Treatment Plan

[amsnwoo]

Is there any regulation CPS has to follow regarding a treatment plan? And if so, does it vary from state to state?

[Bob_Lynn]

CPS doesn't abide by any law and it doesn't even abide by its own local rules so anything they do varies greatly and illogically from caseworker to caseworker never mind state to state.

CPS never heard of equal rights protection.

[Dan Sullivan]

[quote="amsnwoo"]Is there any regulation CPS has to follow regarding a treatment plan? [/quote]

What are you referring to in your treatment plan??

[Anonymous]

CPS doesn't abide by any law and it doesn't even abide by its own local rules so anything they do varies greatly and illogically from caseworker to caseworker never mind state to state.

CPS never heard of equal rights protection.

Bob is exactly right. However, they do have regulations in their CPS manual concerning treatment plans. They are generally vauge.

But, just like Bob says; they will not abide by them anyway.

Bob Fletcher

[amsnwoo]

The parenting plan is what I am referring to.
So basically they set you up to fail???
THIS IS SO FRUSTRATING!!!!!
I just want my babies back!
If anyone knows what I can do to get them back let me know.

[Dan Sullivan]

[quote="amsnwoo"]The parenting plan is what I am referring to.
[/quote]

Sorry to ask again... are we speaking about a reunification plan?

Have you been given a reunification plan in writing?

You should write down all the allegations made against you and your explanation of why the allegations are false.

And you should send this document to CPS return receipt.

Be sure to include your case number.

This way the truth is in your file.

Please post what the plan expects you to do to get your children back.

Thanks, Dan

[amsnwoo]

These are the questions they want us to answer. My husband asked to wait to answer them until he had his lawyer present and the case worker made a big deal of it. She e-mailed these to me to make sure they were answered.



1. What is your understanding of why Child Welfare is involved with your family?
2. Has there been any previous efforts to solve the problems in the past?
3. Would you say there is anything that you need to change?
4. What are your strengths and support systems?
5. Has anyone other than you and wife taken care of your son in his life?
6. What discipline methods do you use?
7. What is your current living situation?
8. What is your highest level of education?
9. What is your current employment status (where and how long)?
10. Are there any cultural issues, religion or ethnicity that you are strongly tied to?
11. Do you have a history of abuse or neglect as a child?
12. Do you have any domestic violence history? Or currently?
13. Do you have any mental health history of treatment (have you ever seen a therapist or been perscribed any medications)?
14. What is your substance abuse history? Does anyone in your family have a history of substance abuse, including alcoholism?
15. Do you have any medical conditions?

[good dad]

A lot of these questions, if answered negatively, will be used against him.. Never admit to being "abused" as a child...or domestic violence..or mental health history.. or substance abuse..

Even medical conditions will be used against him as there are plenty of people here that had kids taken because of their own medical conditions..

He should answer them with this in mind.

[Dan Sullivan]

[quote="amsnwoo"]These are the questions they want us to answer. My husband asked to wait to answer them until he had his lawyer present and the case worker made a big deal of it. She e-mailed these to me to make sure they were answered.[/quote]

Wait for your attny.

[/quote] 1. What is your understanding of why Child Welfare is involved with your family?
2. Has there been any previous efforts to solve the problems in the past?[/quote]

Which problems?

[/quote]
3. Would you say there is anything that you need to change?
[/quote]

The curtains in my kitchen, livingroom and bedroom.

And the oil in my car.

[/quote]
4. What are your strengths and support systems?
5. Has anyone other than you and wife taken care of your son in his life?
6. What discipline methods do you use?
7. What is your current living situation? [/quote]

We prefer living indoors.

[/quote]
8. What is your highest level of education? [/quote]

The internet.

[/quote]
9. What is your current employment status (where and how long)?
10. Are there any cultural issues, religion or ethnicity that you are strongly tied to?
11. Do you have a history of abuse or neglect as a child? [/quote]

I never abused or neglected anyone when I was a child.

[/quote]
12. Do you have any domestic violence history? Or currently?[/quote]

No, but I am willing to try anything to get my children back?

Who do you want me to beat up?

[/quote]
13. Do you have any mental health history of treatment (have you ever seen a therapist or been perscribed any medications)?
14. What is your substance abuse history? Does anyone in your family have a history of substance abuse, including alcoholism?
15. Do you have any medical conditions?[/quote]

Yes. But none that are relevant to keeping my children in FC.

