Need help understanding a motion filed by CPS

General chat area for anything that doesn't fit in elsewhere.

Moderators: family_man, LindaJM

jackiew75
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:23 pm
Location: NH

Need help understanding a motion filed by CPS

Postby jackiew75 » Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:42 am

DCYF attorney filed a Motion for Reconsideration and Clarification in our case..... I dont understand what this is. Anyone familiar?

Marina
Moderator
Posts: 5496
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 3:06 pm

Postby Marina » Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:09 pm

Do a web search for that phrase.

I came up with links that give some sense of what it means, but didn't take the time to find the best one to post here.

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

Postby Frustrated » Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:31 pm

Maybe that is the word exactly what it meant?

Please reconsider this and that...and clarify this or that...

Perhaps a Service Plan? Recommendations to the Judge?
It is easy to steal from poor people. But don't do it. And don't take advantage of those poor people in court. The Lord is on their side. He supports them and he will take things away from any person that takes from them.~ Proverbs 22:22

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

Postby Bob_Lynn » Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:32 pm

A Motion for Reconsideration is one that asks the judge to change his mind about a ruling. CPS attorneys would usually provide a brief with arguments why the judge should change his mind. And a Clarification means just that, CPS wants the judge to explain his ruling further as some things are unclear or left open to interpretation.
We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. Edward R. Murrow

jackiew75
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:23 pm
Location: NH

Postby jackiew75 » Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:35 pm

Yikes, I read a bit about it.... Basically, DCYF filed this motion towards the judge. What they are saying, is that the judge needs to go back and look over the laws that govern this court and reconsider his rulings.... Not sure what the hell they are thinking pulling this one. If I were the judge, boy would I be angry.

I am not sure what this is in regards too.... I can only imagine that it has to do with the motion that my husbands attorney filed for addition discovery in regards to our computers hardrive that Oregon has been in possesion of since January of 2006 that they will not release. Again, for those of you that are not up to speed on my story, the police "found" 24 pictures of hardcore and disgustingly illegal child pornography pictures.... not the crime lab, but the detective found them personally. These have apparently been in his possesion (maybe 9-12 months) but for some ungodly reason, nobody (police or DA) found the need to make an arrest or an indictement. Disgusting....

Back to where I was..... So because the DCYF attorney was trying to submit the pictures into evidence, our attorneys sqawked saying that there was no documentation or proof that these came off the computer and even if they did then why was noone charged. The judge refused the pictures at that time and then handed down his ruling a couple of days later saying that NH DCYF needed to contact the PD out in Oregon and have the hardrive sent here for independent analysis. I can only imagine just how irrate all of these liars are about this one. Some days what I would pay to be a fly on the wall! I believe the motion for reconsideration and clarification goes along with the theory that the burden of proof is so small and this is not criminal but family court so there is no need to go through all of this nonsense..... This is the same attorney (DCYF) who is waiting for imaginary documentation from the PD that does not exist and thinks that everyone should "believe this detective, after all, he is a police detective".

Anxious to see how the judge feels against this motion against him.....

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

Postby Frustrated » Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:08 pm

So far it is sounding GOOD in your Favor! The Case is at best "Weak". Judge already made his ruling. He has to go by the Law, with prepondarence of the EVIDENCE. The Evidence itself is WEAK and has NO DOCUMENT PROOF that it CAME OFF your Computer such as dates, isp addresses, and where located in the files. Just the Pictures, bluntly.
If I was the Judge, I would want more evidene than just "pictures".

I think so far, it is sounding wonderful for your Case and possibly that the Case will be dismissed due to "lack of Evidence".

Finger Crossed for ya and I will be praying for your Family for the good outcome.

Did you hear the News two days ago on CNN News? The Scientists now say that the Kids "accidentally" surfed the web internet and had the porn pop ups ACCIDENTALLY. They further say that 85% were accidentally popped up on the Internet by itself.

I do believe that because my Friend had told me that her Computer had popped up at least five porn sites unwillingly, even with fire walls, and blockers, and all that. It is so powerful that it pushed and popped itself up.

It is horrible and most likely these can be back tracked into your Files. Spywares, and blockers and Firewalls are sometimes no good. Trojan Horses are around for a long time, and managed to get on everybody's Computers. It is all about Competition.

USA Senate is considering banning Porn Pop ups on the Internet to protect Children from "accidentally" seeing it on the Internet while surfing. I think it is a good idea.
It is easy to steal from poor people. But don't do it. And don't take advantage of those poor people in court. The Lord is on their side. He supports them and he will take things away from any person that takes from them.~ Proverbs 22:22

User avatar
good dad
Site Admin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:11 am
Location: Minnesota

Postby good dad » Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:37 pm

the police "found" 24 pictures of hardcore and disgustingly illegal child pornography pictures.... not the crime lab, but the detective found them personally.


