charlotte-Mecklenburg website states that domestic violence consists of “power and control, using male privilege, treating her like a servant, making all the “big” decisions, quoting misinterpreted Bible passages, and acting like the “King of the castle.”
    Mecklenburg County has published a widely distributed full color brochure stating that traditional Christian marriage is a “weapon used in domestic violence.”
    Mecklenburg County’s Marie White has stated that for a man to complete the NOVA program he must admit his (patriarchal) belief systems are “abusive” and give them up:
    “In order to get in the group, first of all, the perpetrators have to take some accountability for their actions, they have to admit to being abusive. Each group is made up of a male and a female facilitator, it is very difficult because they address their belief systems, and they hold them accountable for their actions and their belief system.”
    “It is part of their belief system. That’s why most batterer’s groups is, unless they are there court ordered or they’re there with another authority to keep them there, they leave because once you start challenging that belief system, who wants to sit through a year of that?
    It is impossible for patriarchal Christians to complete the NOVA program without renouncing their Christian beliefs and embracing the feminist belief system.
    Christian mothers who voluntarily submit to their husbands as part of their Biblical religious beliefs are forced by the state to give up their beliefs and embrace feminism.
    The county’s radical feminists force Christian mothers to renounce their religious beliefs (under threat of losing their children forever) even if the county is fully aware there was no domestic violence.
    Dixie Lowery, a social worker who does “domestic violence assessments” for the Mecklenburg County, testified under oath in 2003 that: Many times women will come into us saying that they are not a victim because they do not understand what the dynamics are with domestic violence. Many of them come in and they’ve never been physically assaulted. So they believe they’re not a victim. But they have all the other elements or many of the elements within the power and control wheel that we would identify them as a victim.
    Patriarchal Christian beliefs are proscribed, and the Feminist Philosophy of Religion agenda is mandated, statewide.
    The N.C. administrative code (01 NCAC 17.0707) mandates that: “All abuser treatment programs shall include identification of the personal, societal, and cultural values and beliefs that legitimize and sustain violence and oppression.”
    Mecklenburg County and the State of North Carolina have established radical feminism as the de facto official state religion (belief system).
    The religion of feminism is enforced by state agents armed with guns.
    Fathers who resist the state religion of feminism are jailed, beaten, or killed by law enforcement.
    Children of patriarchal Christians are seized by radical DSS feminists, judges, and GALs.
    The children are held hostage by the state indefinitely until the parents comply and renounce their God and their religion.
    If parents refuse to renounce their religious beliefs and embrace the feminist religion, the state “terminates parental rights” and “adopts out” the children.

    Reply
11. lolamartin says:

