Rds Investigation

DRAFT! You don’t even have to read this. Just save it in case.

This is another one of my attempts at purchasing Life Insurance by raising awareness about an important issue. As you know I am involved in the CPS controversy. What I didn’t know was how long the abuse and expose of the agencies has been known. Conservatively the problems in the agencies in most counties in the US has been known by the media, the politicians and law enforcement for the last 10 years.

Custody Fight: Allegations of Molestation

By Martin Burns, Investigative Producer, Feb 27, 2013 10:02 PM PST                                                                                

Police are investigating allegations a father molested his own daughter. Officers have removed the child from his home – twice.

So why did social workers – or someone – put her back with dad, the alleged molester, each time?

It’s a question we continue to investigate. But the answer is hidden from most public scrutiny.

This Orange County custody battle is one of the stranger cases we’ve covered during our series, “Lost in the System.”

We’ve been reporting these cases for months.

Now a group of parents are organizing, trying to bring change to a system they say is abusing parents who bring charges of sexual abuse.

They claim even a parent who reports child abuse by their spouse is often punished.

Instead of the alleged abuser losing custody of the child, the reporting parent loses or has their custody rights curtailed.

It sounds hard to believe, but Fox 11 has seen case after case – all raising serious, troubling questions.

A recent confidential report – leaked to the Los Angeles Times – detailed terrible deficiencies inside the Los Angeles County Department of Social Services … the department often responsible for investigating child abuse in court cases.

This only adds to the concern.  We continue to look for insiders, whistle-blowers and others with information – pro or con — about DCFS and the Family and Dependency courts.

If you have any information, you may call (310) 584-2079  or email Martin Burns at Martin.Burns@FoxTV.com

WASHINGTON, October 18, 2013 — The death in late summer of Fox News investigative reporter and producer Martin Burns, came as a heavy blow to the many child advocates and suffering parents who looked to Burns’ award winning TV segments “Lost in the System,” to champion their fight for justice for child victims of abuse and trafficking. The LA County Coroner allegedly visited Burns’ house on the day his body was discovered and reportedly told an inquisitive neighbour Burns had probably suffered a “catastrophic accident” but had only minor abrasions on his body from a fall. According to a spokesman from the coroner’s office, Burns’ body was recovered from a location 30’ east of the east edge of the Castle Canyon trail en route for Inspiration Point. Hikers familiar with the trail have commented they consider it unlikely Burns would have died from the fall alone and they suspect other factors were involved. The LA County Coroner allegedly visited Burns’ house on the day his body was discovered and reportedly told an inquisitive neighbour Burns had probably suffered a “catastrophic accident” but had only minor abrasions on his body from a fall. According to a spokesman from the coroner’s office, Burns’ body was recovered from a location 30’ east of the east edge of the Castle Canyon trail en route for Inspiration Point. Hikers familiar with the trail have commented they consider it unlikely Burns would have died from the fall alone and they suspect other factors were involved.

Blogs and social media comments by individuals who seek clarity on the circumstances of Burns’ death draw specific attention to links with the deaths of three former Georgia state senators, Nancy Schaefer (R), Bobby Franklin (R) and Robert Brown (D) and documentary maker, Bill Bowen.

 

 

I call your attention to the following in Martin’s article before he was silenced:

“It’s a question we continue to investigate. But the answer is hidden from most public scrutiny.” This Orange County custody battle is one of the stranger cases we’ve covered during our series, “Lost in the System.” We’ve been reporting these cases for months. It sounds hard to believe, but Fox 11 has seen case after case – all raising serious, troubling questions: Instead of the alleged abuser losing custody of the child, the reporting parent loses or has their custody rights curtailed.”

 

Here is my question to those who ask why Martin Burns; three former Georgia state senators, Nancy Schaefer (R), Bobby Franklin (R) and Robert Brown; (D) and documentary maker, Bill Bowen were murdered.

 

The story of the corruption and abuse in the Child Care System has been around for at least 10 years. The system itself is flawed and needs to be fundamentally reformed from the ground up, but instead of addressing the egregious mistreatment of the non-offending parent and the child, Los Angeles County keeps appointing Blue Ribbon Commissions to give the public the impression they are doing something to prevent and stop the abuse by the offending parent and to stop “mismanagement.”

 

A high-profile case, a judge’s stern warning and a critical state audit have made Orange County a recent statewide example for critics who say child welfare systems suffer from chronic mismanagement and poor oversight.

 

The audit, by the California State Auditor, revealed that child welfare agencies here and elsewhere can fail to do basic background checks and assessments needed to ensure that vulnerable children, who have been neglected or abused, are not again put in unsafe situations.

 

An audit of agencies in Orange, San Francisco and Butte counties found a series of problems that, it says, could lead to children being wrongfully kept in dangerous homes or removed unjustifiably. “This report concludes that these agencies must provide better protection for abused and neglected children,” State Auditor Elaine Howe wrote in an April letter to Gov. Jerry Brown accompanying her report.

 

Exposing the counties Child Care systems that take away the victimized child to be placed in foster care or worse give it to the offending parent is almost old Fox 11 news.

 

The 9-year-old child who was allegedly molested by her own father is Lexi Dillon.

There must be a 100 years of accumulated expertise in child sexual abuse detection by her therapist, forensic police detectives, medical doctors, a forensic 730 child custody evaluator and a number of other Court Appointees all of whom believe and find this child’s disclosures of sexual abuse credible. There is also physical evidence by qualified medical doctors as well. The heinous thing is that in this case— like in other cases we have observed over the years as Court watchers—the Judge chose to ignore the exculpatory evidence of their own court appointees.

 

And while there is no question that the 9-year-old was molested and the mother is the non-offending parent trying to keep her daughter safe, everything else about the case is “strange.” “Every aspect of it has been deeply troubling,” Assemblyman Tim Donnelly said of the case, which has drawn media attention locally and in Sacramento. [1]

Despite a “mountain of evidence suggesting that [the] child has been molested,” including reports from a teacher, psychologist, medical doctor and the girl herself, officials failed to follow through with a proper investigation. “CPS never interviewed the teacher, [the girl] separately, and never interviewed the father” regarding that report, he said. In fact, CPS officials ultimately conducted 16 investigations and found the abuse claims to be “unfounded,” according to court records.

 

The same was true for reports by a doctor and a psychiatrist, according to Claypool, the mother’s legal counsel.

 

 

Furthermore, even though the Social Services Agency liaison handling the case was later discharged by county human resources officials due to “possible perjury” and violations of agency policy regarding his testimony in the Dillon custody case, the agency still refuses to reconsider their position and return the 9-year- old to her mother.

 

And finally, notwithstanding a “mountain of evidence suggesting that [the] child has been molested,” including the following list of felony charges brought by the Tustin Police before the OC District Attorney for prosecution:
California Penal Code Section 288 (a)-Lewd Act
California Penal Code Section 173 (a) (b) Child Abuse
California Penal Code Section 188.5 -Continual Sexual Abuse of a Child
California Penal Code Section 289 (a) (1) (A) – Anal Penetration
California Penal Code Section188 (a) (a) Oral Copulation
California Penal Code Section 188.7 (b)- Oral Copulation with a Victim under 10 Years Old
To date the DA has refused to prosecute.

 

A family court run by Judge Salter refused to hear testimony from a teacher, psychologist, medical doctor and the girl herself. In addition, Officer Tarpley from Tustin PD, Dr. Leah Reinhart, and her 730 Evaluator Dr. Sheffner, were not even allowed in the Courthouse to testify on behalf of the child. Judge Salter refused their entry into the Courtroom and called the mother a “liar,” claiming that the mother coached the child to make her disclosures against any evidence supporting these statements or findings. In fact, the evidence is to the contrary. None of the experts have… or would say that Ruby coached her daughter to make these damning claims. Judge Salter even ordered what could be considered an unlawful arrest based on a 6-year-old non-warrant traffic case over which he had no jurisdiction.

 

This ruling was made with knowledge that liaison Munoz’ testimony was in question. The Orange County Sheriff’s Department has opened a perjury investigation into the custody case, but months into the probe it appears the family court has yet to provide key documents.

 

A hearing last Friday in front of Judge Salter was to discharge John Cate, the minor’s counsel, because he refuses to represent his client in this case. John Cate acts as a representative of the father and, with knowledge of Lexi’s disclosures, suppresses evidence given him by her therapist and by Lexi, who is the main, consistent, unwavering, whistle blower in this case. However, the Judge refused to

remove the minor’s counsel and instead lifted the travel restrictions on Lexi so that she could be legally taken out of the country; possibly to Thailand, a non-signatory to the Hague Convention.

 

 

On August 1, 2013, John Cate was court ordered to get Lexi’s passport but failed to comply. Judge Salter on the record said “get the passport she is not leaving the country” and on the same day Judge Salter restricted Lexi to the seven Southern California counties.

 

On October 4, 2013, Judge Salter restricted Lexi to Orange County.

 

On June 6, 2014, Judge Salter on his own motion with no request lifted the travel restriction and reverted back to the judgment which stated that father could TRAVEL with Lexi on vacation. The final judgment allows him to travel with Lexi out of the country on vacation.

 

And on the same day according to the records, the father withdrew his move away request. This action was taken because the court wants to remove the move away on calendar and then when Lexi is moved out of the country the court can claim “We didn’t know he was abducting her, we just thought they were on VACATION.”

 

There is no evidence the father or his attorney is involved in removing the move away request. The Judge is operating on his own in this case at this point.

 

 

Judge Salter covered himself when he ordered Lexi back to Orange County in September.

 

At this point you should be asking the following questions:

 

Why is the father wanted by Homeland Security?

 

Why does Tony R refuse to prosecute the father?

 

Why don’t Feinstein, Pelosi, Boxer and the California Governor and Attorney General who have personal knowledge of CPS crimes do anything?

 

Why did the Judge unilaterally come up with an elaborate convoluted plan to get Lexi out of the country, leaving CPS even more culpability and liability?

 

Why would a Judge arrest a woman on a 6-year-old traffic ticket?

 

Why doesn’t the agency acknowledge the problems with Munoz and the irregularities in their investigation and return Lexi with an apology and accept Ruby’s compromise to drop her civil case against Orange County?

 

All credibility by the Court and CPS has already been lost. There can be no benefit to continue fighting a losing battle.

 

You should be questioning everything about this case except the child was abused and the mother is innocent.

 

One possible explanation is that Lexi’s father is wealthy and has bribed the Judge, the Tustin Police, the District Attorney and CPS to return Lexi to him. However the father’s finances are in question. Furthermore we have so many cases where the child is returned to the offending parent you would wonder if that kind of bribery at every level of the system could be kept secret. Another explanation offered that I consider very weak is that the system abuses children to justify the unusually large budge for Social Services (Los Angeles County spends 7 billion a year).

 

Either explanation is already exposed. What can be the purpose to engage in elaborate cover-up and wholesale child abuse?

 

Why not just give the girl back to her mother and admit that the system is totally broken? Ruby already offered to drop the civil lawsuit.

 

Why would anyone care? The corruption in the childcare agencies has been going on for so long it’s almost old news. The agency is already convicted in the media and the oversight committees of the egregious crimes against the children.

 

L.A. County has had to appoint 3 Blue Ribbon Commission in the last few years.

 

What is all the fuss about Lexi?

 

In the course of my own investigation of the Department of Children and Family Services I have uncovered a connection between these departments and the CIA.

 

Looking back on Martin’s last words, “We continue to look for insiders, whistle-blowers and others with information – pro or con — about DCFS and the Family and Dependency courts. If you have any information, you may call (310) 584-2079 or email Martin Burns at Martin.Burns@FoxTV.com.”

 

One advocate of the victims disclosed that two members of a Jury in an abuse civil case in San Diego had ties to the CIA.

 

When I tried to get a private investigator to investigate whether Robert Munoz had a connection outside CPS he refuse to investigate. [2]

 

Martin Burns’ and the four other deaths are consistent with a theory that their investigations uncovered a link to the “Child Protective Services” and the CIA.

 

Senator Nancy Schaefer was killed while trying to expose the link to the CIA and Child Protective Services abuse of children. The hearings on MK Ultra and Operation Paperclip, conspiracies proven to be true, documented experiments with children minds and behavior as a tool to create “child soldiers.” We have the testimony of Cathy O’Brien, Candy Jones, Gina Blasbalg as reported by The Province and the Times Colonist to support this theory.

 

A google search turned up two relevant exposes on the connection between CPS and the CIA.

 

We archived a video expose documenting the connection. The video is 1.5 hours and we will be extracting the relevant parts for review. In the meantime let us know if the video is no longer available.

 

Whistle Blower Laurel Aston Ex CIA Op CHILD Trafficking Victim Exposes CIA Masonic Pedophiles & More

 

The most plausible explanation for the collusion between minor’s counsel, Judge Salter, the DA and CPS, is that Lexi is in a position to expose the corruption. And while a 9-year-old’s testimony would not be sufficient to bring down CPS, were a physical examination to reveal Lexi had an operation to fit her with neuromotor prosthetic device, because of the Dillon high profile it might be to expose the CIA connection to CPS . Blaming the father for getting her out of the United States would eliminate this threat to the agency.

 

The mother will be successful at suing the County but that won’t bring her daughter back or expose the connection to the CIA.

 

More coming on the importance of 1974. See appendix A.

 

The advocates and parents innocent parents involved believe they are being persecuted for exposing the agency but considering there is nothing new in their claims the truth is that they aren’t exposing anything the BOS, the Courts, the police, don’t already know.

 

Therefore the only explanation is that they are targeted for shining a light on an operation that an in depth investigation linking CPS to the CIA would reveal what is been hidden from the public.

 

Consider this email as my latest Life Insurance premium. If I am wrong then I have nothing to worry about, however, if on the other hand I have come across the answer that is hidden from most public scrutiny, then I feel the best life insurance policy is tell as many people as I can because you see there really “is always strength in numbers. The more individuals or organizations that you can rally to your cause, the better.” Why are more individuals the better? Let them try and kill us all.

 

[1] (R-Twin Peaks), a Republican candidate for governor who identifies closely with the Tea Party.

 

[2] Subject: Lexi Dillon needs you

Sent: Sat, Jun 14, 2014 10:27:31 PM

 

A comprehensive article the Orange County Voice by Nick Gerda: Problems in OC Child Welfare System Get Statewide Scrutiny

image

Problems in OC Child Welfare System Get Statewide Scruti…

A state lawmaker, a court case and a statewide audit allege mismanagement within the county’s system.

View on http://www.voiceofoc.org

Preview by Yahoo

 

I think the key to this case is to find a connection Munoz outside the Social Services Agency.

 

Robert Munoz, a senior social worker, was the chief witness that led the family court judge to give full custody to Lexi’s abuser. Munoz was investigated by the County for perjury and violating the policies and principles of Social Services Agency.

The agency has since relieved Mr. Munoz of his position but nevertheless contintue to refuse to protect Lexi knowing full well their employee endangered this child.

 

 

His reply Today at 7:34 PM

Hi Robert,

I cannot take on this assignment.

 

 

 

Appendix A

State’s Child Protection Agencies Collude with Judges to Defraud Federal Government

September 14, 2008

State’s Child Protection Agencies Collude with Judges to Defraud Federal Government

© Nev Moore Jan. ‘02

 

In 1974 Walter Mondale initiated CAPTA (the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act), the legislation that began feeding federal funding into the state’s child welfare agencies. With remarkable foresight Mondale expressed concerns that the legislation could lead to systemic abuse in that the state agencies might over-process children into the system unnecessarily to keep, and increase, the flow of federal dollars. Shortly after CAPTA was enacted there was a dramatic increase in the number of children in foster care, peaking at around 500,000 during the mid-70’s. George Miller, the Chairman of the federal Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, initiated an intensive investigation of the nation’s foster care system after the effects of CAPTA started to become apparent by the soaring numbers of children who were being placed in foster care. An official at the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare admitted to Miller that the government had no idea where many of the nation’s 500,000 foster children where living, what services they were receiving, if any, or if any efforts were being made to reunite them with their families.

 

To address the obvious free-for-all snatching of children that CAPTA had stimulated, the Committee crafted new federal legislation with the intent of creating accountability and clearer guidelines for the states child welfare agencies. During the crafting of P.L. 96-272 Chairman Miller’s concern was that the federal government was footing the bill for warehousing children in institutions and inappropriate settings without accountability. In 1980 the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act, P.L. 96-272, was enacted. The act included provisions that “reasonable efforts” be made to prevent children from being unnecessarily removed from their homes and placed in foster care. Although CPS has always tried to buffalo the media and the public that they are involved with families due to some sort of horrific child abuse or neglect, there has never been any debate among national policy makers, researchers, and federal agencies that the vast majority of CPS cases are due to poverty or frivolous/social reasons and do not contain elements of real child abuse. If the cases did actually involve acts of abuse they would be criminal, identified and investigated by law enforcement, rather than social workers, and would be prosecuted as such. P.L. 96-272 came into effect partly because Congress determined that a large number of children were being unnecessarily removed from their homes, and, once removed, they were lost in the limbo of foster care for years, many until they just grew too old, when they were then put on the streets at the age of 18.

 

The Child Welfare League of America testified before a senate subcommittee: “In fact, there were many instances then, as now, of children being removed unnecessarily from their families. It is important to recognize that children are almost always traumatized by removal from their own families.” So, accountability from each states child protection agency was also written in. To receive the federal money the states would have to submit an annual report to the federal government, known as an AFCARS report, that specifically accounts for each child in state care. ACLU Children’s Rights Project attorney, Marcia Robinson Lowry, explained in her testimony to Congress: “As a condition of federal funding, states must have a reasonable information system to identify children in federally-funded state custody.” These requirements were implemented in 1980. Up until 1999 some states were still not filing their federally required AFCARS report to the federal government. According to Jeffrey Locke, former Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Social Services, the excuse to the legislature was that they “couldn’t figure out how to

work their computer system.”

 

When I called Senator Therese Murray in 1998 to ask how many children had died in foster care in Massachusetts, her aide replied: “We don’t have those statistics.” At that time Senator Murray was the Senate Chair of the Committee on Health & Elderly Affairs, and therefore responsible to oversee the collection and filing of AFCARS data.

 

The “reasonable efforts” requirements were designed to address these issues by requiring the states child welfare agencies to have specific investigation and assessment policies to minimize frivolous removals, to provide “services” to address and ameliorate conditions that were detrimental to the child’s well-being; to place children with relatives when removal from the home was absolutely necessary; and make efforts to reunite families in a timely fashion. Methods to audit and track compliance with federal requirements were also built in. The states were to establish “citizen review panels” comprised of a specifically designated representation of the population which would include not only members of collateral professional communities involved in child protection, but “parents, foster parents, and former foster children.” Each state was to have at least three citizen review panels. The panels would essentially act as a standing jury of peers and would review CPS cases. Twenty years after P.L. 96- 272 went into effect the citizen review panels have never been established in most states.

 

Another means of creating accountability was to have the federal authority, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, conduct compliance audits, which are known as Section 427 reviews. The method of enforcement that Congress devised to ensure that the states followed the federal law was to provide incentive funds to the states that documented their compliance with the federal regulations. The states would self-certify compliance, but could be subjected to “periodic” 427 reviews by the Dept. of Health & Human Services. Were the states to find themselves in non-compliance they would simply return the incentive funds. It would seem that providing cash to agencies that are allowed to self-document compliance is a somewhat less than intelligent system. It would be interesting to track down exactly how much money the states child “protective” agencies have returned to the government because they found themselves in non-compliance. Gee, maybe this is rocket science.

 

Like CAPTA, P.L. 96-272 could only have worked if the federal government demanded compliance and meticulous accountability, and them imposed sanctions for non-compliance. Even better – criminal charges for racketeering for intentional fraud. Mark Soler, director of the National Youth Law Center in California explained:

 

“The Department of Health & Human Services has failed to promulgate meaningful regulations to implement the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act. It has applied even the minimal federal regulations that were developed in an inconsistent and arbitrary manner, and only token implementation of the laws protecting children.’

 

Even when HHS finds overwhelming evidence of lack of compliance during 427 reviews, no sanctions are imposed and they continue to keep the fed $$$ pouring in – in violation of their own regulations. Not so much as a slap on the hand or even token admonishment. Certainly explains how CPS developed their arrogance and contempt for any authority – because there is none. Their confidence that they are free from the feds insisting on compliance with the law is well illustrated by the foster care numbers which increased dramatically after CAPTA began feeding federal dollars into the states child protection agencies, then dropped equally dramatically after the enactment of P.L.96-272, which was supposed to create more specific federal regulation and accountability. However, once the state agencies saw that the federal government was not enforcing compliance, the foster care numbers soared once again.

 

Michael Petit, Deputy Director of the Child Welfare League of America, stated in his testimony before Congress: “A 427 is a meaningless process for most of the states. It represents no kind of sanctions to the states whatsoever for non-compliance.” Marcia Robinson Lowry told Congress: “States are passing HHS audits with systems in which no reasonable person could consider that children are being well treated. It is virtually impossible to fail a 427 audit.”

 

The initial concept of “reasonable efforts” was the only conclusion that any rational person could come to: rather than disrupt children’s lives, and traumatize them by seizing them from non- abusive situations and placing them with strangers (who are often no better, and sometimes far worse), assist families in overcoming their obstacles and problems by providing support and services. The idea never worked, though, because it has always been more profitable to too many to remove children rather than keep them at home. Rather than offer support and simple, practical services to families CPS forged contracts with vendors. Now private businesses, under the guise of “service providers”, could mushroom into existence knowing that their sugar daddy, CPS, would provide a never-ending flow of coerced clients. The market potential is unlimited – potentially every mother, father, grandparent, and child in the country. Rather than offering practical, meaningful services that are germane to the families circumstances, CPS clients are ordered to engage in “services” with CPS-contracted vendors; special interest groups who are dependent on CPS for their income and profit by maintaining the levels of children in foster care, and whose interests are protected by a bureaucracy intent on securing it’s own survival and protecting unlimited growth.

 

The extent of which CPS is allowed to continue to operate while being so far out of compliance with the existing state and federal laws is mind boggling. It would be a challenge to find any other agency in our countries history that operated in such gross and blatant violation of the law with absolutely no intervention from the administration. Tens of millions of tax dollars are being squandered on a system that is destroying families and causing lifelong emotional ruin to children – and those are the lucky ones who live through it.

 

The most egregious area of outright criminal fraud is CPS’s practice of filing their federally required documentation of compliance in secrecy through the courts. The federal foster care reimbursements are channeled through the Title IV-E section of the Social Security Act. Each states child welfare agency enters into a contract with the federal government, which is referred to as their Title IV-E state plan. It is this contract that spells out the responsibilities that CPS must, by law, comply with in order to receive their federal funding. To document compliance with the fed regs CPS must file a form through the courts in each individual case. In Massachusetts these forms are referred to as a “29-C.” 42 U.S. Code, ss 672 reads:

 

“These requirements are not mere formalities. The Finance Committee of Congress, in preparing its summary for final passage of the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980, P.L. 96-272, stated; ` The Committee is aware of allegations that the judicial determination requirement (sic: that a judge makes a determination that a child needs to be removed from the home) can become a mere pro forma exercise in paper shuffling to obtain federal funding. While this could occur in some instances, the Committee is unwilling to accept as a general proposition that the judiciaries of the States would so lightly treat a responsibility placed upon them by federal statute for the protection of children.”

 

1980 U.S. Code Cong. and Admin. News: “A judicial determination of those efforts (reasonable efforts, as defined in the Act) serves to closely examine, in the case of each individual child, whether reasonable efforts were made to keep the family intact.” In accordance with the federal requirements the Massachusetts legislature enacted G.L. c.119 ss 29b, which requires all judges to certify that the Department of Social Services met the obligation grounded in the federal statute of making reasonable efforts to protect the child short of removing him or her from the parents, and, if the child was removed, making it possible for the child to return home in a timely manner. Rather than “closely examining”, in Massachusetts this grave responsibility is carried out by judges by rubber stamping stacks of 29c forms that simply contain three “yes” or “no” check boxes. In many instances making three check marks is even too much work for Massachusetts judges and they rubber stamp the forms while leaving them blank – never mind actually verifying that the “reasonable efforts” were made. In return for these forms DSS receives it’s federal money.

 

The three questions are:

 

1. Continuation in the home is contrary to the well being of the child?

 

2. Reasonable efforts have been made prior to the placement of the child to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the child from his/her home?

 

3. Reasonable efforts have been made to make it possible for the child to return to his parent/guardian?

 

I discussed this issue a few years ago with Veronica Melendez at the Children’s Bureau (the federal authority). She told me that the federal government was under the impression that all parties were present in the court room at the time of the filing of the 29c’s, so that the parents attorneys had the opportunity to object, rebut, or verify the “reasonable efforts.” In reality, no one sees the federal forms except the judges and a representative of DSS’s main legal department. Attorneys ask us how we ever “got our hands on” the 29c forms, as we have never yet met an attorney who has seen the forms, let alone have been notified of the filing hearing. We even have forms on which the “no” boxes were checked, yet the children were still removed from their homes and federal funds collected for them.

 

By seizing children illegally in violation of the Title IV-E requirements, then filing false documents in secrecy through the courts to obtain federal funding, CPS is defrauding the federal government with intent. CPS should be subject to investigation and prosecution by the U.S. Attorneys Office. They should be held liable for the restitution of all illegally obtained funds, and prosecuted for perjury, obstruction of justice, and the fraudulent collection of federal funds under the False Statements and Accountability Act of 1996, P.L. 104-292 110 stat 3459, 42 U.S.C.S. 670-679a; P.L. 96-272; C.F.R. part 1356; and Title IV-E. I have discussed this issue with the Inspector Generals Office and they felt it could possible be prosecuted under RICO, yet they have also failed to act, possibly because it isn’t just CPS/DSS who is committing federal fraud, but also the judges who are signing the documents.

 

In 1988 George Miller, the original architect of P.L. 96-272, and Chairman of the congressionally appointed Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, recognized the fraud being committed in the name of child “protection”, and stated:

 

“What has been demonstrated here is that you have a system that is simply in contempt. This system has been sued and sued and orders have been issued and they just continue on their merry way. And HHS just continues to look the other way. You have a system that is not only out of control, it’s illegal at this point. What you are really engaged in is state sponsored child abuse.”

 

From FBI Investigating This CPS Office!, 2008/09/14 at 3:08 PM

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s