These are funny cartoons that include references to actual cases in Riverside County, CA.
Tag Archives: defense panel
FOSTER “PARENT” THROWS BABY TO FLOOR, BABY DIES, GETS $100,000 BAIL
When my husband and I rescued our son from the dangers of foster care bail was set at a half a million dollars and this lady kills a baby and gets only a hundred thousand dollar bail?
I changed the heading of this post. Originally I posted something I had to remove as I was very upset at the time I posted it. Then I posted a redaction. Now I am focusing this post on the news story below which is why I was upset to begin with. But the story below just goes to show why my husband and I rescued our son on May 23, 2011 after visiting him at the CPS office in Moreno Valley, CA and seeing a bruise on his face which he said that his “brother”, meaning the foster brother, hit him in the face. That rescue is the reason that the adoptive parents of him filed and were granted a restraining order against my husband and I. It is just not right to use protective actions against us as if they were criminal in nature. There is no reason to fear us unless they are abusing our son and I do not believe they are. Why would we rescue a child who is not being abused? Why would we upset the only life and family he knows because I am sure that he does not remember us at all. That upsets me very much that they do not remind him that he has a family that loves him more than anything. The loss of our son not only affects my husband and I, but his sisters’ lives, his brothers’ lives, his grandfather’s life, his aunts’ and uncles’ lives and his cousins’ lives. WE ALL miss him so much.
Here is the original post from the redaction heading:
I am upset and heartbroken but I am also very fearful of our corrupt government. In fact, I believe that the government is the best thing ever. The President is the most wonderful President that ever lived. Our local officials and police are just doing their job and are personally very nice people. They care about humanity and just try to keep law and order in our communities. The government takes such good care of us all and we should all be very thankful that we have such a wonderful government full of wonderful people who look out for us and especially our children. They take such good care of our children that they save parents from the indictments and prosecutions of killing their children by taking them away from us and putting them with strangers who eventually throw babies to the ground and kill them. So the foster parents are doing that nasty deed for the parents, isn’t that so kind of them?
I am being extremely sarcastic. Check out this story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Etw_QSvC2ag
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idbDxQtB8UU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Etw_QSvC2ag
Oh AND I DID NOT MEAN GOING TO PRISON FOR KIDNAPPING! I MEANT MY NEW YEARS RESOLUTION I DON’T CARE IF I GO TO PRISON FOR POSTING THAT POST. THAT’S ALL.
FINALLY! Someone taking on RIVERSIDE COUNTY DPSS!!
ATTORNEY SHAWN MCMILLAN HAS FILED A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST SOCIAL WORKERS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Riverside County is VERY GOOD at hiding the fact that they literally steal children from innocent parents. They make it LOOK LIKE they are doing the “right thing” but in reality, they are not playing by their own rules. The Welfare & Institutions Codes are violated in every case but they will hold the parents to codes that shouldn’t even apply to them. It is teamwork, not only is the County railroading parents and abusing children but the whole Court system is involved. County Counsel, the Defense Panel, the Clerk, and yes, THE “JUDGE” are all fully aware of the scheme against parents and the taking of their children all for FEDERAL FUNDING and their paychecks. It IS a conspiracy and I can give you more people involved as well, such as every contractor for services such as the psychologists and psychiatrists that perform the “psychological evaluations” that end up saying whatever CPS wants it to say, the drug counselors who fake, falsify and CHANGE DRUG TEST RESULTS! The regular doctors at hospitals such as Rady Children’s Hospital who literally “shop” for kids for CPS to take as well as Kaiser Hospital who allow CPS to enter into the maternity ward and just steal babies! I am not exaggerating, no I am not. They will use absolutely nothing against a parent and make it into something. Actually, anything can be construed to declare that a child comes withing W&I Code Section 300. A “preponderance” is merely an utterance from anyone regardless of how far removed the utterance was. Hearsay is only applied to parents when they have paid for their own drug tests that prove they are not using drugs but a hair sample can go to a reputable lab but come back from a third party on a piece of paper which is not from that lab nor has any indication that the results are actually the donor’s. Look here!