    September 10, 2011 at 8:13 pm

    Federal Laws are used to orchestrate Organized Crime by the North Carolina Court System.
    On June 14, 1988 Representative Robert W. Kastenmeier introduced a bill entitled the “Judicial Improvements and Access to Justice Act”, November 19, 1988 it became Public Law No: 100-702, title IX, Sec. 901(a).
    105th Congress amended title 28 U.S.C. (&) 651-658, United States Code, with respect to the use of alternative dispute resolution processes in United States district courts, and for other purposes and enacted by the Senate and U.S. House of Representatives Office of the Law Revision Counsel, October 30, 1998 Public Law 105–315.
    This Act is cited as the ‘‘Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998’’.
    The October 30, 1998, Public Law 105–315, ‘‘Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998’’ is used by the defendant members of the North Carolina Court System to give credibility to a limited few PhD’s along with a number of key figures who are used in civil, criminal and juvenile court controversy.
    The ‘‘Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998’’ is used to dedicate to the courts the concept that children who enter the court system through juvenile, divorce or custody cases are deserving of their own legal advocates.
    The courts use a network of lawyers, guardians and mental health professionals all of whom charge very high fees and produce prejudicial outcomes and are used in civil, criminal and juvenile court controversy.
    Title IV of the social security act, the ‘‘Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998’’ and the “Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act” (“CAPTA”) are the acts which have created the downfall of the American Family as we used to know it.
    These Acts are being used by all defendants in this complaint to rob the family of their children, all their earnings, homes, businesses and all the money in the bank. The defendants conspire together until there is nothing left for them to take from litigants.
    NC DSS and state of North Carolina Judges do not take children from parents who are abusing their children.
    In order to keep receiving money from the Federal Government the states must show that there is a need for funding. Statistical records are used. The higher the amount of children being seriously injured or killed by biological parents or parents who are supposed to be biological parents the more secure the states is for receiving federal funds for protecting children and removing them from their homes.
    NC DSS does not take children who are actually being abused. Instead they take children who are not abused and report that these children are abused.
    Every child that ends up dead, seriously injured or used for pornography at the hands of an abusive parent the result ends up on the statistical record regardless of how the child was in the custody of that parent, therefore the courts give sole custody to the abusive parent or someone documented to be the parent whether they are the biological parent or not, in hopes that some day that child will become a statistic of dead or seriously injured children at the hands of the abusive parent, which increases the need for continuous funding from the Federal Government.
    Title IV of the social security act, the ‘‘Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998’’ and the “Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act” (“CAPTA”) are three acts used by North Carolina to obtain huge amounts of federal money, which they want to make sure they continue to receive.
    If a parent learns how to represent them self in court then the judge writes up a Gate Keeping Order forbidding them from writing up motions or attempting to represent them self in court, has them falsely arrested, denies them all visitation with their child indefinitely and has the network of lawyers, guardians and mental health professionals give creditability to the Judge’s order.
    Brett Loftis and the Council for Children’s Rights
    The Council for Children’s Rights is a United Way criminal front set up by the Mecklenburg County Child Trafficking and Parental Kidnapping enterprise. It is the result of a merger between the Council for Children and the Children’s Law Center.
    The Director of the Council for Children’s Rights is Brett Loftis.
    Loftis and Council for Children’s Rights attorneys are officially attached to juvenile and child custody cases by the Mecklenburg County Courts and function as state actors. Loftis and the Council for Children’s Rights are fully joined in the Mecklenburg County Child Trafficking and Parental Abduction Scheme and was a participant in all of the extrinsic fraud heretofore set forth, including but not limited to using the aforementioned facially fraudulent “Juvenile Summons” and other fake court documents to kidnap children.
    Loftis and the Council for Children’s rights need the bodies of little children n order to funnel money to their organization.
    They obtain their child victims through the DSS and North Carolina Court System child trafficking and parental child kidnapping operation.
    Juvenile and District Court Judges Meet Secretly with DSS, Guardian Ad Litems, and Non-Profits to Plot Against Parents.
    “The Children’s Alliance” is another secret back room conspiratorial group in which the Defendant Counties Juvenile and District Court Judges Meet Secretly with the DSS, and the Guardian ad Litems to plot and conspire against parents.
    Every nonprofit “partner” in the Children’s Alliance makes money from the state seizure of children.
    The Children’s Alliance is also a “partner” in the “United Agenda for Children.”
    Conspiracy in Mecklenburg Juvenile Justice and Prevention Counsel Meetings
    A meeting was held on February 25, 2002 under the auspices of the Mecklenburg County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council.
    The minutes of that meeting show Brett Loftis and other non-profits asking the juvenile court judges what they can do to force parents to enter into their programs (compelled contracts). The judges show the non-profits how to file motions to put the parents in fail for not signing the contracts.
    Loftis, Trosch, and Portwood, and Boyd Secret “Collaboration”
    On August 17th through 20th of 2010 the American Psychological Association held its annual convention in San Francisco, California.
    Brett Loftis, Mecklenburg County Juvenile Judge Louis Trosch, Sharon Portwood, of the UNCC Institute for Social Capital, and UNCC Social Work Professor Suzanne Boyd traveled together to San Francisco and gave a presentation for the convention entitled Effective Coordination of Community-Based Strategies for Serving Children and Youth.
    Loftis collects millions of dollars for his non-profit “Council for Children’s Rights” by falsely telling donors and the public that he and his group are “independent watch dogs” of the Mecklenburg Court System and the DSS.
    The “UNCC Institute for Social Capital” is one of the “partners” in the “United Agenda for Children” and “The Children’s Alliance.”
    In furtherance of the child trafficking and parental kidnapping conspiracy, the Institute for Social Capital is currently building a massive secret database on every child in Mecklenburg County.
    On the Institute’s Board are: Director Sharon Portwood, United Way of Central Carolinas CEO Jane McIntire, Mecklenburg County Juvenile Court Judge Louis Trosch, Council for Children’s Rights Board member William Underwood, Levine Childen’s Hospital chief medical officer Leonard Feld, Major Diego Anselmo of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, Charlotte-Mecklenburg School Superintendant Peter Gorman, Carolinas Medical Center Senior Vice President James McDeavitt, Mecklenburg County General Manager for Health and Safety Janice Allen Jackson, and Jan Thompson, Director of Inmate Services for the Mecklenburg County Sheriff’s Office.
    Judge Louis Trosch is a member of the National Council of Juvenile and Family court Judges and travels around the country teaching municipalities how to have “collaborative partnerships” between juvenile judges, DSS, Guardian ad litems, non-profits, and others.
    America’s Promise Alliance and the City of Charlotte
    Americas Promise Alliance (“APA”) was allegedly started by General Colin Powell, a Council on Foreign Relations.
    APA is the largest conspiratorial child trafficking and parental kidnapping non-profit in the country outside of United Way, with 420 allied organizations, a large percentage of them extremely powerful and influential.
    The stated purpose of APA is to further the “collaboration” between governments, non-profits, corporations, and “the faith community” to “ensure” that all children “receive the five promises” (code language for the state conspiracy to take over child rearing from birth).
    The City of Charlotte has “adopted” the APA conspiracy and was named one of the top one hundred cities in America for implementing the APA agenda.
    Anthony Foxx, recently elected Mayor of Charlotte, was backed in his campaign by international banker and Trilateral Commission member Hugh McColl. A picture of McColl with his arm around Foxx was prominent on the Foxx website.
    When asked what his number one priority was Foxx stated it was for all children to “start school ready to learn”(universal code language for child traffickers across the United States, meaning the state will constructively seize all children from their parents at birth).

    Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998, also known as “ADR”

    The existence of a network of lawyers, guardians, and mental health professionals using the ‘‘Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998’’ Defendant conspirators produce prejudicial outcomes in juvenile, divorce and child custody cases in the counties of North Carolina.
    A number of the key figures in current Mecklenburg family court system controversies were affiliated in the 1990s with the organization called the Children’s Law Center, which was dedicated to the concept that children who enter the court system through juvenile, divorce or custody cases are deserving of their own legal advocates.
    The founders of this organization, which is now known as the Defendant “Council for Children’s Rights”, include William G. Jones, who eventually became Chief Judge of Mecklenburg County District Court, and Katharine S. Holiday, now a leading family law practitioner at the James, McElroy & Diehl (JMD) law firm of Charlotte.
    In 2000-2001, Mecklenburg County Chief District Court Judge William G. Jones, and Katharine S. Holiday became embroiled in controversy after it was disclosed that the two were co-owners of a weekend retreat in rural Yancey County near Mount Mitchell.
    The arrangement drew notice because Katharine S. Holiday argued divorce cases before Mecklenburg County Chief District Court Judge William G. Jones, while her husband, psychologist Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, and his business associates appeared before Mecklenburg County Chief District Court Judge William G. Jones, as expert witnesses and in other capacities.
    In March 2001, a local psychologist named William M. Tyson, Ph.D. wrote a letter to Mecklenburg County’s district court judges seeking to raise concerns about the growing influence of psychologist Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D. and his associates over the courts. William M. Tyson, Ph.D. also spoke with the Charlotte Observer in March 2001, and said: “People are getting hurt, and we just can’t afford to sit back and be nice anymore.” Custody Reports Provoke Dispute,” Charlotte Observer, March 17, 2001.
    Mecklenburg judges “are giving way too much credibility to a limited few PhD’s in the community,” leading Charlotte lawyer Tom Bush told the paper.
    Chief District Court Judge William G. Jones had made a preliminary custody decision in 2001 in favor of David K. Lange, a client of Katharine S. Holiday and her partner William K. Diehl.
    On Oct. 4, 2001, Judge William G. Jones was removed from the Lange case by a judge based in another county on the grounds that the jurist’s relationship with Katharine S. Holiday “would cause a reasonable person to question whether the Honorable William G. Jones could rule impartially.”
    Concurrent with these events, at least three other litigants filed complaints with the state judicial Standards Commission alleging conflicts of interest by Chief District Court Judge William G. Jones in his relationship with Katharine S. Holiday, Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D., and his associate psychologist, Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D.
    Psychologist, Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D., also testified for Ray Carruth, the Carolina Panther who arranged the murder of his pregnant wife… about Ray Carruth’s ability to contribute to society.
    Dr. Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D., in 1998 determined that Karen Myers, a Charlotte resident falsely accused her husband of sexually abusing their children (Forensic Child Custody Evaluation on July 30, 1998) causing Karen Myers, to lose custody of her children.
    Karen Myers was not aware at that time that Dr. Jonathan W. Gould Ph.D., had an informal professional relationship with psychologist Hugh D. Kirkpatrick Ph.D., and thus indirectly also had a relationship to Mecklenburg Chief District Court Judge William G. Jones and to her husband’s lawyer, Katharine S. Holiday.
    Dr. Jonathan W. Gould cites a May 9, 1997 personal communication with psychologist Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D. in his 1998 book, “Conducting Scientifically Crafted Child Custody Evaluations”. He also offers “special thanks” to psychologist Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D. and Tobin in his April 1999 follow-up.
    Dr. Jonathan W. Gould and psychologist Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D. became occasional collaborators.
    Sometime in 1999 or 2000, Dr. Jonathan W. Gould joined Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D., at their home in Yancey County to revise the North Carolina Child Custody Guidelines.
    Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D. and psychologist Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D. coauthored a paper in 2001.
    Katharine S. Holiday, leading family law practitioner at the James, McElroy & Diehl (JMD) law firm of Charlotte and married to Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D. submitted an affidavit provided by Dr. Jonathan W. Gould in May 1999 in another custody case.
    Chief District Court Judge William G. Jones recused himself from the Karen Myers case but his rulings were allowed to stand. (Karen Myers letter to Creative Loafing, November 6, 2002 issue).
    Significantly, Karen Myers claimed in 2002 that the Children’s Law Center which Chief District Court Judge William G. Jones and Katharine S. Holiday, practitioner at James, McElroy & Diehl (JMD) law firm founded, had failed to properly investigate “a very disturbing notarized affidavit” in her own custody case that was potentially harmful to Katharine S. Holiday’s client.
    According to a letter Karen Myers later wrote in 2002 to the newspaper Creative Loafing, “Under the direction of former lead counsel for the Children’s Law Center, Defendant Rebecca Thorne Tin, Defendant Ronald Chapman ‘graciously’ offered to conduct an investigation into the facts of this affidavit – an investigation never took place! (Karen Myers letter to Creative Loafing, November 6, 2002 issue.)
    Karen Myers received backing from her psychologist William M. Tyson Ph.D., who claimed in a 2002 letter that a candidate for District court at the time, [Defendant Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin] then a staff attorney at Children’s Law Center, “was a staff attorney assigned to Karen Myers’ case.
    Defendant Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin, a staff attorney at Children’s Law Center, was elected and still serves as a District Court Judge on the Mecklenburg County District Court.
    In October 2001, Chief District Court Judge William G. Jones retired at the age of 56, two years before the end of his elected term.
    State judicial ethics officials and the State Bureau of Investigation then dropped their investigations of the judge.
