(click on the link above to download a copy)
October 12, 2014
Phillip L Browning, Director
425 Shatto Place
Los Angeles, CA 90020
(don’t double space the address or the RE:
RE: [Name(s) of child(ren)
DSS No.: __________
Dear Mr. Browning,
I am sure you are a reasonable man and truly care for the people in your County and strive to achieve for the most courteous and professional delivery of health and human services possible. I feel it is my duty, as a resident and citizen of the County of Los Angeles, to bring to your attention the very shameful actions of those who serve under your authority. I am specifically referring to those social workers, in the Santa Clarita office, who have been assigned to my case, past and presently, with emphasis on social worker, Ramaul Rush. Ramaul is unprofessional, lacks empathy, has committed perjury, and filed falsified documents with the Court. This entire investigation is based on a repetitive referral that began over two years ago, that has been investigated by two counties, Riverside and Los Angeles, including an LAPD officer, at least four times and deemed each time to be unfounded
My main concern is the health and safety of my five children who have all been separated from each other. I believe this has been done on purpose as with everything else that is happening to my family simply because I am outspoken and somewhat of an advocate when it comes to Child Protective Services and the horrifying actions they often needlessly perpetrate upon children and their families. My concern right now is the children’s placement and living conditions. As I can understand that there are so many children in foster care and may be difficult to place five children together, I still object to this separation. My children have the right to familial association. My children are very close to one another but not so much as to be so dependent upon one another that their health is impaired. Nonetheless, the separation takes it toll on their emotional well-being. Child Protective Services is supposed to be about the children and right now the Department is performing a disservice to my children. This will affect them for the rest of their lives; their education will suffer and therefore so will their future. I ask you, sincerely Sir, please intervene, and assist the social workers by whatever means possible to re-establish placement for all five children. There is an approved foster home in Riverside County willing to take them in immediately. I have attached the pertinent details for your convenience.
Regarding the children’s current placement concerns, my oldest son, _______, is experiencing severe emotional distress. When he was first placed in foster care, I had spoken with him on the phone, but I have not seen him since September 22nd, the day the Department confiscated all five of my children. But now something is wrong, something has changed as the foster parents claim that he does not want to speak to me or visit with me. I have attached copies of emails advising me that our visits have been canceled allegedly due to Anthony refusing to visit. This causes me great concern as _______ and I have a good relationship. I would like to know if he is being given any type of psychotropic medication. I am sure I do not have to remind you that the Department is required to file a request for authorization to administer psychotropic medication to children with notice to the parents/guardians for an opportunity to object. I believe _______ may be withdrawing from socializing and is internalizing his distress. This is not healthy for a boy his age. I respectfully request that he be placed in an environment that better fits his needs and together with his siblings.
My daughter, _______, whom I have not abused in any way whatsoever, told me during a visit that she has to take some kind of liquid medicine and I do not know what it is because no one will tell me. I have the right to know, in fact, if she is being given psychotropic medication I should be advised. Again, I do not have to remind you of the procedures involved in giving children psychotropic medication. Even if she is taking Tylenol, I want to know why she has to take it every day. This poor child has been subjected to TWO vaginal/anal examinations within a matter of a few days! Again, I have not sexually or by any other means, abused this little girl! She has never been touched or probed until the Department exposed her to it! This is a violation of her body and mind. It is so shameful that the people who claim they care and are paid to protect are actually the real perpetrators. I do visit with _______ but she is not the same, she is obviously distressed and scared. She was not scared in my care. _______ appears extremely traumatized by everything she has been forced to endure. As her parent and guardian, it is my responsibility to console her and help her to understand the nature of what is happening to our family. The visit supervisor demanded that I discontinue any discussion with the child and further claimed that I was “interrogating” ________. This child is clearly suffering from separation anxiety, depression, and severe emotional detachment as she is alone without her familial siblings. This is a violation of her Fourth Amendment Rights. I am demanding that ________ be placed in a proper home, with her siblings, immediately.
I am also very concerned about the baby, ______. She is barely 14 months old and we are the only parents she has ever known. She has been sick and she never got sick in my care. I was very concerned when I met the foster family as one child had a clear and distinct red mark on their face, clearly due to a fierce smack of a whole hand. The baby also had a severe diaper rash along with the rash from the Rosella she allegedly had. _________ was also very fussy however; she seemed to relax in the comfort of my wife and me. I demand that ________ be moved to a better home with a higher standard of care and with her siblings.
_______ and _______ are currently placed together. ________ has voiced his distress as he is not happy at all with the living conditions he is being forced to endure. _________ states that he is put in his room constantly as punishment and for an indeterminate time. Sometimes two hours, sometimes four hours. He is not told how long, just that he is confined to his room and they will let him know when he can come out. He states that he is being punished for unwanted behaviors such as sitting on the couch while wearing shoes, or laying down anyplace other than his bed. That means he cannot lay on the couch or the carpeted floor at any time. ________ revealed to me that one night, during dinner, he was deprived of the rest of his meal, for speaking while sitting at the table, and sent to his room. This is unreasonable and not the type of discipline that I condone. To add insult to injury, ________ states that he is not allowed to play outside at all. _________ states that he is confined to inside the house once he arrives from school for the rest of the day only to be subjected to constant verbal abuse by an adult living in the home. This adult is using foul, demeaning words. This is inappropriate and unacceptable. Additionally, _________ needs new shoes. I had saved money last month because I planned on purchasing new sneakers for him this month but then he was removed along with his four brothers and sisters. _________’s white shirts are being washed the kitchen sink and coming out all dingy. __________ takes pride in his appearance and the caregiver who is washing his clothes is not taking care with his laundry. I have always been so very proud of __________ as he has an engaging personality and a good heart. His current environment is extremely detrimental to his health and well being. Moreover, my last scheduled visit was abruptly canceled before it even began. I am attaching copies of the emails regarding that issue. I am demanding that the Department find proper living arrangements, with his siblings, immediately.
I have many more complaints about the way the Department has handled allegations that are over two years old and proven unfounded at least four times. Now Ramaul Rush and his cohorts have made up allegations that are extremely disturbing to me. I say this because I know I didn’t do anything they are claiming so someone is quite sick in the head if you ask me. The Department should really weed out these bad seeds because they make the entire agency appear like misfits. I don’t know a single person who trusts LA DCFS. Why can’t anyone in the Department show diligence and strive to achieve the basic standards of care? Does anyone there realize that removing children from loving homes is not right? I don’t see anyone in the Department looking out for any child’s best interests, only the Department’s best interests. Mr. Browning, Sir, with all due respect, maybe you should look into this.
I throw myself at your mercy; please help me with placing my children together. I am getting nowhere with Ramaul or any other worker assigned to my case. Ramaul does not return my phone calls or emails. I am enclosing copies of my unanswered correspondence. I am also enclosing information regarding the approved foster home that is welcoming all of my children. Please communicate with the Supervisors of the Santa Clarita office as they need some direction and to review the policies that are established to provide quality standards of practice and service delivery. Made up allegations, falsified documents and perjury do not qualify as a standard of care. I think I understand what the Department means when they say Evidence Based Practice which really means Falsified Evidence Based Practice.
I thank you, in advance, and sincerely appreciate your assistance.
Click on the picture to read the report. NOTE** ON THE FIRST PAGE, SECOND PARAGRAPH OF THIS DOCUMENT IT STATES, “This fact-based analysis presents a unique opportunity to examine the need and possibly for wholesale changes in the way DCFS and the County of Los Angeles carry out the charge of providing services for families and children in crisis. Accordingly, in addition to identifying the RSI (Reoccurring Systemic Issues), this report suggests opportunities for improvement that, if capitalized upon effectively, can lead to positive changes and outcomes for the children and families DCFS serves.” ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!
We are trying to raise money to help families. A few of my goals are:
1. Print and distribute information to parents caught in the judicial system as well as valuable information about Child Protective Services.
2. Coordinate and conduct workshops for parents to learn everything about the California Juvenile Dependency Court.
3. Outline a protocol of the workshop for others in other States to conduct workshops in their area.
4. Record the workshops on video and make them available on YouTube.
5. Complete writing a Bill, and submit it to our legislators, that would change the requirements for proof of neglect, evidence of hearings that are conducted according to Law, the hiring and administration of Hearing Officers and attorneys so they are not paid for by the County, to provide for “secret shoppers” who are allowed in any courtroom at any time to audit the hearings and that would provide for the auditing of every single case file terminating parental rights that includes interviewing the parents and every audit’s findings can be submitted to the Appellate Courts for review and determination of whether or not the parent’s rights be restored.
I have created an account with Ebay where I am selling random stuff. Every penny profit will go towards achieving these goals. Please support our cause simply by purchasing everyday items. I am working on another blog (it is updated daily) which highlight some of these items for sale. Once you are directed to my Ebay site, at the bottom you will see boxes which showcase all the items I have for sale. (I purchase these items from the clearance racks and re-sell them for a lot less than retail price.) Here is the link to my blog: http://radomestuff4sale.wordpress.com/
This is absolutely CRAZY! These people CHOSE to adopt a child, they chose to adopt a “special needs” child, just like couples chose to have a natural child. Natural parents don’t receive any money for having a “special needs” child. Most of the “special needs” children ,who they claim “need” medication, wouldn’t need medication if they were never taken from their families!! The system is the most discusting, perverse, hypocritical, abomination! Adoptive parents don’t deserve money any more or less than the biological parents!
Watch this news report:
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
DISCLAIMER: This is not to anyone specific, it is to every person who has adopted a child through the child protective services adoption agency.
YOU THINK THAT WHAT THE COURT DOES IS LEGAL? WATCH THIS! WE ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES WHO HAVE BEEN RAILROADED BY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES. GET A CLUE, IT CAN HAPPEN TO YOU TOO!
ALLOW BIRTH PARENT RELATIONSHIPS-ITS JUST THE RIGHT THING TO DO!
THE CHILDREN YOU HAVE ADOPTED WERE HAPPY WITH THEIR FAMILIES AND YOU ARE DENYING THE CHILDREN THEIR GOD GIVEN RIGHT TO THE AFFECTION AND LOVE FROM THEIR BIRTH FAMILIES.
IF YOU ARE NOT JUST DOING IT FOR THE MONEY, PROVE IT!
DO THE RIGHT THING. DO THE RIGHT THING. DO THE RIGHT THING. PLEASE!
I have been told by the people who are taking care of my son that I refuse to take account for my actions. If they watched this video they may get a clue as to what is really going on. I love my son and will always be their for him. I don’t care what Judge on the take states I can’t. You judge can’t make decisions like the one that took my son but you did, so why aren’t you in jail? answer because of all the money your ILLEGAL COURT has made the county for the general fund that is impossible to audit. I will find a way to get this county audited for all the federal funding fraud.
I saw a sign today Kid’s for sale at
$$$$$$$$$$$Riverside County CPS $$$$$$$$$$$$$$
We take telephone orders to the hot line
I am sure it was written by a destroyed parent
We love you and miss you soooo much! We think about you every single second, of every single hour, every single day, of every single week, of every single month, since we last saw you and for the rest of our lives.
Mommy and Daddy never did anything to hurt you except fail to protect you from being kidnapped by CPS and the Collaborative Court Cohorts. We tried to RESCUE you but they had us illegally arrested for kidnapping charges that should have only been a contempt of court issue.
Your whole family misses you too:
Sissy Kayla, Aunt Cindy, Pop-pop, Sissy Alex, Stephen, Billy, Christopher, Aunt Katie, Uncle Hugo, Cousin Kaitlyn, Cousin Mikey, Michielle, Melissa, Racheal, and the rest of your friends.
We hope you still have pictures of us so you won’t forget us.
Published on Jul 28, 2012
Vintage Judge Judith Sheindlin as a Family Court Judge
Something about Judge Judy has always reminded me of my own mother. After watching the personal interviews now she’s EXACTLY like my Mom (the NY accent and all). Although she didn’t allow OBJECTIONS from the attorneys due to the caseload, at least she is REAL. I bet she would have noticed a piece of paper with NO NAME, NO ID, NO SPECIMEN NUMBER, NO LABORATORY NAME, NO COLLECTION SITE, NO CHAIN OF CUSTODY FORM, NO CERTIFYING SCIENTIST which claimed to be a valid hair follicle test document!
Vintage 1993 video footage of Judge Judith
Sheindlin as she sets in as a Family Court Judge in the Bronx in New York City. Watch and see how Judith Sheindlin handles the Children’s Aid, Lawyer, Caseworkers and Foster Homes in her court room.
Aired on 60 Minutes back in 1993 before she became Judge Judy TV Start
DonnellyJustice and sjb4djustice write:
MAY I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE?
STAKEHOLDERS IN THE CHILD ABUSE INDUSTRY: We have been waiting for you to notice us. And now that we have your attention, please be advised that this blog is about you and the things you do and did to us. That’s right, we are exposing you. We have a very good following of others who have been victimized by your collaborative efforts to fund your counties.You SOLD our son through what is called “forced adoption”. You ARE kidnapping our children AND GETTING PAID TO DO IT! We are dedicating our lives to exposing you and every other county’s secrets. You claim that we are “crazy conspiracy theorists”. Well, you are partly correct. You did manage to make us a bit CRAZY, you do CONSPIRE to ruin families and the only thing THEORETICAL about it is your true concern for “the children’s best interests”. The power you have over families is purely an ability to BULLY, INTIMIDATE, COERCE, EXTORT, FALSIFY, AND LIE. You even made it so my wife and daughter were completely railroaded in court by taking a DA to lunch. You are holding other children against their will and drugging them and telling the parents that their children hate them and do not want anything to do with them all because you have NO EVIDENCE. Parents are HELPLESS and YOU KNOW IT. This is the only thing we can legally do: PROTEST. Amanda Spratley and Antoine Coley JUMPED UP FOR JOY, SMILING AND HUGGING when the judge terminated our rights!! EXPLAIN THAT TO DONNELLY!!! EXPLAIN HOW MUCH MONEY THE STATE AND COUNTY RECEIVED FOR TAKING HIM AWAY FROM HIS MOMMY AND DADDDY, SISSY KAYLA, SISSY ALEX, BROTHERS STEPHEN, BILLY AND CHRISTOPHER, POP-POP, AUNT CINDY, AUNT KATIE, UNCLE HUGO, COUSINS KAITLYN AND MIKEY, FRIENDS MICHELLE AND MELISSA, RACHAEL, KRISTINA, AND JAMES. But knowing you he will be told untrue and awful things about us, isn’t that right Sue and (your best friend) Jamila?
TO OUR SUPPORTIVE AND CONTINUED VIEWERS: Thank you for your continued support. If you have anything you would like us to post or research email us at: firstname.lastname@example.org.
We are busy putting together a PROTEST SCHEDULE for Riverside, Moreno Valley and Murrieta for later this month.
TO CURRENT VICTIMS OF THIS CHILD STEALING RING: We have a link to The Dependency Quick Guide, a.k.a. the DOGBOOK, this could be a family-saver, it will help you ensure your attorney performs their duties competently but you have to assert your rights as they will NOT tell you what they are and they WILL force you to “buy-in” and submit to an Amended Petition by striking a few of the lies which are in the original. Learn what Welfare & Institutions Code § 300 (a)-(j) are as well as the Rules of Civil Procedure. We have links for those too. Go to our Self-Help site, there is a document library there. New information is added several times a week. Email us if you have any questions and we can possibly direct you to the answers. We are NOT lawyers but I bet we would be better than the JuvDP except that we would probably be fired for not being favorably bias towards CPS. Regardless, we do not give legal advice, we only explain what we experienced and what we have seen happen to others.
Part 3 of a series explaining what happened to our family. This is a remade version which excludes certain information about others which may have been too personal to have published. Our apologies for that. Also, more information and evidence is included in this version. Stay tuned for Part 4 COMING SOON@!