DO YOU SEE ANY NAME ON THIS DOCUMENT? NO. BUT IT WAS USED TO REMOVE MY CHILDREN AND ULTIMATELY TERMINATE OUR PARENTAL RIGHTS!
Read more about McMillan’s lawsuit here:
Fight CPS and WIN Seminar
Sample Letter To Social Services
If your children have been removed from your care and it has been several months since then, and you are experiencing delays on the part of the social worker(s) in providing you with services and or having the children returned to you even though you are diligently completing your case plan, I suggest you write a letter to the worker with a cc: to the supervisor AND the Director or Assistant Director. Here is a good example if CPS has recently changed workers and causing a delay in what they are supposed to do. You can copy this letter and change it to fit your situation. I have witnessed the effectiveness of these types of letters. Always be sure to send a copy to your attorney as well as file it with the Court, especially using it as an attachment to a Declaration in the event you file a Contempt of Court against CPS.
Dear Suzy Social Worker:
I understand the Department’s goal is to protect my children while providing me and my family with the tools and services we need to overcome our difficulties. [Name of husband, wife, partner] and I have been dedicated to strengthening our family by engaging in all of the services that the Department is providing us. We are working diligently in completing the case plan because we firmly believe that it is in the best interests of our children and family. We are dedicated to complying with whatever the Department deems necessary for the safe and timely return of our child(ren) to our home. As we can sympathize with the Department’s caseloads, this is no excuse for failing to diligently perform your duties and responsibilities. The Standards of Practice as well as the State’s Policy Manual clearly regulates the Department regarding the children’s permanency. {name of husband, wife, partner] and I are meeting our responsibilities without delay and we expect nothing less from the Department. This letter is to notify you that the Department is failing our family with excessive delays in their service functions which is not meeting regulatory policies in regards to providing our children with permanency.
Over a month ago, I was told that we would be provided with overnight visits. I had spoken with our previous worker, [name], four times prior to the change in workers however, I was repeatedly told that our case was being transferred to you and that as soon as you reviewed the file that the Department would be providing the court ordered overnight visits. I spoke with you a week after you received the file and you told me that you had not reviewed it yet. I called again three times last week and was unable to speak with you personally so I left several messages. To date, I have not received a return call. I find this unacceptable and unprofessional not to mention not in the best interests of our children, who ask me everyday I speak with them while in foster care, when they can stay the night. Our children cry and exhibit signs of severe emotional distress. This can be verified by the foster family.
This letter serves as an official request and demand that the Department adhere to the Court’s Order and provide my children the benefit of familial association before the emotional damages become worse, immediately. If the Department fails to respond to this request and demand within 48 hours of receipt of this letter, we shall have no other remedy than to proceed with a Contempt filing.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
cc: [List of names of other recipients, i.e., worker’s supervisor, the Director and/or Assistant Director of DPSS (or ACS/ACFS/DCFS, etc.), your attorney, other parent’s attorney, minor’s counsel
HERE IS A LINK TO CALIFORNIA CPS POLICIES
YOU CAN GOOGLE “CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES POLICIES ___ (NAME OF YOUR STATE)
http://www.childsworld.ca.gov/res/pdf/SDM_Manual.pdf
More Helpful California Code
This code section explains how CPS needs to file another Petition when they remove a child placed with the parents, family or non-relative kinship/guardian (a person somehow related to the family or is a close friend): So, if CPS removed your child but allowed the child to come home but the case is still open and you have to participate in “services”, then they come and remove the child AGAIN, OR your child was removed and placed with, say, your mom, but then CPS comes to remove the child from mom’s house, or if your child was removed and placed with a non-relative kinship and they come to remove the child from them, then they MUST file another document called a 387-Supplemental.
(Every State has rules, laws, statutes, codes or other court regulations that govern CPS court. If I do not have the links on the side under your state, just Google, “CPS laws” or “Child Welfare Statutes” or “Child Protection Codes” and you should be able to find them.)