    The closing of the judicial ethics investigation was “predicated on his retirement from the bench,” the Judicial Standards Commission Executive Secretary wrote in 2002.
    North Carolina Family Court Enterprise has used the ‘‘Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998’’ along with Defendant conspirators Council for Children’s Rights, Court Appointed Guardian Ad Litems and the network of mental health professionals to fraudulently and illegally seize children from one of their parents and give sole custody to the other parent.
    Litigants continue to complain about the courthouse roles of the Defendant conspirators Council for Children’s Rights, Court Appointed Guardian Ad Litems, Family Court Coordinators and the network of mental health professionals.
    Often the complaints involve the Defendant James, McElroy & Diehl law firm (JMD) – Katharine S. Holiday’s and Diehl’s firm, which frequently uses Defendant psychologist Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D., Katharine S. Holiday’s husband, as a consultant or expert witness, and Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin.
    Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin in 2002 was elected to District Court in Mecklenburg County with the endorsement of Chief District Court Judge William G. Jones and campaign contributions from partners at James, McElroy & Diehl, including contributions from William K. Diehl and contributions from Katharine S. Holiday.
    Psychologist Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D., and four fellow mental health experts have been affiliated through Child Custody Consultants, a Charlotte-based group that described itself as “a consulting consortium.”
    Its website stated that its members could provide expert testimony and trial consultation in family law matters, particularly custody and visitation.
    The consortium members turn up together in custody cases in Charlotte and nationally.
    A consortium advertisement from 2008 listed as members Jonathan W. Gould, David A. Martindale, James R. Flens, and Dr. Wiliam G. Austin.
    Dr. Jonathan Gould’s current CV states that he left the Consortium in 2008. The group listed its headquarters as an office in Charlotte that is currently used by Dr. Jonathan W. Gould Ph. D. One consortium member serves as a trial consultant and another serves as an expert witness.
    North Carolina Seizes Children Statewide From Parents With No Due Process Hearings Mandated by NCGS § 50 11.2 and NCGS § 50 13.1. (Action or proceeding for custody of minor child) using the ‘‘Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998’’ incorporated into the Local Rules For Domestic Cases
    Using the “Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998’’ North Carolina seizes children statewide from parents with no due process hearings.
    In a three-week-long custody trial involving a wealthy Charlotte couple Amy Grissom and David Cohen in 2009, Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D., served as Amy Grissom’s therapist while James, McElroy & Diehl lawyers hired James R. Flens and Dr. Wiliam G. Austin to serve as both trial consultants and as expert witnesses.
    The father in that case, David Cohen, has complained in court filings that, William G. Austin Ph.D. acted as an expert witness in the case without disclosing to the court his consulting work for the James, McElroy & Diehl lawyers representing his ex-wife Amy Grissom.
    At the same time William G. Austin Ph.D., was brought in by James, McElroy & Diehl to act as “tutor, trial strategist, and co-advocate,” the August 2010 court filing asserts, William G. Austin, Ph.D. also presented himself as “a purportedly ethical, objective, and fair forensic witness.”
    Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin in a 2009, using the “Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998’’ made a ruling, awarding sole permanent custody of the couple’s children to Amy S. Grissom, adopting the views of James R. Flens, Psy.D. and William G. Austin, Ph.D., over the independent evaluation and recommendation of the psychologist appointed earlier by Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin.
    A Motion was entered by David I. Cohen, defendant in the case of (Amy S. Grissom v. David I. Cohen) to strike expert William G. Austin, Ph.D. and exclude testimony of expert Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D., with article attached of: Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D., “Emerging Principles Regarding Role Differences Between a Testifying Expert and a Non-Testifying Trial Consultant”
    In a 2008 case in California, a lawyer sought to have Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D., removed as a trial consultant after she learned that he and David Martindale, Ph.D., whom Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D., had recruited to be an expert witness in the case, attended confidential” team meetings” with opposing counsel.
    In another episode during the (Amy S. Grissom v. David I. Cohen) custody case, Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin upheld a request from William Diehl to bar David Cohen from using William Michael Tyson, Ph.D. as his psychologist based on the “history of personal animosity” between William Michael Tyson Ph.D. and Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D.
    Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D. served in that case as the personal psychologist for Amy Grissom.
    “William Michael Tyson Ph.D. alleged that Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D. was ‘colluding’ with various family court judges in child custody cases,” noted Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin in an August 24, 2009 letter released to a lawyer for the Foundation under the Public Record Act.
    Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin specifically cited the Karen Myers custody case as a basis for rejecting William Michael Tyson, Ph.D., as a psychologist for David Cohen.
    “Dr. Tyson is not the right fit for this case,” Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin stated. In particular, she noted that his “charges of corruption” had “eventually extended to include the Children’s Law Center “CLC” (now Council for Children’s Rights) at a time when I was serving as a custody attorney there.”
    Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin went on to explain that “CLC was involved in a high conflict custody case, Myers v. Perry, where William Michael Tyson, Ph.D. was the mother’s therapist.
    “My counterpart at CLC was assigned to this case for custody adjudication, so I did not have direct involvement in the proceedings that led to the ultimate custody decision,” wrote Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin.
    Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin’s description of her role is somewhat at odds with letters to Creative Loafing by Karen Myers and her therapist William Michael Tyson, Ph.D., in 2002.
    These letters refer to Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin’s role in Myer’s case and an investigation that was to have been conducted, but which had never been done. (Karen Myers letter to Creative Loafing November 6, 2004).
    The fact that Karen Myers and William Michael Tyson, Ph.D., publicly named Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin as a participant in this controversy gives considerable evidence of conspiracy in Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin to exclude William Michael Tyson, Ph.D., from the Grissom case.
    Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin’s episode illustrates how the enterprise of intertwined relationships in Family Court has used fraudulent orders void of all jurisdiction to fraudulently and illegally seize thousands of children from one parent over the other parent in family court custody cases and depriving one parent of their parental rights.
    James, McElroy & Diehl rely on Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D., in some of their biggest family law cases – and Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D., is married to JMD partner Katie Holliday, yet, William K. Diehl has also described Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D., as independent of the firm.
    North Carolina District Courts Network of Psychologists and Court Appointed Guardian Ad Litems Circumvents the Bill of Rights
    Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D., has also had a role in the custody case in Mecklenburg domestic court, between Lisa Pennington and Marco Peters.
    A lawyer for James, McElroy & Diehl obtained a confidential report from Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D., by Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D., in Lisa Pennington’s sister’s divorce case and submitted it to Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin.
    The report of Jonathan W. Gould, Ph.D., corrupted the ruling of Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin in the case of Lisa Pennington and Marco Peters which awarded sole custody of the couple’s children to Marco Peters, depriving Lisa Pennington of all parental rights to her sons, with no Due Process and no Parental Rights hearings.
    Defendant District Court Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin ruled that the report was not admissible, yet the circumstances of the sister’s case were noted in Judge Rebecca Thorne Tin’s findings against Lisa Pennington.
    In a 2004 case, William K. Diehl of the Law Firm “James, McElroy & Diehl” was appointed guardian for a wealthy elderly Massachusetts woman whose son moved her to Charlotte and sought power of attorney over her $35 million estate.
    Betty G. Lewis’ attorneys unsuccessfully objected to William K. Diehl, of the Law Firm “James, McElroy & Diehl” appointment as guardian ad litem as well as his commissioning of two competency evaluations without their knowledge.
    William K. Diehl, asserted in a December 16, 2004 letter to lawyers for Betty G. Lewis that Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D. and a psychiatrist he hired for the evaluations were “two of the best professionals in psychology and psychiatry in this community. “They are fiercely independent and very careful.” (Bill Diehl letter re Betty Lewis in court filings, December 16, 2004.)
    At the conclusion of the Betty G. Lewis case, William K. Diehl, Attorney at Law, remained guardian for Betty G. Lewis and her son gained control of her estate.
    In 2006, William K. Diehl and other James, McElroy & Diehl lawyers, including Katharine S. Holiday, contributed more than $11,000 to the judicial campaign of the hearing officer, Selina Brooks, who at the time was running for Mecklenburg District Court Judge.
    Mecklenburg’s Guardianship System Uses Custody Proceedings in Divorce and Custody Disputes to facilitate Kidnapping.
    Mecklenburg County Family Court holds no due process hearings as mandated by law.
    Instead there is a quick appointment and assignment of “Guardian Ad Litems”, Family Court Child Coordinators and Psychologists then “set a date for a hearing void of all Due Process.”
    The court appointed attorneys are joined in perpetrating the Family Court Child Custody Fraud, which extorts money and kidnaps children from parents involved in Custody proceedings in divorce and custody disputes.
    The court appointed attorneys prevent parents from having and exercising their due process rights and thereby getting their children back after the court order that removed them with or without a hearing and with or without their consent.
    Conspirator guardian ad litem (“GAL”) attorneys are “court appointed” to the children with or without parental consent and without the parents being found “guilty” of anything.
    On its own initiative, the State of North Carolina has greatly expanded the state of North Carolina’s system of guardianship and advocacy for children.
    While the state allows District Court Judges to appoint volunteer guardians for abused and neglected children brought into Juvenile Court System by the Department of Social Services, Judges are also allowed to appoint the same volunteer guardians in divorce and custody disputes using the ‘‘Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998’’ and authorizing such appointments.
    The North Carolina Court System Web Site states that “…Since 1983, the North Carolina Guardian ad Litem (GAL) program has served the best interests of thousands of children. Many were able to return home, some now live with other family members, still others have been adopted. What we try to ensure is that all of the children we represent remain safe, and that their homes are permanent. In the past fiscal year, 4,919 trained volunteers served 15,373 children. These children were in court because a petition had been filed stating they were abused or neglected. The number of volunteers advocating for children is greater than the preceding year, and a record number of hearings were scheduled – 43,988”.
    The “court appointed” attorneys come from the pool of hand-picked conspirators joined in the North Carolina child abduction and parental kidnapping criminal enterprise.
    Guardians serve dual roles as advocates for their “clients” – children, the elderly and individuals with a disability.
    Guardians Ad Litem investigate for the judges who appoint them without any adherence to NCGS § 7B 600 WHICH IS ALREADY VOID OF ALL DUE PROCESS. (Appointment of guardian).
    The guardian may also consent to any necessary remedial, psychological, medical, or surgical treatment for the juvenile. The authority of the guardian shall continue until the guardianship is terminated by court order, until the juvenile is emancipated pursuant to Article 35 of Subchapter IV of this Chapter, or until the juvenile reaches the age of majority.
    North Carolina Courts uses the same system for children IN JUVENILE COURT AND FAMILY COURT under NCGS § 7B 600 (Appointment of guardian).
    This system approves for the appointment of GALs in what the judge refers to as “high-conflict” divorce cases, which really means where the conspirators know they will make the most money.
    The Court Appointed Guardian Ad Litems are supplied by the same private-run Council for Children’s Rights.
    Brett Loftis and the Council for Children’s Rights are fully joined in the Mecklenburg County Parental Child Kidnapping Scheme in Mecklenburg District Family Courts and are participants in all of the extrinsic fraud heretofore set forth, including but not limited to using the aforementioned facially fraudulent court documents and agents to kidnap children from one parent and give them to the other parent involved in Divorce and Custody Disputes, whiles extorting money from the parents.
    Local Mecklenburg court rules specifically provide for the Council for Children’s Rights to train and assign custody advocates from its staff, pairing them with attorneys from their organization or appointed from a list of lawyers maintained by judges.
    “This team acts as investigators and facilitators of services in an attempt to resolve conflicts outside of the courtroom and to promote effective co-parenting,” the local rules state. “Custody advocates may testify at trial.”
    When the court appoints a guardian ad litem, parents are required to turn over medical, psychological, financial records, and to concede some of their parental authority.
    Psychological evaluations of parents and children are ordered, becoming evidence in custody proceedings.
    The Council for Children’s Rights has a staff of about 30 and a yearly budget of about $2 million. It was formed in 2006 through the consolidation of the Children’s Law Center and the Council for Children.
    “When the Custody Advocacy Program is appointed to represent a child, parents and guardians either come to an agreement approved by the child’s Custody team, or the judge orders recommendations by that team, or the judge orders recommendations by that team be followed – nearly 100% of the time.
    Its literature describes the custody program this way: “Our Custody Advocacy Program (CAP) is a unique, nationally recognized model.”
    “In its 11 years of service, the Guardian Ad Litem (friend in court) program has earned a reputation for corruption and a one of a kind service to make sure that the welfare and best interests of children are not protected, while the judges, friends of the court, psychologists and DSS all get rich.
    It is the court system for ensuring that children will be given to the abusive parent and never again will the child have any contact with the protective parent and the federal government pays the bill.
    The Council for Children’s Rights bills for its custody services.
    Parents are required to provide an affidavit of financial standing and fees are levied on a sliding scale depending on income.
    Costs can easily balloon for these services, with individual custody advocated sometimes assigned to each child in the family and outside lawyers appointed by the court billing in the range of $200 an hour and up.
    Parents are required by the court to pay for these services, and may be charged for the services of therapists and other experts the Council for Children’s Rights selects and engages.
    The Council for Children’s Rights is brought into divorce cases as an independent advocate for children, James, McElroy & Diehl lawyers, Sarah Brady and Jonathan Feit have both served as volunteer attorneys for the organization.
    According to the James, McElroy & Diehl attorneys’ website, Jonathan Feit has been a pro bono attorney for the Council for Children’s Rights since 2005, while James, McElroy & Diehl lawyer, Sarah Brady has served as a volunteer as well.
    In addition, Katharine S. Holiday served as director of the group for ten years and received its “Dolly Award” in 2009.
    Katharine S. Holiday and Hugh D. Kirkpatrick are also listed as financial supporters of the group.
    During these years James, McElroy & Diehl attorneys have represented one or another spouse in many cases in which the Council for Children’s Rights was involved as guardian ad litem including Gay vs. Gay, where father Mark David Gay complained vociferously that he had been falsely accused of child abuse by his ex-wife, a client of Katharine S. Holiday.
    Such relationships of the parental kidnapping conspiracy is covered up by the Council for Children’s Rights who can claim to be fully independent of all parties when it enters cases involving lawyers who provide volunteer law services to the Council for Children’s Rights.
    Part of the Extrinsic Fraud Scheme is for the truth-seeking process to be conducted by the court-appointed agent who has clearly documented ties to one side of the dispute.
    The court-appointed agent is tasked with conducting inquiries into the character and parenting abilities of the parties, and also tasked with the welfare of children, and representing the child’s interest, while the court-appointed agent is clearly tied to one party who is represented by attorneys with ties to the agent.
    A 1986 ethics opinion by the North Carolina state bar held that an attorney who occasionally offered informal advice to the Department of Social Services could not also serve as a guardian ad litem in case involving DSS.
    In 2009, Chief Judge Lisa Bell at a disciplinary hearing before the North Carolina Psychology Board, gave favorable testimony on Hugh D. Kirkpatrick, Ph.D’s behalf.
    The Council for Children’s Rights assertions of power raised constitutional concerns in the Mecklenburg County Domestic Court Bar Committee meeting on April 6, 2010.
    The Minutes of the discussion disclosed to the Foundation under the Public Records Act show that Mecklenburg County District Court Judge Defendant Rebecca Thorne Tin and Defendant Council for Children’s Rights attorney, Robert McCarter, insisted that the Defendant Council for Children’s Rights does have the legal standing to weigh in to block settlements if Council for Children’s Rights custody advocates think it is not in the best interest of the children.
    The Mecklenburg County Domestic Court Bar Committee granting the Council for Children’s Rights the legal standing to weigh in to block settlements if Council for Children’s Rights custody advocates think it is not in the best interest of the children violates the legal rights of parents and gives jurisdiction to federal court to hear challenges.
    The Mecklenburg County Domestic Court Bar Committee’s decision means that two parties who wish to resolve their lawsuit can be impeded in settling the lawsuit by a party that has been court appointed.
    If these clear legal issues with standing went to the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court would surely violate the rights of the parents as they have done emphatically and continuously in the present and past court opinions. (Mecklenburg County Domestic Court Bar Committee Meeting, April 6, 2010.)

    Reply
12. JP Merzetti says:

    October 21, 2011 at 8:15 pm

    After voraciously researching this issue for about 3 weeks (university library research reader) I’m fetching up against some alarming trends.
    First, let me state clearly: The entire Child Protection “industry” in my opinion, and from what I’ve found out so far, is indeed…rotten almost to its core.
    This is not what I dispute.

    But a couple of things I’ve found in the middle of well-presented arguments against the industry, bother me deeply.
    As a single parent, I raised a child successfully in as fair, open-minded, and non-traditional way as I saw fit – with no state intervention at all.

    My first problem comes from having read extensively the views of a Massachusettes lawyer who has worked for approximately 15 years defending children and families from the “system” and I heartily applaud him for that.
    However – his deep distrust of any public school system (“Government” schools”) outrages me.
    Allegedly – his reasons appear to be that public schools have become hotbeds of “hotline ratting” and act as agents for the kidnapping cartel.
    My response: If indeed they are, then fix them.
    Not everyone can or wants to homeschool. Many two-parent families consist of two fulltime working parents, (or a desperately overworked single wage-slave.) In this rotten economic environment, to consider radical changes that would allow an alternative home-economic setup, is patently ridiculous.

    Our public school system as originally set up – was to conform to the ideal of universal education and opportunity, also to hold the belief that participation within the public realm was essential to a heathy homogenous social order. If the basic fundamental foundation of a good society does not require this, I don’t know what does.
    I do not believe the answer is to hide children away from the public bogeyman. Instead, deal with the bogeyman, out front, fair and square.

    If the issue of state-sanctioned child kidnapping becomes embroiled and hopelessly entangled with the Homeschool agenda, we’ll never get anywhere.

    Second: As a father and a man within society, I have issues with radical feminism on a personal level, though none of that stuff ever got in the way of my fatherhood – nor should it.
    But to blame radical feminism as a distinct source of exploitable “resource” to employ within the “child protective” racket – is also ridiculous.
    Really…you can throw several million fire-breathing raging feminists into the mix, and what power do they really have, if you follow the money all the way back up to the top? Up there, you’ll find that all the players are Kings. The women are just the pawns who do they dirty work.
    Whacking them – is just throwing wasted effort nowhere.

    If a society is sick enough to create a massive population of women who are incapable of feeling a mother’s pain at losing her child, or children…and who are also incapable of genuinely caring about a child, and being truly on that child’s side, in the most humane manner possible – then deal with the source of where this comes from. Otherwise you are just swatting flies with howitzers.

    Feminism, in and of itself, is not the problem.
    If one studies human history, an elementary education in the stuff will lead any rational human being very quickly to the studied conclusion that women have been crapped upon by “ideologicl” men throughout the ages.
    For my part – if every single “child-saver” were immediately unleashed upon the world to go savage the perpetrators of actual abuse…well then, maybe we’d see a radical decline in global incidentce of female genital mutilation, stoning, beheading, child-slavery, generational indentured servitude, pornographic exploitation, and actual slaughter of innocents.
    How many Iraqui children died as a result of Western Governmental sanctions?
    They actually were innocent victims, no doubt about it.

    But these issues are much more difficult to tackle than warring on poor families (many headed by a single parent.)

    Lastly – if we are to make this issue a fight between religious and sectarian values, or patriarchal and feminist values – then the two warring sides will not solve this problem, ever – and while the fight continues, children still suffer.

    Reply
13. william hudson says:

    November 8, 2011 at 8:39 pm

    I agree that there is plenty of money for the legal community to cash in on with the destruction of families. However, there is another reason they do it as well, they do it so that they can brag about all the children they save. These attorneys also know that they’re not going to be held accountable by the judges and their fellow attorneys. This is why people need to know that they can get a new attorney by filing a complaint against their pretender. However, they should not expect the bar to do anything as it is made up of all lawyers and is more of a country club than a serious license Board. Who put the interest of the legal community first and the clients last. People also need to know that they can of valuate their lawyers on the Internet, so that all of the people that have your lawyer either presently or in the future can know what to expect of this lawyer and can also of valuate them too. I have found two websites that will do this. They are http://www.lawyerratingz.com or http://www.avvo.com. All lawyers care about their reputation if they find that they have 50 negative complaints at these websites, which will not protect him like the bar. The lawyers will either quit the field of law that are in or start doing their job the way it needs to be done. After all who wants to hire a lawyer or anybody else that will have multiple complaints against them for anybody to see?
    It is also a good idea to start meet up groups in the cities where you’re fighting social services. For instance in Raleigh such a meet up group could go to county commissioners meetings and put the fact that they’ve hired Mr. Singer in their face. I know when I did this back in 2009 they did not like it at all. It would also be a good idea to protest at Mr. Singer’s theater company the second street theater. It is absolutely imperative that people find a way to take away the hero complex of these attorneys, therapist, and any other public servant that cashes in from CPS. It is also a good idea to revisit these sites and reevaluate your attorneys, and if anybody else finds sites to valuate lawyers or therapists they should also share them.

    Reply
14. Pat says:

    May 27, 2012 at 11:11 pm

    This sounds like a Kelo program for humans, where the government prefers the role of public ruler rather than public servant, dictating the winners and losers of society rather than governing, and making money in the process – justified by some bizarre logic – that endangers everyone but makes them look like heroes. What of the follow up on all those children and what happens after adoption?

    NBC Dateline predator show illustrates that placing children in the hands of strangers cannot guarantee their safety, but there is no incentive to report abuses. This is a very dangerous business for government or nonprofit alike.

    What makes government (of those few of us elected to sit in the office for a while) believe that they are able to so drastically dictate the lives of others, as they prefer to do? Or that free money is available from the taxpayer for doing so?

    Government needs grounding in just what government is, and what they are permitted to do under the Constitution, and with what authority, or pay plans. Government was never created to dictate to the public by the few of us who manage to get elected, even if happens to be for life – which is the greatest mistake ever – for democracy. We don’t have rulers and dictators in America, right?

    Reply
15. Sharron Ann Bryan says:

    June 6, 2012 at 5:17 pm

    My name is Sharron Ann Bryan. I am the grandmother of 4 beautiful children in Iron County,Ut who have been taken after almost 4 years of fighting DCFS. My daughter moved to Panquitch,Ut with 3 children and dispite having a 3 bedroom home, a husband with a great job they were targeted. The parents lost their rights May 8, 2012. The final decree has still not been signed because juvinal districk Attorney Kathryn Holt sat on it and sent a copy of the decree to be signed on June 5th. the parents attorneys sent it back to Ms Holt because she loaded it up with lies and hearsay. The parents are still going to appeal this action as soon as Judge Higbe signs
    it. The parents attorneys were never given discovery, proof of hearsay, the right to a fair trial, and provable purgery by the DCFS workers, foster parents and the shariff who said one thin on the stand and a different thing on the police report. The warrent was written on the wrong address and when they searched the correct address without a warrent they smashed the generator , killed a cat, beat a pregnent dog (which killed the babies). The first 4 ammendments to the US Constitution were over looked by Judge Higbe, Kathryn Holt,the childrens advocate, and Jenny Coloty from DCFS who worked in collusion. The parents have taped every meetin with these conspiritors, their attorneys, and all visits with the children. The older children asked to speak to the judge to let them go home this was also not allowed. There has never been any proof of neglect, or abuse just hearsay. The parents were not allowed to have the children sent to me or my other daughter (even though we had Social Services in Cheyenne,Wy come to check out our house and were excepted by them).
    I have since moved to Iron County to help fight for the kids. The family has been distroyed by these corrupt people and no longer financially secure, but we will keep fighting all the way up to the Supreme court in Washington DC. With the proof we have against the judicial system in Southern Utah their own voices contridicting themselves, Kathryn Holt saying that if the parents would sign the kids over to them they could have four more and DCFS wouldn’t take them (I wonder if she would have put that in writing), The parents attorney saying that Kathryn Holt and the Judge have secret meetings, and the Judge is President of the “Church of Jesus Christ Stake Center which causes a conflict of interest because the people who want to adopt the childern are members of his church.
    We have enough evedence against this corrupt system to help with a class action suit if we could get help with an attorney to get it started. There are years of people here in S. Utah who would love to see an end to this child traffiking and an end to our Federal government paying for it.
    Thank you;
    Sharron Ann Bryan PO Box 1669 Parawan Ut. 84761-1669
    I transfered to Cedar City Walmart Overnight stocker my phone # is (307) 256-3802

    Reply
16. Tammy says:

    January 11, 2013 at 7:58 pm

    Please send this to me in a way I can post this on Socail Media. I am getting ready to take on DSS and Foster Parents involved in the selling and buying of my grandduaghter. I would llike to have your web site on my face book. I will, and mark my words make this a Case Law in the NC General Statue through the Supreme Court Jutices. I need you help here, and let’s get these story up and running, so someone like me does not have to keep searching and seaching. Thank you very much for your help.
    PS. I will send photos when the Fed’s come in and handcuff the Attorney, the DSS workers, and the Judge.

    Reply