Is there a courtdate set for the Motion for Reconsideration and Clarification????

I really don't think this "newbie" detective has the needed qualifications to exam your hard drive.. Dig further into this to present evidence to the court.


Computer forensics The simple definition of Computer Forensics, "... is the use of specialized techniques for recovery, authentication, and analysis of electronic data when a case involves issues relating to reconstruction of computer usage, examination of residual data, authentication of data by technical analysis or explanation of technical features of data and computer usage. Computer forensics requires specialized expertise that goes beyond normal data collection and preservation techniques available to end-users or system support personnel." (Kroll-OnTrack). This process often involves investigating computer systems to determine whether they are or have been used for illegal or unauthorized activities. Mostly, computer forensics experts investigate data storage devices, either fixed like hard disks or removable like compact disks and solid state devices. Computer forensics experts:

Identify sources of documentary or other digital evidence.
Preserve the evidence.
Analyze the evidence.
Present the findings.
Computer forensics is done in a fashion that adheres to the standards of evidence that are admissible in a court of law.Thus, computer forensics must be techno-legal in nature rather than purely technical or purely legal.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_forensics

By the detective mearly saying there are pictures isn't showing" the use of specialized techniques for recovery, authentication, and analysis of electronic data when a case involves issues relating to reconstruction of computer usage, examination of residual data, authentication of data by technical analysis or explanation of technical features of data and computer usage."
*********************
My advice is my opinion and not legal advice
*********************
A bad lawyer is worse then no lawyer and bad advice is worse then no advice....

jackiew75
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:23 pm
Location: NH

Postby jackiew75 » Thu Feb 08, 2007 6:01 am

I believe that the reason the judge ordered the hardrive is because he is seeing a lot of inconsistancies in the evidence. The judge made it clear that he knows nothing about computers but I think he was a bit concerned when the pictures came on a CD but nothing else went along with it such as ISP address', times, dates, etc. It certainly was a fair ruling on his part.

As for a court date on the motion, no. This whole adjudication process is mostly fighting about who is on the witness stand, how they are going to testify (telephonic or not), what evidence is admissable, etc. Generally, we have a 3 hour court time set aside for this hearing and 60-80% of it is just arguing motions. Typically, this is done in the judge's chambers out of our sight. I dont think that he will schedule another date as we have only been going to court one day a month for this adjudication process. We went to the preliminary hearing in December, the adjudication process started in January where we went twice, now one day is scheduled for February, then one day in March and I am assuming more is to come. The terrible part is that my husband has to live outside of the home during these months of fighting in court and that is very confusing to our children. Essentially we are prisoners in our own home because my husband has to be supervised by a relative and we cant go out and do anything.... not even play outside unless the relative is there watching. Dont get me wrong as we are very greatful that we atleast have that, but for this process to go on for months and months..... It takes away from your personal freedom's.

The detective, I don't even know where to begin with him.... He has done such a sloppy job in the investigation and thinks that he will "get us" with his foolish antics. He harrass' this family, threatens, degrades and lies about us..... What comes around goes around I believe..... The judicial system is slow at best but it does exist. I am just thankful that I kept the notes that I did in regards to my contact with him.... It shows a terrible pattern of behavior on his part and he should be ashamed of himself taking the role as a detective, swearing to protect people and uphold justice and look at what he is doing.

Its funny because someone we know out there was talking about this detective who basically broke down their door during a drug sort of raid.... He talked about how the detective was all gung ho about his "mission"..... The detective was at the wrong house! When my husband asked what the name of the detective was, it was the one working on this case against us. Just shows you what a clown this idiot is. I think he might have missed some days during training.

Marina
Moderator
Posts: 5496
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 3:06 pm

Postby Marina » Thu Feb 08, 2007 6:11 am

Here are some links on Ordering Adults out of the Home.

http://fightcps.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6315

I don't know what your state laws are, but as shown in Virginia, having one parent out of the home is a method of considering the children derived, thereby generating funding or potential funding for the agency.

I would like to see motions in court about this.

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

Postby Bob_Lynn » Thu Feb 08, 2007 8:20 am

good dad wrote:Is there a courtdate set for the Motion for Reconsideration and Clarification????


There isn't necessarily a hearing required for a ruling on a motion unless a party petitions for one or the judge orders one.
We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. Edward R. Murrow


Return to “Round Table”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests