Has anybody tried or is trying to sue over 4th/14th Amendmen

Are you going through an investigation now? Tell your story and get feedback here.

Moderators: family_man, LindaJM

busterbrown
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:27 pm

Has anybody tried or is trying to sue over 4th/14th Amendmen

Postby busterbrown » Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:23 pm

How common is it?

I have a family member whose children were questioned at school w/out her consent and it floors me that this is a common place occurence for CFS. It seems a clear violation of our children's rights.

Do many people try to sue over this and just aren't successful, or is just not common for people to try to sue?

Thanks for any feedback. I appreciate this website. Y'all have helped me equip my s-i-l. However, I have to admit, I liked it better a month ago when I didn't have a clue that the monster of CFS existed.

User avatar
unfairjustice05
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 7:39 pm
Location: missouri
Contact:

Postby unfairjustice05 » Wed Jan 11, 2006 12:45 am

I have't tried it yet,but CPS also questioned my 2 girls at school without me present or my permission.And that is a nono.Sedwards gave me the info on this.


http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/181/print

look at this site

the Gault case


In re Gault
387 U.S. 1 (1967)
Docket Number: 116
Abstract

Argued:


December 16, 1966

Decided:


May 15, 1967

Subjects:


Civil Rights: Juveniles
Facts of the Case

Gerald Francis Gault, fifteen years old, was taken into custody for allegedly making an obscene phone call. Gault had previously been placed on probation. The police did not leave notice with Gault's parents, who were at work, when the youth was arrested. After proceedings before a juvenile court judge, Gault was committed to the State Industrial School until he reached the age of 21.
Question Presented

Were the procedures used to commit Gault constitutionally legitimate under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Conclusion

No. The proceedings of the Juvenile Court failed to comply with the Constitution. The Court held that the proceedings for juveniles had to comply with the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment. These requirements included adequate notice of charges, notification of both the parents and the child of the juvenile's right to counsel, opportunity for confrontation and cross-examination at the hearings, and adequate safeguards against self-incrimination. The Court found that the procedures used in Gault's case met none of these requirements.

it was a violation back them i am not sure about now,since things have changed

http://web.utk.edu/~scheb/gault.html

http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/userman ... ourtsb.cfm

http://yria.alcade.net/essays/inregault.htm

alot of courts don't remember this case since it was so long ago.
Honeybee

busterbrown
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:27 pm

Postby busterbrown » Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:05 am

It certainly would be a violation. That's why I don't understand why there aren't more lawsuits. Why doesn't the ACLU get involved in these cases? Or have they?

There was some good information in the legal research forum regarding this, too.

Keep us informed if you decided to proceed.

Bob_Lynn
Posts: 1276
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 3:56 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Postby Bob_Lynn » Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:11 am

Your question/topic is, has anyone sued over 4th/14th Amendment rights violations then you cite specifics regarding questioning children in school, so I'll give you answers to what may be different issues.

1. Yes, many people have sued over 4th/14th Amendment rights violations, including my family. If I'm not mistaken, most Section 1983 lawsuits vs CPS include one or both allegations of 4th and 14th Amendment rights violations.

2. The last I heard, there was a case where an Appeals Court ruled that interviews of children in private schools without a warrant violates 4th Amendment protections, however, I don't believe this applies to public schools and I'm not sure if this issue was specifically struck down when it comes to public schools or no one has sued on that issue.

3. You have a right to demand that your child's public school denies an interview with your child by any government agent who does not have a warrant and failure to comply would be a 4th Amendment violation.

Note all the above is strictly my opinion and not legal advice.

Bob_Lynn
Posts: 1276
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 3:56 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Postby Bob_Lynn » Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:41 am

From Thomas Dutkiewicz - Connecticut DCF Watch

THE U.S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 7TH CIRCUIT RECENTLY

RULED THAT CHILD ABUSE INVESTIGATIONS HELD ON PRIVATE PROPERTY

AND INTERVIEW OF A CHILD WITHOUT CONSENT UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

The decision in the case of Doe et al, v. Heck et al (No. 01-3648, 2003 US App. Lexis 7144) will affect the manner in which law enforcement and child protective services investigations of alleged child abuse or neglect are conducted. The decision of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals found that this practice, that is “no prior consent” interview of a child, will ordinarily constitute a “clear violation” of the constitutional rights of parents under the 4th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. According to the Court, the investigative interview of a child constitutes a “search and seizure” and, when conducted on private property without “consent, a warrant, probable cause, or exigent circumstances,” such an interview is an unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the rights of the parent, child, and, possibly the owner of the private property.

gideonmacleish
Posts: 460
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 9:50 am
Contact:

Postby gideonmacleish » Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:44 am

Bob_Lynn wrote:2. The last I heard, there was a case where an Appeals Court ruled that interviews of children in private schools without a warrant violates 4th Amendment protections, however, I don't believe this applies to public schools and I'm not sure if this issue was specifically struck down when it comes to public schools or no one has sued on that issue.