387. (a) An order changing or modifying a previous order by removing a child from the physical custody of a parent, guardian, relative, or friend and directing placement in a foster home, or commitment to a private or county institution, shall be made only after noticed hearing upon a supplemental petition. (b) The supplemental petition shall be filed by the social worker in the original matter and shall contain a concise statement of facts sufficient to support the conclusion that the previous disposition has not been effective in the rehabilitation or protection of the child or, in the case of a placement with a relative, sufficient to show that the placement is not appropriate in view of the criteria in Section 361.3. (c) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), dependency jurisdiction shall be resumed for a child as to whom dependency jurisdiction has been suspended pursuant to Section 366.5 if the jurisdiction established pursuant to Section 601 or 602 is terminated and if, after the issuance of a joint assessment pursuant to Section 366.5, the court determines that the court’s dependency jurisdiction should be resumed. (d) Upon the filing of the supplemental petition, the clerk of the juvenile court shall immediately set the same for hearing within 30 days, and the social worker shall cause notice thereof to be served upon the persons and in the manner prescribed by Sections 290.1 and 291. (e) An order for the detention of the child pending adjudication of the petition may be made only after a hearing is conducted pursuant to Article 7 (commencing with Section 305).
Many people ask about a “388 hearing”, well, here is the California Welfare & Institutions Code for that:
388. (a) (1) Any parent or other person having an interest in a child who is a dependent child of the juvenile court or a nonminor dependent as defined in subdivision (v) of Section 11400, or the child himself or herself or the nonminor dependent through a properly appointed guardian may, upon grounds of change of circumstance or new evidence, petition the court in the same action in which the child was found to be a dependent child of the juvenile court or in which a guardianship was ordered pursuant to Section 360 for a hearing to change, modify, or set aside any order of court previously made or to terminate the jurisdiction of the court. The petition shall be verified and, if made by a person other than the child or the nonminor dependent shall state the petitioner’s relationship to or interest in the child or the nonminor dependent and shall setforth in concise language any change of circumstance or new evidence that is alleged to require the change of order or termination of jurisdiction. (2) When any party, including a child who is a dependent of the juvenile court, petitions the court prior to an order terminating parental rights, to modify the order that reunification services were not needed pursuant to paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 361.5, or to modify any orders related to custody or visitation of the subject child, and the court orders a hearing pursuant to subdivision (d), the court shall modify the order that reunification services were not needed pursuant to paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 361.5, or any orders related to the custody or visitation of the child for whom reunification services were not ordered pursuant to paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 361.5, only if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the proposed change is in the best interests of the child. (b) Any person, including a child or the nonminor dependent who is a dependent of the juvenile court, may petition the court to assert a relationship as a sibling related by blood, adoption, or affinity through a common legal or biological parent to a child who is, or is the subject of a petition for adjudication as, a dependent of the juvenile court, and may request visitation with the dependent child, placement with or near the dependent child, or consideration when determining or implementing a case plan or permanent plan for the dependent child or make any other request for an order which may be shown to be in the best interest of the dependent child. The courtmay appoint a guardian ad litem to file the petition for thedependent child asserting the sibling relationship if the courtdetermines that the appointment is necessary for the best interests of the dependent child. The petition shall be verified and shall set forth the following: (1) Through which parent he or she is related to the dependent child. (2) Whether he or she is related to the dependent child by blood, adoption, or affinity. (3) The request or order that the petitioner is seeking. (4) Why that request or order is in the best interest of thedependent child. (c) (1) Any party, including a child who is a dependent of the juvenile court, may petition the court, prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 361.5, or prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) ofSection 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 361.5, to terminate court-ordered reunification services provided under subdivision (a) of Section 361.5 only if one of the following conditions exists: (A) It appears that a change of circumstance or new evidenceexists that satisfies a condition set forth in subdivision (b) or (e) of Section 361.5 justifying termination of court-orderedreunification services. (B) The action or inaction of the parent or guardian creates a substantial likelihood that reunification will not occur, including, but not limited to, the parent’s or guardian’s failure to visit the child, or the failure of the parent or guardian to participate regularly and make substantive progress in a court-ordered treatment plan. (2) In determining whether the parent or guardian has failed to visit the child or participate regularly or make progress in the treatment plan, the court shall consider factors that include but are not limited to, the parent’s or guardian’s incarceration, institutionalization, detention by the United States Department of Homeland Security, deportation, or participation in a court-ordered residential substance abuse treatment program. (3) The court shall terminate reunification services during the above-described time periods only upon a finding by a preponderance of evidence that reasonable services have been offered or provided, and upon a finding of clear and convincing evidence that one of the conditions in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) exists. (4) Any party, including a nonminor dependent, as defined insubdivision (v) of Section 11400, may petition the court prior to the review hearing set pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 366.31 to terminate the continuation of court-ordered family reunification services for a nonminor dependent who has attained 18 years of age. The court shall terminate family reunification services to the parent or guardian if the nonminor dependent or parent or guardian are not in agreement that the continued provision of court-ordered family reunification services is in the best interests of the nonminordependent. (5) If the court terminates reunification services, it shall order that a hearing pursuant to Section 366.26 be held within 120 days. On and after January 1, 2012, a hearing pursuant to Section 366.26 shall not be ordered if the child is a nonminor dependent. The court may order a nonminor dependent who is otherwise eligible to AFDC-FC benefits pursuant to Section 11403 to remain in a planned, permanent living arrangement. (d) If it appears that the best interests of the child or the nonminor dependent may be promoted by the proposed change of order, modification of reunification services, custody, or visitation orders concerning a child for whom reunification services were not ordered pursuant to paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 361.5, recognition of a sibling relationship, termination of jurisdiction, or clear and convincing evidence supports revocation or termination of court-ordered reunification services, the court shallorder that a hearing be held and shall give prior notice, or cause prior notice to be given, to the persons and in the manner prescribed by Section 386, and, in those instances in which the manner of giving notice is not prescribed by those sections, then in the manner the court prescribes. (e) (1) On and after January 1, 2012, a nonminor who attained 18 years of age while subject to an order for foster care placement and, commencing January 1, 2012, who has not attained 19 years of age, or, commencing January 1, 2013, 20 years of age, or, commencing January 1, 2014, 21 years of age, or as described in Section 10103.5, for whom the court has dismissed dependency jurisdiction pursuant toSection 391, or delinquency jurisdiction pursuant to Section 607.2, or transition jurisdiction pursuant to Section 452, but has retained general jurisdiction under subdivision (b) of Section 303, or the county child welfare services, probation department, or tribal placing agency on behalf of the nonminor, may petition the court in the same action in which the child was found to be a dependent or delinquent child of the juvenile court, for a hearing to resume the dependency jurisdiction over a former dependent or to assume or resume transition jurisdiction over a former delinquent ward pursuant to Section 450. The petition shall be filed within the period that the nonminor is of the age described in this paragraph. If thenonminor has completed the voluntary reentry agreement, as described in subdivision (z) of Section 11400, with the placing agency, the agency shall file the petition on behalf of the nonminor within 15 judicial days of the date the agreement was signed unless the nonminor elects to file the petition at an earlier date. (2) (A) The petition to resume jurisdiction may be filed in the juvenile court that retains general jurisdiction under subdivision (b) of Section 303, or the petition may be submitted to the juvenile court in the county where the youth resides and forwarded to the juvenile court that retained general jurisdiction and filed with that court. The juvenile court having general jurisdiction under Section 303 shall receive the petition from the court where the petition was submitted within five court days of its submission, if the petition is filed in the county of residence. The juvenile court that retained general jurisdiction shall order that a hearing be held within 15 judicial days of the date the petition was filed if there is a prima facie showing that the nonminor satisfies the following criteria: (i) He or she was previously under juvenile court jurisdiction, subject to an order for foster care placement when he or she attained 18 years of age, and has not attained the age limits described in paragraph (1). (ii) He or she intends to satisfy at least one of the conditions set forth in paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, of subdivision (b) of Section 11403. (iii) He or she wants assistance either in maintaining or securing appropriate supervised placement, or is in need of immediate placement and agrees to supervised placement pursuant to the voluntary reentry agreement as described in subdivision (z) of Section 11400. (B) Upon ordering a hearing, the court shall give prior notice, or cause prior notice to be given, to the persons and by the means prescribed by Section 386, except that notice to parents or former guardians shall not be provided unless the nonminor requests, in writing on the face of the petition, notice to the parents or former guardians. (3) The Judicial Council, by January 1, 2012, shall adopt rules of court to allow for telephonic appearances by nonminor former dependents or delinquents in these proceedings, and for telephonic appearances by nonminor dependents in any proceeding in which the nonminor dependent is a party, and he or she declines to appear and elects a telephonic appearance. (4) Prior to the hearing on a petition to resume dependencyjurisdiction or to assume or resume transition jurisdiction, the court shall order the county child welfare or probation department to prepare a report for the court addressing whether the nonminor intends to satisfy at least one of the criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 11403. When the recommendation is for the nonminor dependent to be placed in a setting where minor dependents also reside, the results of a background check of the petitioning nonminor conducted pursuant to Section 16504.5, may be used by the placing agency to determine appropriate placement options for the nonminor. The existence of a criminal conviction is not a bar to eligibility for reentry or resumption of dependency jurisdiction or the assumption or resumption of transition jurisdiction over a nonminor. (5) (A) The court shall resume dependency jurisdiction over a former dependent or assume or resume transition jurisdiction over a former delinquent ward pursuant to Section 450, and order that the nonminor’s placement and care be under the responsibility of the county child welfare services department, the probation department, tribe, consortium of tribes, or tribal organization, if the court finds all of the following: (i) The nonminor was previously under juvenile court jurisdiction subject to an order for foster care placement when he or she attained 18 years of age. (ii) The nonminor has not attained the age limits described in paragraph (1). (iii) Reentry and remaining in foster care are in the nonminor’s best interests. (iv) The nonminor intends to satisfy, and agrees to satisfy, at least one of the criteria set forth in paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, of subdivision (b) of Section 11403, and demonstrates his or her agreement to placement in a supervised setting under the placement and care responsibility of the placing agency and to satisfy the criteria by signing the voluntary reentry agreement as described in subdivision (z) of Section 11400. (B) In no event shall the court grant a continuance that would cause the hearing to resume dependency jurisdiction or to assume or resume transition jurisdiction to be completed more than 120 days after the date the petition was filed. (C) The agency made responsible for the nonminor’s placement and care pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall prepare a new transitional independent living case plan within 60 calendar days from the date the nonminor signed the voluntary reentry agreement as described in subdivision (z) of Section 11400 and submit it to the court for the review hearing under Section 366.31, to be held within 70 days of the resumption of dependency jurisdiction or assumption or resumption of transition jurisdiction. In no event shall the review hearing under Section 366.3 be held more than 170 calendar days from the date the nonminor signed the voluntary reentry agreem
Speak Out Against CPS’s Corrupt Practices June 13, 2014
Help us inform parents, help us expose the illegal practices of CPS and Dependency Court, help end children being abused in foster care! Doing NOTHING doesn’t change anything.
Family Advocate Profile
Detention Hearing AUDIT
For California Juvenile Dependency Courts
AUDIT THE HEARINGS! THIS IS A DETENTION HEARING PACKET I PUT TOGETHER. IT CATERS TO NEWBIES BUT ITS GOOD INFORMATION FOR ALL PARENTS AND GUARDIANS STILL GOING TO COURT. YOU CAN GO BACK AND GET THE DETENTION HEARING TRANSCRIPTS & MINUTE ORDER AND DO THE AUDIT NO MATTER WHAT STAGE YOUR CASE IS IN OR EVEN IF IT IS CLOSED.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_PlDs4d_B_lTWRydmRQaThWcU0/edit?usp=sharing
Mother Reports Sonoma County Juvenile Court Commissioner to Sonoma County Sheriff’s Department
When a crime is committed, who do you call? THE POLICE RIGHT? If a child is kidnapped, being held against their will, being brainwashed to believe that their parents do not love them and are bad people to convince them to testify against them OR being forced to take psychotropic drugs NO MATTER WHO THE “ABDUCTOR” IS, shouldn’t this CRIME AGAINST CHILDREN be reported to authorities? ACCORDING TO THE JUVENILE COURT COHORTS, MAKING SUCH A CRIME REPORT AGAINST THEM IS “EXTREMELY DETRIMENTAL TO THEIR [the parent’s] CASE”.