[Anonymous]

These are the questions they want us to answer. My husband asked to wait to answer them until he had his lawyer present and the case worker made a big deal of it. She e-mailed these to me to make sure they were answered.



1. What is your understanding of why Child Welfare is involved with your family?
2. Has there been any previous efforts to solve the problems in the past?
3. Would you say there is anything that you need to change?
4. What are your strengths and support systems?
5. Has anyone other than you and wife taken care of your son in his life?
6. What discipline methods do you use?
7. What is your current living situation?
8. What is your highest level of education?
9. What is your current employment status (where and how long)?
10. Are there any cultural issues, religion or ethnicity that you are strongly tied to?
11. Do you have a history of abuse or neglect as a child?
12. Do you have any domestic violence history? Or currently?
13. Do you have any mental health history of treatment (have you ever seen a therapist or been perscribed any medications)?
14. What is your substance abuse history? Does anyone in your family have a history of substance abuse, including alcoholism?
15. Do you have any medical conditions?

Do not answer any of these stupid questions without a dam good attorney; especially 1, 3, 4. Do not answer 6 anyway except reasonable for situation, or do not answer it at all.

8 is irrelevant, & none of their business. 9 is irrelevant, & none of their business. 10 is irrelevant, & none of their business.

Answer 11; no. I would refuse to answer 12, 13, & 14.

My advise is not to talk to these Marxist morons at all. Get an attorney. Do not answer any of these questions without the approval of an attorney, after he has discovered their case against you.

One last thing. An attorney that wants to "cooperate" with these whackos, is generally worse than no attorney at all.

Bob Fletcher

[Bob_Lynn]

First off, don't answer any question without a decent lawyer's advice. It's obvious they don't want you to use a lawyer unless of course, he's working for them (as most lawyers are, even the private ones you pay ridiculous fees for).

This is a very difficult problem because with CPS, you're always caught between a rock and a hard place. You can bet though, that every single answer you give, no matter what it is, will be used against you. NEVER, EVER admit to anything incriminating.

In our case, my wife cooperated but I usually didn't. The only times I cooperated with their ridiculous and irrelevant rules and demands was when I thought it would get our children back. I signed every document that I thought I had to sign, with the words "SIGNED UNDER DURESS" except the agreement when our children were returned to us. Our mostly useless attorney advised me not to sign that one "SIGNED UNDER DURESS" or they would not return our children. However, at the reunification meeting, I made sure to ask the caseworker in front of witnesses if everyone had to sign such a document (a piece of garbage blatantly designed to violate parents' and children's constitutional rights) in order to get their children back. The answer from the caseworker was YES. I later used that information in our federal suit and the document became another exhibit.

But I am not advising you to do as we did because every CPS and every caseworker is different and I have no idea what will work best for you. As I noted in an earlier post, CPS doesn't understand the basic constitutional concept of EQUAL RIGHTS PROTECTION.

[Anonymous]

>>

It's obvious they don't want you to use a >>lawyer unless of course, he's working for them (as most lawyers >>are, even the private ones you pay ridiculous fees for).

This is so true. It is almost impossible to find a lawyer that will represnt you; instead of performing his duties as an "officer of the Court" (translated as; enemy spie.

>>This is a very difficult problem because with CPS, you're always >>caught between a rock and a hard place. You can bet though, >>that every single answer you give, no matter what it is, will be >>used against you. NEVER, EVER admit to anything incriminating.

Actually you are between a Marxist whacko, & a lazy lawer that couldn't build a clientell; with an authority complex to boot.

Both the Marxist, & the lazy lawyer; despise the Constitution; that is what little they know about it.

Remember; these whackos know what is best for you; & your family.

>>Our mostly useless attorney advised me not to sign that one >>"SIGNED UNDER DURESS" or they would not return our children.

It seems to me your attorney would have said: sign it any way you want; if they don't like it; refer them to me.

Oh wait; that is what an attorney that represented you would have said. Evidently your attorney was more concerned about being an "officer of the Court."


>>However, at the reunification meeting, I made sure to ask the >>caseworker in front of witnesses if everyone had to sign such a >>document (a piece of garbage blatantly designed to violate >>parents' and children's constitutional rights) in order to get their >>children back.


This is exactly what their case plan, or what ever euphemism these Marxist whackos may call it; is designed for.

Remember, be a good little Marxist; run along, & do exactly as youare told by the all knowing, benevolent, nanny state. We know what is best for you, & your family. It's for your own good.


>>The answer from the caseworker was YES. I later used that >>information in our federal suit and the document became another >>exhibit.

Bob, did you file a title 42, section 1983 suit, in your Federal District Court; against these Marxist whackos?

So far, we have only filed in Brown County District Court. We intend to file in Federal Court as well, when the time comes.

In Federal Court I believe you can get a jury trial. Is that correst? Have you demanded a jury trial yet?

>> CPS doesn't understand the basic constitutional concept of >>EQUAL RIGHTS PROTECTION.

I disagree totally here Bob. They understand your Rights just fine. They have nothing but contempt for your Rights.

The objectve of CPS is to do their part in completely destroying the Constitution, & the Bill of Rights.

The parental Rights; which these Matxist whackos hold in utter contempt; are merely the specific part of your Constitutional Rights these whackos are destroying.

Best wishes,
Bob Fletcher

P.S. No one should ever talk to these Marxist whackos with out a tape recorder in hand. Sometimes, it is smart to have it in plain sight so they are aware you are recording them. It may surprisse you how it changes their attitude. Sometimes, it also irratates them so bad; they tend to make stupid mistakes (besides the mistake of being a Marxist dirt ball; on a power trip, with an ego which has to be turned sideways to get though a door jam).

[amsnwoo]

This is what I sent the case worker

1. Copy of family rights brochure:
Family Survival InformationWhat Happens Next
If you are WEALTHY, they will NEVER mess with you, because your top-notch
lawyer that is on retainer and available on a moment’s notice will tear
them to shreds. Then too, you might call your pals in the U.S. SENATE and
cause LOTS of trouble. You should anyhow.
Otherwise, you are GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT. You have to prove your
innocence. The social worker is a children's advocate, not an impartial
investigator. CPS agencies are fueled with BILLION$ of DOLLAR$ and HIGHLY
MOTIVATED to INCREASE the head count in the MEAT GRINDER.
If you earn a decent wage, live in a decent house, are married, have no
run-in’s with the law, and have SOME stature in the community, (In other
words, if your character appears unimpeachable, while the witnesses’
character does not)-
If Johnnie or Suzie told the social worker they fell off the bicycle or
down the stairs or hurt themselves on the trampoline, THINGS MIGHT be OK.
Whether you DID or DID NOT spank, hit, slap, or Emotionally Injure the
child, you are going to AT LEAST get counseling, and go to a “Parenting
Class” to be tutored in the New Age drivel.
If you did Sexually Abuse a child, you deserve what you get. If you DID
NOT, you are in a battle for your LIFE.
If you are poor, or a minority, and have NO stature in the community-The
state gets up to $6000 BONUS from the Feds if they get your child
(preferably UNDER 5 years old) adopted. (FAMILY PRESERVATION is no longer
the goal under the new ASFA act of 1997).
The scenarios above represent what happens if you don’t know your rights,
and don’t know anything about CPS BEFORE you get involved with them.
By the time you figure out -
THIS IS SERIOUS
you have already GIVEN them your
Constitutional Rights
and your lunch, and they
HAVE THEIR BOGUS CASE BUILT

Back Next


2. In the 1789 French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen article 9 states, “As all persons are held innocent until they shall have been declared guilty, if arrest shall be indispensable, all harshness not essential to the securing of the prisoner’s person shall be severely repressed by law.”
The notion of innocent until proven guilty is one of the most widely accepted principles of law in the world and is present in some form or another in all but the most primitive legal systems.
The principle was first entered into American Law in 1894 when the U.S. Supreme Court made their decision in Coffin vs. U.S. They found that a lower court had refused to instruct the jury in the concept of innocent until proven guilty. Part of their decision reads, “The law presumes that persons charged with crime are innocent until they are proven by competent evidence to be guilty.”[1]
In 1948 the United Nations incorporated the principle of innocent until proven guilty into The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article eleven, section one, which declares, “Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.”[2] It further states that people are entitled to a fair and impartial hearing based solely on the evidence presented and the rule of law.
The principle was also incorporated into the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights in 1953 (article 6 section 2) and the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (article 12, section 2.)
Some people believe that “innocent until proven guilty” is a legal fiction regaled to potential jurors in order to subjugate the prevailing attitude that “if he’s been arrested he must be guilty”. However, the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution reads, “No person shall be deprived of life liberty, or property without due process of law…” In plain language this means that no one can be executed, imprisoned or fined without the proper course of justice taking place. Due process is not defined constitutionally but it is a term that is universally recognized as meaning “fair trial”. The principle is innocent until proven guilty, not suspected until proven innocent.
A fair trial by a jury of one’s peers would require that each juror approach the case with the principle that the prosecution must prove the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. At the beginning of the trial, the prosecution has not presented any evidence; therefore it follows that the accused must be innocent until he is proven guilty by the preponderance of the evidence.


3. The thing that needs to be changed is to have my son returned to me.

4. My son IS my strength.

5. Not until the department took him from me.

6. I did not discipline. I would only show him an alternitive solution to the problem.

7., 8., 9., 10.,
The right to privacy is not mentioned in
the Constitution, but the Supreme Court
has said that several of the
amendments create this right. One of the
amendments is the Fourth Amendment,
which stops the police and other
government agents from searching us or
our property without “probable cause” to
believe that we have committed a crime.
Other amendments protect our
freedom to make certain
decisions about our bodies and
our private lives without
interference from the
government Ð which includes
the public schools.
You’ve all heard cops on TV or in the
movies say, “you have the right to
remain silent...” Well, that’s exactly
what you should do if the police ask you
questions. Remember anything you
say can be used against you.
Just give the police your name and
address and say you want to speak to
your parents and a lawyer. As soon
as you do that, the police must
stop questioning you.
The police arenÕt allowed
to search you unless they
have a warrant signed by
a judge or unless they
are arresting you. However,
if they believe that you have a
weapon, they can frisk you, and if
they feel a weapon, they can then
search you. If the cops ask to
search you or your car, donÕt
resist the search, but let
them know that you don’t consent
to it.
Yes and no. Since public schools are run
by the government, they must obey the
Constitution. However, you do
have fewer privacy rights in
school than outside of school.
Some of the so-called solutions to
problems like drugs and violence – such
as searching us or planting undercover
cops in the hallways to spy on us – can
abuse students’ rights. It’s like, hey
guys, this is school, not prison!
You have the right to remain
silent if youÕre questioned by
a school official. Usually there is
no problem with answering a few
questions to clear something up. But if
you think that a teacher suspects you of
having committed a crime, donÕt
explain, donÕt lie and donÕt
confess, because anything you say
could be used against you. Ask to see
your parents or a lawyer.
Getting an education
isnÕt just about books
and grades – we’re also
learning how to participate fully
in the life of this nation.
(Because the future’s up to us!)
But in order to really
participate, we need to know
our rights – otherwise we may
lose them. The highest law in
our land is the U.S.
Constitution, which has some
amendments, known as the
Bill of Rights. The Bill of
Rights guarantees that the
government can never deprive
people in the U.S. of certain
fundamental rights including
the right to freedom of
religion and to free speech
and the due process of law.
Many federal and state laws
give us additional rights, too.
The Bill of Rights applies to
young people as well as
adults. And what I’m going to
do right here is tell you about
THE RIGHT TO
PRIVACY.
your right to
PRIVACY
We spend a big part of our life in school, so letÕs make a difference. Join
the student government! Attend school meetings! Petition your school
administration! Talk about your rights with your friends! Get involved!
WHAT IS THE RIGHT
TO PRIVACY?
WHAT ARE MY RIGHTS
CONCERNING THE POLICE?
DO I HAVE A RIGHT
TO PRIVACY WHEN
IÕM AT SCHOOL?
WHAT SHOULD I DO IF
A TEACHERWANTS TO
QUESTION OR SEARCH ME?
AS K AS K
abou t
a b o u t
your local ACLU is:
Ò(The right to privacy is a personÕs) right to be left alone
by the government... the right most valued by civilized men.Ó
- Former The Supreme Court ruled in 1985 in mer Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis
New Jersey v. T.L.O. that school
officials, unlike police, may search
students without a warrant when they
have “reasonable grounds for
suspecting that the search will turn up
evidence that the student has
violated... either the law or rules of the
school.” But school officials may not
search you unless they have a good
reason to believe that you in
particular -- not just
ÒsomeoneÓ -- broke a law or a
school rule. So, if a teacher thinks
she saw you selling drugs to another
student, she can ask you to empty
your pockets and can search your
backpack. But just because they think
some students have drugs doesnÕt
give them the authority to
search all students.
And no matter what, the search must
be conducted in a
Òreasonable" way, based on your
age and what they’re looking for. Strip
searching is illegal in many states,
and where it is allowed, there has to
be a solid reason to suspect a
particular student of having committed
a really serious crime.
In some states, courts have ruled that
a student’s locker is school property,
so the school can search it. But in
other states, school officials must
have “reasonable suspicion” that you
are hiding something illegal before
they can search your locker.
Your local ACLU can fill you in on your
state laws. But here’s a word to the
wise: don’t keep anything in your
locker that you wouldn’t want
other people to see.
A drug or alcohol test is a
search, but whether the officials in
your school have to have “reasonable
suspicion” that you’re a user before
they can make you take a test
depends on what state you live in.
A Supreme Court decision in 1995 in a
case called Vernonia v. Acton said that
student athletes can be tested for drugs
because athletic programs are voluntary,
and student athletes are role models.
Students all over the
country are protesting
random testing programs, where
officials test a few individuals or force a
whole class to be tested just because
they suspect that “someone” is doing
drugs. Check with your local ACLU to
know what the deal is in your state.
They’re allowed in many states
because the courts have ruled that a
metal detector is less of an
invasion of privacy than
frisks or other kinds of
searches. Nevertheless, some
states have guidelines to protect
students’ rights. California, for
example, allows metal detectors in its
schools, but it says they can’t be used
selectively just on certain students –
that’s discrimination.
What you do or don’t do with your body
is your personal business. If you need to
have a pregnancy test, or if you’re
pregnant, you should go to the
family planning clinic
nearest you. Your local ACLU can
help you find one. Some schools provide
birth control supplies; find out if yours
does. If you go to the doctor, find out
what the doctorÕs policy is on
telling your parents.
ItÕs your constitutional
right to have an abortion.
You don’t even have to tell your
boyfriend about it if you don’t want to.
However, some states require women
under the age of 18 to get their
parents’ permission, or at least tell
them about the abortion. But if you
canÕt tell your parents, you
have a right to go to court and ask the
judge to drop the parental notification
requirement in your particular case.
Reproductive rights is a very serious
issue, and groups like the ACLU are
working hard to make sure
no woman or girl loses her
rights to a safe and legal
abortion if she decides to have one.
Some states require your parents be
notified before you get tested or get
treatment. Ask your local ACLU about
the laws in your state concerning HIV
testing of minors, and where you can
get tested anonymously. One last
thing: your school or employer
doesnÕt have the right to
force you to be tested for
HIV. You totally have the right to
refuse to take an AIDS test.
Some REALLY private matters Ð like birth control and abortion rights
Ð vary from state to state. And theyÕre worth fighting for!
WHATÕS THE DEAL
WITH DRUG TESTS
OR ALCOHOL TESTS?
WHAT ABOUT METAL
DETECTORS?
WHAT ABOUT THE
PRIVACY OF MY BODY?
WHO HAS TO KNOWIF
I HAVE AN HIV TEST?
Produced by the ACLU Department of Public Education. 125 Broad Street, NY NY 10004. For more copies of this or
any other Sybil Liberty paper, or to order the ACLU handbook The Rights of Students or other student-related
publications, call 800-775-ACLU or visit us on the internet at http:www.aclu.org. Illustrations by Gloria Petron.

12-15 NO


(I copy pasted the files here so the might read funny)

[Bob_Lynn]

"Bob, did you file a title 42, section 1983 suit, in your Federal District Court; against these Marxist whackos?"

Yes we filed a Section 1983 suit, please see:

http://forum.fightcps.com/viewtopic.php?t=264

"In Federal Court I believe you can get a jury trial. Is that correst? Have you demanded a jury trial yet?"

Yes absolutely. We will try to stock the jury with jurors who have children if possible.

[Anonymous]

"Bob, did you file a title 42, section 1983 suit, in your Federal District Court; against these Marxist whackos?"

Yes we filed a Section 1983 suit, please see:

http://forum.fightcps.com/viewtopic.php?t=264

"In Federal Court I believe you can get a jury trial. Is that correst? Have you demanded a jury trial yet?"

Yes absolutely. We will try to stock the jury with jurors who have children if possible.

Dear Bob:

Exactly Bob (on the jury). But I'll bet you will NEVER be allowed anyone who has ever had been violated by these Marxist whackos. I'd also cover any bet that comes my way; you won't be allowed a jurior that even knows someone who has been violated by CPS. Unless, of course, they were the scumbag that snitched to CPS.

No I did not (1983 suit). I filed suit against these Marxist whackos in state Court. The Brown County District Court (Nebraska, 8th Federal Circut).

I am still well within the statue of limitations to file suit in Federal Distric Court. And have every intention of doing so, unless there is some type of law that says I can not sue these whackos twice ( I do not believe there is any such law).

I believe the statue of limitations on a 1983 suit is two years. If so, I will need to get filed in Federal Court by the end of next January.

I do not expect to get anywhere in state Court. But we are learning how to sue these whackos; & correcting our mistakes before we move into Federal Court.

We have spent every dime we ever had already. When we go to trial, we will probably hire another attorney ro represent my mother, & my little girl, & co-council me.

But that will probably be down the road a ways. Right now we have waited a month, or so, for a decision on the states motion for summary judgement.

Bob Fletcher

[Dan Sullivan]

[quote="amsnwoo"]

This is what I sent the case worker

1. Copy of family rights brochure:
Family Survival InformationWhat Happens Next
<<<snip>>>

2. In the 1789 French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen article 9 states, “As all persons are held innocent until they shall have been declared guilty, if arrest shall be indispensable, all harshness not essential to the securing of the prisoner’s person shall be severely repressed by law.”
<<<snip>>>

3. The thing that needs to be changed is to have my son returned to me.

4. My son IS my strength.

5. Not until the department took him from me.

6. I did not discipline. I would only show him an alternitive solution to the problem.

7., 8., 9., 10.,
The right to privacy is not mentioned in the Constitution, but the Supreme Court has said that several of the amendments create this right.

<<<snip>>>

Produced by the ACLU

12-15 NO

[/quote]

Please post CPS' response to your information.

I'm very interested in what they do.

Did you show/discuss your answers to CPS' questions before you sent the paperwork back to CPS?

Thanks, Dan

[Bob_Lynn]

But I'll bet you will NEVER be allowed anyone who has ever had been violated by these Marxist whackos. I'd also cover any bet that comes my way; you won't be allowed a jurior that even knows someone who has been violated by CPS. Unless, of course, they were the scumbag that snitched to CPS.

You're probably right but it doesn't matter. In a way, I'd rather get parents on the jury who are unaware what CPS really does, in order to educate them. That will in turn, also educate me in how to best expose CPS to all those who have no clue. Furthermore, I am a avid believer in true justice. As such, I want to give these criminals the opportunity to try to prove their innocence in front of a totally unbiased jury of their peers. Something they don't afford to those they prosecute mercilessly. They are after all, innocent until I prove them guilty, right?

I believe the statue of limitations on a 1983 suit is two years.

That's correct, the statute of limitations on any civil suit is 2 years.

[Anonymous]

>>>>You're probably right but it doesn't matter. In a way, I'd rather get parents on the jury who are unaware what CPS really does, in order to educate them.


Parents who have no idea how these whackos operate may be hard to educate until you can bring thm out of their state of shock.

However, if these Marxist whackos were fair, even handed, & showed reverence for your Constitutional Rights; haveing someone on the jury who had dealt with them in the past; would tend to bias the jury for them, instead of against them.

The fact that you would welcome a jurior with CPS experience (we certainly would); & they will not; speaks volumes about CPS.

But remember; they're only doing what's best for you & your family.


>>>>I am a avid believer in true justice. As such, I want to give these criminals the opportunity to try to prove their innocence in front of a totally unbiased jury of their peers. Something they don't afford to those they prosecute mercilessly. They are after all, innocent until I prove them guilty, right?


The closest you will ever get to justice; is in front of an unbiased jury. But biased judges can hurt you in front of an unbiased jury; & they generally do.

I agree; CPS is innocent until you prove their guilt in a Court of law. However; presumption of innocence; is a Constitutional Right these Marxist bastards despise. Quite frankly; it is also a Right that 99.9% of all judges litterally despise.

Have you ever noticed that CPS, & cops, & the like; who violate peoples Rights with impunity; are always the first to demand their Rights; whenever someone they violated goes after them for their crimes against humanity; & the Constitution?

These people really do give incest a bad name.

I hope you sue these whackos into the stone age.

Best wishes,
Bob Fletcher

[Bob_Lynn]

From the many federal cases against CPS I've reviewed, the vast majority are eventually decided against CPS for obvious reasons. These scum are blatant in the manner in which they violate human rights. However, most district court judges initially rule in favor of CPS because they often don't do the research and use what they believe are established case law and guidelines that give CPS absolute and/or qualified immunity. The higher courts generally overrule the district court judges are are much more inclined to either generate new opinons that favor constitutional protection or cite case law that does the same.

There are a rare few district court judges, such as Rebecca Pallmeyer (Illinois) for example, who view parental and children's rights as paramount. In our case, the district judge put on his blinders and has already gone the route of dismissing virtually everyone. He did however, leave us a tiny opening and did not dismiss the County and 2 caseworkers. I almost wish he did dismiss everyone so we can go right to Appeal. We now have to continue with the crumbs he left us, beat the hell out of the leftovers and then appeal the ones that escaped (temporarily).

[Anonymous]

Dear Bob:

>>>>From the many federal cases against CPS I've reviewed, the vast majority are eventually decided against CPS for obvious reasons. These scum are blatant in the manner in which they violate human rights.

Except for the Gloria Owens case in Missouri, I can’t think of a case CPS haven’t lost.

>>>>However, most district court judges initially rule in favor of CPS because they often don't do the research and use what they believe are established case law and guidelines that give CPS absolute and/or qualified immunity.

Most judges rule for CPS because they are Marxists; on a power trip.

Absolute, & qualified immunity? What a bunch of absolute; & blatantly un-Constitutional; nonsense. You & I are sovereign individuals (see below). Yet we can be held liable, both criminally, & civilly; for torts we commit against others (such as violating their Constitutional Rights). Absolute, & qualified immunity, are Marxist euphemisms for Police State.

The framers of the Constitution knew full well they would never get the Constitution through the state legislatures. It wouldn’t have passed in a single state. They were also concerned about legitimacy. They wanted the new Constitution to be loved, cherished, & respected; by the people.

Therefore, they decided to bypass the state legislatures, & take the vote on the Constitution directly to the people. They set up a committee to decide if this could be done legally. The committee decided that it could be done legally because in a free society, it is the individual person, & NOT THE GOVERNMENT, that is sovereign.

Note the statements in the Declaration Of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Note also the Ninth, & Tenth Amendments to the Constitution (the last two Amendments of the Bill of Rights):

Ninth Amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain Rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Who retains the Rights? The people do. You can not retain a Right if you do not have it to begin with (these Rights were granted to you by almighty God, & can not be taken away from you by the government).

Tenth Amendment:
The plowers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Who are the Rights reserved to? The states, then the people. Note that the Constitution prohibits no powers to the people. The prohibitions in the Constitution constrain the states (such as the prohibition on entering into treaties with foreign powers, or taxing commerce from other states).

There is no reasonable argument that the individual citizen in the United States is not the sovereign power. If the individual is sovereign; how on earth can the government be sovereign as well. If the government were sovereign, how on earth could the people have the Right to redress their grievances against the government; which is clearly stated in the First Amendment (suing the government; is a redress of your grievances against it)?

If the individual is not sovereign, how in earth do the people retain the Right to dissolve the government when it fails to redress their grievances against it?

>>>>The higher courts generally overrule the district court judges are much more inclined to either generate new opinions that favor constitutional protection or cite case law that does the same.

And even these Courts are inclined to overlook all but the most egregious Constitutional Rights violations.

>>>>There are a rare few district court judges, such as Rebecca Pallmeyer (Illinois) for example, who view parental and children's rights as paramount.

An extremely rare few.

>>>>In our case, the district judge put on his blinders and has already gone the route of dismissing virtually everyone. He did however, leave us a tiny opening and did not dismiss the County and 2 caseworkers.

This is the norm. If you really want to read an egregious case where the Court let everyone go except the main perpetrator; read the 8th Circuit case; Heartland Christian Academy v. Waddell. Although the sheriffs departments were as guilty as Waddell, & several other CPS workers; the judge let everyone except the two CPS big dogs off. How disgraceful.

By the way; as of a week ago; Mike Waddell (CPS big dog), was still on the job in Missouri. Not one of these scumbags was ever held accountable. Even after the Court found at least two CPS big dogs committed perjury at trial (Mike Waddell was one of the CPS big dogs who perjured him self). What an absolute disgrace.

One more thing. The Courts never hold the judges to account for their part in perpetrating these egregious Constitutional Rights violations. How absolutely disgraceful.

>>>>I almost wish he did dismiss everyone so we can go right to Appeal. We now have to continue with the crumbs he left us, beat the hell out of the leftovers and then appeal the ones that escaped (temporarily).

Exactly. The judge realizes this. If he would have dismissed you outright, you would have won on appeal; & sued these Marxist sleeze balls. This way, all you can do is move forward (unless you file an introluctory appeal; which will delay your case, & probably be denied). If you get a favorable out come; chances are; you won’t appeal.

Therefore; most of the guilty go free. This tactic is commonly known as damage control. What an absolute disgrace.

Bob Fletcher

[Dazeemay]

Bob,

You are to be commended on your last post. I enjoyed every bit of the info.

I had a nun who taught me in high school the very things you have alluded to in this post about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
She also taught that one day, and she named the approximate years it would happen which is now, we would be fighting a full hard scale battle for these rights out in the open.

You might be interested in inamess's post on the In The News forum concerning this statement you made

One more thing. The Courts never hold the judges to account for their part in perpetrating these egregious Constitutional Rights violations. How absolutely disgraceful.

http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dl ... COLUMNISTS

[sob900]

You have the right NOT to answer any of those questions. You can not be forced into incriminating yourself in any way.

[Bob_Lynn]

I like your arguments very much Bob, unfortunately, the Courts convolute their perspective to the point where it makes little logical sense to us but fits their agendas which includes, among other things, job security and maintenance of their extremely profitable and rip-off legal industry, not to mention the $200-$300 billion dollar per year child peddling industry.

"If you get a favorable out come; chances are; you won’t appeal."

I plan to appeal regardless of outcome. My only drawback is that I doubt my attorney will appeal decisions he doesn't believe have a chance (such as the kangaroo court judge's dismissal).

[amsnwoo]

CPS has responded yet but since thier false allegations is drug use I asked if they put me in an intreatment program would I get my son faster. This is from the e-mail from my case worker:

In order to receive inpatient treatment you need to have a
recommendation for that level of care. It would be difficult to get that recommendation based
on my report. In order to regain custody you need to comply with the
treatment plan that we went over the other day.


Okay, if they don't feel my so-called drug problem is bad enough to get inpatient care why do they have my son?!? Isn't ANY drug problem bad enough for treatment? And are those questions they want us to answer my treatment plan???

P.S. Has anyone checked out my links? I have alot more I could add to it if I knew people were visiting the sites!

[Anonymous]

>>>>I like your arguments very much Bob, unfortunately, the Courts convolute their perspective to the point where it makes little logical sense to us but fits their agendas which includes, among other things, job security and maintenance of their extremely profitable and rip-off legal industry, not to mention the $200-$300 billion dollar per year child peddling industry.


Exactly Bob. The Constitution is totally irrevelant. THeir agenda is what counts. WHat an absolute disgrace.


>>>> plan to appeal regardless of outcome. My only drawback is that I doubt my attorney will appeal decisions he doesn't believe have a chance (such as the kangaroo court judge's dismissal).


Exactly. Your attorney is an "officer of the Court." What a joke. He serves two masters; & he generaly serves the governmet master a hell of a lot more than he serves you.

If he loses his exclusive membership to the bar; he is out. He can no longer practice law (a very appropiate term). The judge can sanction your attorney for fioling frivulous motions, &/or appeals (once again; define frivulous).

These sanctions can, & generally will lead to disbarment. What a sham. There are very few attorneys that have the courage to fight the system.

Whatr an absolutre disgrace.

Bob Fletcher