My advice does not constitute legal advice, either. What I found regarding public schools in the research provided is that the suits have met with mixed results. Courts use what they call "the Terry standard" (meaning, that a search was reasonably justified at its inception) in public school cases. If there's good reason for the interview, they usually rule against the parents.

That being said, in some states, at least, anonymous reports with no further substantiation may not constitute a reasonably justified search (again, you'd need to talk with a lawyer about this or research it further). In Texas, for instance, investigators are actually given VERY little latitude as regards an investigation based solely on an anonymous tip. I was shocked to discover this fact (it is clearly stated in the state CPS Policies and Procedures manual), as I know MANY cases where anonymous tips have led to extensive searches (the loophole CPS uses is that these searches were "consent" searches, even though the family was not informed of their rights; indeed, the pamphlet they leave with their calling card indicates that these searches are legally required).

I do believe you can take action BEFORE the fact to protect your child from an interview without your knowledge at their public school. Make sure the documents you file to prevent such interviews are within the full compliance of the law, signed, dated and notarized...and that you have a copy FOR EACH CHILD, though...I know personally of a family that had such a document on file for their oldest two and CPS interviewed the youngest, and used his interview as the basis for obtaining warrants for the other two.

User avatar
scarfyrre
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: Fulton County, GA

Postby scarfyrre » Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:47 am

Also note that the ruling is the police, not CPS, that violated the child's rights. Sadly, until we can change it, they're two different entities with different rules.

If the police try to question any child without a warrant, and/or if the child asks for the parents/attorney, and they continue the questioning, it is a violation of that child's rights. Usually in a criminal setting, though. As far as CPS coming in and talking to your kid at school, they can do that whenever they want.

This is just a generalized statement, so don't take minutae out for argument sake. :) Most of what the constitution refers to is criminal cases, and what ACLU deals with is only outright constitutional violations. Some cases fall within constitutional rights and ACLU cases, but only under certain circumstances.

Basically, as long as anything to do with abuse charges stay in family court, which for some odd reason doesn't have to follow the constitution, the ACLU can't get involved and our rights are being trampled upon.

My husband was never charged by the DA or the police, yet juvenile court can remove our child without a fair hearing as what we're used to with criminal cases. And juvenile court never has to hear anything they don't wish to. If we lose our son, we have to go to appeals court, which oddly enough follows normal procedure.

It's just all F'd up, ain't it?

Again, a sweeping statement. Don't pick on me. :P :wink:

User avatar
Dazeemay
Posts: 4135
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 1:07 pm

Postby Dazeemay » Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:52 am

Can't I consider the schools, as a parent, private property being as I pay taxes.

Maybe I am being extreme here, but if I pay for something it is mine. I paid for it and even though public schools are considered just that, it is my tax dollars that pay for it to be public, but I have a vested interest in it in that part of that public is privately mine by my invested tax money.

Sounds good to me, but then I am not in a very good mood and I tend to rant when I have been crossed one to many times :evil:
**********************************
This is not legal advice;hopefully wisdom

To put it in simple terms…when the authorities ARE the perpetrators and the perpetrators ARE the authorities, there is no earthly justice or recourse, at the end of the day (unless the American people wake up).

Therefore, those who have achieved the highest levels of power seek to ‘enjoy’ the most grievous and extreme injustices. For many of those in the highest circles of power, the greatest statement of power is to perpetrate the greatest possible injustice…the savage, brutal traumatization and abuse of an innocent child.
http://themurkynews.blogspot.com/ MattTwoFour

"Ultimately, the law is only as good as the judge" --- D.X. Yue, 2005, in "law, reason and judicial fraud"
http://www.parentalrightsandjustice.com/index.cgi?ctype=Page;site_id=1;objid=45;curloc=Site:1

Bob_Lynn
Posts: 1276
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 3:56 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Postby Bob_Lynn » Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:10 am

scarfyrre wrote:Also note that the ruling is the police, not CPS, that violated the child's rights. Sadly, until we can change it, they're two different entities with different rules.


I beg to differ. Police have greater powers than CPS, regardless, any court ruling applicable to police, unless there's an explicit statutory exception, applies similarly to all government agents and certainly to CPS.

(just my opinion)

User avatar
scarfyrre
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: Fulton County, GA

Postby scarfyrre » Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:40 am

Bob_Lynn wrote:
scarfyrre wrote:Also note that the ruling is the police, not CPS, that violated the child's rights. Sadly, until we can change it, they're two different entities with different rules.


I beg to differ. Police have greater powers than CPS, regardless, any court ruling applicable to police, unless there's an explicit statutory exception, applies similarly to all government agents and certainly to CPS.

(just my opinion)


Ah, but a ruling dealing with the police and not CPS directly cannot/won't be used for one or the other. If that court case said that CPS violated his 14th amendment rights, then there we go, but it specifically targeted police. Not only that, but the case cited resulted in a child going to 'jail' and dealing with a criminal case, not CPS coming into a school and interviewing a child.

The constitution deals mainly with criminal proceedings, and gives criminals more rights than parents fighting for their lives in family court. It covers very minimal due process for us, and that's the problem. The Gault case does not apply to us.

And that is how it was explained to me by a very nice lawyer whose dirty socks I wash once a week. Or used to until CPS made him move out yet again. :(

Oh, and I'm not arguing to knock this down, but we have to figure out how to get rights back into family court and/or these abuse charges into criminal court. Right now, no matter what our constitution says, we have no rights. I guess, though, if we went out and stole a car, we can have all the rights we want. Go figure the government wants to strip families of everything yet screams about Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

User avatar
kdddav
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 6:32 pm

Postby kdddav » Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:53 am

The only way to get any of this to work as it should be, we need to get "Abuse" made into a Crime, not a Civil issue.

Satan's cruelist trick to the world was to convince most of the people he didn't exist.

CPS's even more cruel trick to the Country was to convince most of the people that Abuse is not a crime.

You can quote me on that.

At least that way, if criminalized, Parents, innocent or not, can get the same protections and consideration as a criminal.

There have been some case laws where the Police and by association, the Social Workers, get their immunity removed. But to do that, you have to PROVE they violated your Rights, and talking about it isn't proof.

It's why I advocate video taping, covert, on your property. The moment you ask politely for a warrant, and show them the kids through a window, not a doorway, they they are ok and safe, and they force their way in with a police officer who threatens arrest or worse and you have tyhe proof, THEN and only then you can remove their immunity to a Civil Suit.

Yup, Civil Suit. And they will lose, as every parent who has done this has won. I used to have the Stats, caselaws, etc, but I had to reformatt my hard Drive and lost it all. Give me a few to re-look this all up and I will post the caselaws that point to this.
"The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy of the State." —Dr. Joseph M. Goebbels, Hitler’s Propaganda Minister

Bob_Lynn
Posts: 1276
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 3:56 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Postby Bob_Lynn » Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:17 am

scarfyrre wrote:a ruling dealing with the police and not CPS directly cannot/won't be used for one or the other. If that court case said that CPS violated his 14th amendment rights, then there we go, but it specifically targeted police. Not only that, but the case cited resulted in a child going to 'jail' and dealing with a criminal case, not CPS coming into a school and interviewing a child.


Well, once again I disagree. A court ruling is applicable to any similar situation and this is supported by many such past rulings. A precedent is not focused on an exactly like situation, it only has to be similar to be similarly applicable.

scarfyrre wrote:The constitution deals mainly with criminal proceedings, and gives criminals more rights than parents fighting for their lives in family court. It covers very minimal due process for us, and that's the problem.


Sorry to disagree with this as well. The Constitution applies to everything, criminal and civil. It does not give criminals more rights than parents at all. The fact that it seems that way in practice does not mean your statement is true. The Constitution applies to everyone, criminal or not. Due process applies to everything and everyone as well.

scarfyrre wrote:The Gault case does not apply to us.

And that is how it was explained to me by a very nice lawyer whose dirty socks I wash once a week. Or used to until CPS made him move out yet again.


I'm not sure who you mean by "us" but the right to counsel, opportunity for confrontation and cross-examination at a hearing, and adequate safeguards against self-incrimination applies to everyone and anyone. This is not the first time I've disagreed with an attorney and have already won arguments vs attorneys in the past in my own case. Of course, I will never claim I'm 100% right, this is just my educated opinion.

scarfyrre wrote:I'm not arguing to knock this down


And I'm not arguing at all, I'm merely stating my opinion for the purposes of discussion. The reader is free to come to his/her own conclusion.

User avatar
scarfyrre
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: Fulton County, GA

Postby scarfyrre » Wed Jan 11, 2006 12:26 pm

Bah, I had a nice reply but I'm having too bad of a day/week/month/year/life to care what our rights are or aren't. It doesn't matter with family court and CPS because they make up the rules. If that Gault ruling ever mattered with CPS, it would've ended school visits ages ago. Criminal IS different than family, and they DO have more rights than a parent fighting for their child.

CPS's own lawyer lied to the judge yesterday in our case, but that doesn't matter. God forbid we pay 3k for a decent psychologist for the eval, because CPS wants their own hacks to do it and the judge agrees.

I give up.

User avatar
Dazeemay
Posts: 4135
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 1:07 pm

Postby Dazeemay » Wed Jan 11, 2006 12:45 pm

Scarfrrye,

You need to take a break from all of this. Get some R&R. Back away for a couple of weeks. Believe me I know. When I would do this it would not look so overwhelming. It is overwhelming, but doesn't make one feel down and out about it.

Even though we have our granddaughter back it still can get overwhelming just being on the board and seeing so many hurting like you are and not being able to do anything to pull all of you out of the muck and mire they have put you in.

I have decided to get back into my writing and crafts. If I don't I won't be of use to anybody. These two things keep me relaxed and focused.

I found a couple of clear answers to helping our granddaughter whenever I did this while she was incarcerated at the theraputic home.
**********************************
This is not legal advice;hopefully wisdom

To put it in simple terms…when the authorities ARE the perpetrators and the perpetrators ARE the authorities, there is no earthly justice or recourse, at the end of the day (unless the American people wake up).

Therefore, those who have achieved the highest levels of power seek to ‘enjoy’ the most grievous and extreme injustices. For many of those in the highest circles of power, the greatest statement of power is to perpetrate the greatest possible injustice…the savage, brutal traumatization and abuse of an innocent child.
http://themurkynews.blogspot.com/ MattTwoFour

"Ultimately, the law is only as good as the judge" --- D.X. Yue, 2005, in "law, reason and judicial fraud"
http://www.parentalrightsandjustice.com/index.cgi?ctype=Page;site_id=1;objid=45;curloc=Site:1

busterbrown
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:27 pm

Postby busterbrown » Wed Jan 11, 2006 12:54 pm

Scarfyyre,

I hate to say it, but I WISH and HOPE that you are wrong and that Bob is right. It is certainly more palatable for me to believe that we are ALL deserving of due process.

Yet, your explanation would answer why the social workers are still going to the schools and that there isn't lawsuit after lawsuit pursuing them.

But the case of Merck (?) and the private Christian School wasn't a criminal case, was it? And that was a successful suit.

Don't give up. Some of the websites that I have visisted said that CFS's goal is to wear you down until you're at a point where you don't care anymore what happens so long as it is over. Don't reach that point.

My heart goes out to you all.

Thanks to everyone for the discussion.

Dan Sullivan
Posts: 1538
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:42 am
Location: Long Island, New York

Postby Dan Sullivan » Wed Jan 11, 2006 1:42 pm

scarfyrre wrote:
Bob_Lynn wrote:
scarfyrre wrote:Also note that the ruling is the police, not CPS, that violated the child's rights. Sadly, until we can change it, they're two different entities with different rules.


I beg to differ. Police have greater powers than CPS, regardless, any court ruling applicable to police, unless there's an explicit statutory exception, applies similarly to all government agents and certainly to CPS.

(just my opinion)


Ah, but a ruling dealing with the police and not CPS directly cannot/won't be used for one or the other. If that court case said that CPS violated his 14th amendment rights, then there we go, but it specifically targeted police. Not only that, but the case cited resulted in a child going to 'jail' and dealing with a criminal case, not CPS coming into a school and interviewing a child.


The violation of due process was found against the Family Court Judge.

Read, http://web.utk.edu/~scheb/gault.html

"We conclude that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires that in respect of proceedings to determine delinquency which may result in commitment to an institution in which the juvenile's freedom is curtailed, the child and his parents must be notified of the child's right to be represented by counsel retained by them, or if they are unable to afford counsel, that counsel will be appointed to represent the child. . . . "

User avatar
unfairjustice05
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 7:39 pm
Location: missouri
Contact:

Postby unfairjustice05 » Wed Jan 11, 2006 1:54 pm

Your so right CPS/DCS will try to wear you down,but in my case I am NOT letting them wear me down.I am continuing my fight and hope to wear them down,they did not expect for me and my new husband to go as far as we have now,we took them by surprise and hired a new lawyer (husband fired the court appointed one) and filed motion after motion.And now they will get a big surprise when they get the notice to appear in the divorce court from 12 years ago.

The judge advised my ex husband to go remodify the divorce decree and he hasn't done it yet.Well,we gave my attorney another 1500 to file a motion to take my case out of juvinile court and go back to the original divorce decree.

So from the little court house to the big courthouse.Me and my husband are not going to wear down we have to much fight in us to stop,and we are fighitng for a good reason.

They will sooner or later get tired of going to court knowing thatthey have no case and no reason to keep my kids.And once the judge sees that all 3 of my children are now teens the judge will just look at them and say what reason do you have to keep these children.My son will be 18 in April and my girls are now 16,14 and also the kids dad wants to keep the kids because he doesn't have to pay his child support that he is 30,000 dollars in arrears on.His wife is 10,000 behind in hers.

And once the judge sees that DCS will look really stupid with a big S.

But,just don't let your guard down,keeep it up and don't back off.Keep pushing till they can't push back anymore.

I also have a sign on my front door that reads

"if you are fom the state ither CPS/DCS show proper ID and wait for my attorney to be present."
Honeybee

User avatar
Frustrated
Posts: 3916
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 11:15 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Postby Frustrated » Wed Jan 11, 2006 4:21 pm

I have a sign on my door:

"This person is Deaf, you must obtain a Professional Interpreter according to the Human Rights Code Chapter 19, blah, blah...."


they have ignored this instruction twice thus far, and it is looking good for a Human Civil Rights Violation Case.

I SUCCESFULLY WON a Human Rights Case against them four years ago, for the lack of an Interpreter. They keep on ignorning this thus far. This time around, they are going to be deeper trouble than they were ever before. But that never stopped them before, they will keep doing the persecution and the only thing they do best anyways to all innocent families.

The only way we can think of is to be prepared and ammunized ourselves with the Law, the knowledge of the Manual, and to record their conversation, and to document everything, and keep a track of everything is what keeps them at bay.

Yes, they went to my Kid's School for the past 5 years, kept asking questions there without my knowledge and my permission.

You can successfully sue the CPS for Repetitve Questioning on Children, and the Judges HATES Repetitive Questioning on Children. There is a Case Law and I forget where? LOL These information, I think was on:

http://www.casat.com or was that org? oh well, either way you will find out.

LOL

These CPS are EVIL~ Best stay away from those people.

We are overwhelmed, yes, it is best to take a Vacation once in a while. The CPS cannot question a Family while they are on Vacation, because it is the jurisdiction problem they have. So good for us. Let's take a Vacation far and far away. Let's go to Jamaica, Hawaii, The Bahamas, Mexico...relax for a bit, take a breather, then come back with strong will against them. :wink: I know this works, because I have tried this so many times every year. Twice in a Year, 6 months intervals, because they work in 6 months Service Plan, so take a vacation, while they come back and close the case. :D I am taking a Vacation this Summer. Nothing will stop me, Nothing!

User avatar
Frustrated
Posts: 3916
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 11:15 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Postby Frustrated » Wed Jan 11, 2006 4:26 pm

Oh, I just remembered, you just type in the Google search and type in the word:

Human Rights Commission Cases or just Human Rights Commission

It will pop up with all the Cases of Human Civil Rights Violation with People filed for many different reasons.

It would be worth taking a look at. :D

Momoffor
Moderator
Posts: 1307
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:17 pm

Postby Momoffor » Wed Jan 11, 2006 5:26 pm

Bob_Lynn wrote:From Thomas Dutkiewicz - Connecticut DCF Watch

THE U.S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 7TH CIRCUIT RECENTLY

RULED THAT CHILD ABUSE INVESTIGATIONS HELD ON PRIVATE PROPERTY

AND INTERVIEW OF A CHILD WITHOUT CONSENT UNCONSTITUTIONAL. .


Public schools are government property...therefore NOT private ....IF your child were attending a private school not funded by the government this would apply. But since public schools are public property and state 'agencies' they can question the child to their hearts content without regard to that ruling.

Public school = public property

User avatar
kdddav
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 6:32 pm

Postby kdddav » Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:09 pm

* United States Code TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
o PART I - CRIMES CHAPTER 109 - SEARCHES AND SEIZURES

U.S. Code as of: 01/02/01

Section 2234. Authority exceeded in executing warrant

Whoever, in executing a search warrant, willfully exceeds his authority or exercises it with unnecessary severity, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year. U.S. Code as of: 01/02/01

Section 2235. Search warrant procured maliciously Whoever maliciously and without probable cause procures a search warrant to be issued and executed, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year.

Section 2236. Searches without warrant

Whoever, being an officer, agent, or employee of the United States or any department or agency thereof, engaged in the enforcement of any law of the United States, searches any private dwelling used and occupied as such dwelling without a warrant directing such search, or maliciously and without reasonable cause searches any other building or property without a search warrant, shall be fined for a first offense not more than $1,000; and, for a subsequent offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.


-------------
After a comma (,) and with or (or) used, maliciously and without reasonable cause, and it is attached to "any other" building or property, no mention if it's public or private as the word ANY covers a lot of places, is why Parents win this in the Supreme Court.

So it's covered. CPS thrives on ignorance. Even a lawyer's.
"The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy of the State." —Dr. Joseph M. Goebbels, Hitler’s Propaganda Minister

User avatar
Dazeemay
Posts: 4135
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 1:07 pm

Postby Dazeemay » Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:24 pm

Thanks for that info Kdddav; I will make sure my daughter gives it to her lawyer. This new lawyer is thinking about going the route of fighting cps because of parents not getting due process.

Are you able to post a win or two from the Supreme Court
**********************************
This is not legal advice;hopefully wisdom

To put it in simple terms…when the authorities ARE the perpetrators and the perpetrators ARE the authorities, there is no earthly justice or recourse, at the end of the day (unless the American people wake up).

Therefore, those who have achieved the highest levels of power seek to ‘enjoy’ the most grievous and extreme injustices. For many of those in the highest circles of power, the greatest statement of power is to perpetrate the greatest possible injustice…the savage, brutal traumatization and abuse of an innocent child.
http://themurkynews.blogspot.com/ MattTwoFour

"Ultimately, the law is only as good as the judge" --- D.X. Yue, 2005, in "law, reason and judicial fraud"
http://www.parentalrightsandjustice.com/index.cgi?ctype=Page;site_id=1;objid=45;curloc=Site:1

User avatar
kdddav
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 6:32 pm

Postby kdddav » Thu Jan 12, 2006 1:04 am

Aponte Matos v. Toledo Davilla (1st Cir. 1998)

Wallis v. Spencer, (9th Cir 1999)

Brokaw v. Mercer County, (7th Cir. 2000)

Good v. Dauphin County Social Services, (3rd Cir. 1989)

Wooley v. City of Baton Rouge, (5th Cir. 2000)

California v. Hodari, 499 U.S. 621 (1991)

Yabarra v. Illinois, 44 U.S. 85 (1979)

§ 1983. Aponte Matos v. Toledo Davilla, 1st Cir. 1998)

That's what I got in my arsenal, you may all ready have a few of these. I had many more, but my information was mostly lost due to reformatting my harddrive and I forgot to backup some data. It will take me a while to rebuild the info I had.
"The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy of the State." —Dr. Joseph M. Goebbels, Hitler’s Propaganda Minister

busterbrown
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:27 pm

Postby busterbrown » Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:53 pm

Thank you for such thorough information.

My sil had a bad app't w/ her lawyer and she feels there is no hope or recourse. He was more doom and gloom than the CFS agents, saying anything she pursues will only make matters worse and not work toward securing her children.

So, I am sure that this is one of the reasons many folks don't sue CFS and state laws for constitutional violations. They get to a point to where they are just hoping to have their children back, and constitutional violations don't work toward that end.

Once again, thanks for the discussion. Will copy for my records in the hopes that when things settle at some point, maybe sil will want to revisit this issue.

DLFritsch
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 8:25 am

ACLU

Postby DLFritsch » Sat Jan 14, 2006 6:45 am

The letter I recieved from the ACLU explains they can not take on a dispute between individual parties, however it will file cases that affect civil rights of a large number of people. Should we try all together?


Return to “CPS Investigations”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests