Judges that are spineless, with no ability to uphold the oath they swore to. Passing the responsibility of making decisions to unqualified people so as not to interfere in their “friends” livlihoods.They turn a blind eye to what is clearly before them. Shame on you!
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Lawyers are more than willing to defend child molesters and incompetant self serving social workers…They set their morals aside..(if they have any) to line their own pockets!! The legal proffession and the CAS’s credibility is the lowest ever. How far will Society allow the morals and ethics in our Justice System to plumet? Action is needed now!!
If these people are accepting of public money on pay day … They should be held accountable to the people. Delay and avioding accountability is an outright abuse!
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Our Government and society as a whole needs a lesson in the meaning of “good faith”. Good faith, or in Latin bona fides, is the mental and moral state of honesty, conviction as to the truth or falsehood of a proposition or body of opinion, or as to the rectitude or depravity of a line of conduct, even if the conviction is objectively unfounded. This concept is important in law and in “life”. How can we see a Judge who relinquishes his or her judgement and responsibility to a third party as having “good faith”? Or a children’s Lawyer who doesn’t take time to understand a childs situation? Or doctors who prescribe maximum dosages of Ritalin to young children with no medical test being performed,prescriptions that are written at the “mothers” request. Case workers that are fool enough to state a child would be better off not having their Father in their life. The only fault having been found against the Father was him asking his Son too many questions about his life! Its a disgrace that the only one true person in this childs life that truly cares about his well being, and that doesn’t see the child as a meal ticket..is being forced from his life.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
It is very alarming that a Doctor would prescribe a drug such as Ritalin with out extensive test being conducted first. There are test in place that can determine if a child has a medical need for this drug or if the parent is the one in need of a parenting course or other professional help.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Independent oversight by the Ombudsman or any other organization would be movement in the right direction… FATHER’S PRAYER
You may not know me, but I know everything about you. Psalm 139:1Â Â
I know when you sit down and when you rise up. Psalm 139:2
I am familiar with all your ways. Psalm 139:3
Even the very hairs on your head are numbered. Matthew 10:29-31
For you were made in my image. Genesis 1:27
In me you live and move and have your being. Acts 17:28
For you are my offspring. Acts 17:28
I knew you even before you were conceived. Jeremiah 1:4-5
I chose you when I planned creation. Ephesians 1:11-12
You were not a mistake, for all your days are written in my book. Psalm 139:15-16
I determined the exact time of your birth and where you would live. Acts 17:26
You are fearfully and wonderfully made. Psalm 139:14
I knit you together in your mother’s womb. Psalm 139:13
And brought you forth on the day you were born. Psalm 71:6
I have been misrepresented by those who don’t know me. John 8:41-44
I am not distant and angry, but am the complete expression of love. 1 John 4:16
And it is my desire to lavish my love on you. 1 John 3:1
Simply because you are my child and I am your Father. 1 John 3:1
I offer you more than your earthly father ever could. Matthew 7:11
For I am the perfect father. Matthew 5:48
Every good gift that you receive comes from my hand. James 1:17
For I am your provider and I meet all your needs. Matthew 6:31-33
My plan for your future has always been filled with hope. Jeremiah 29:11
Because I love you with an everlasting love. Jeremiah 31:3
My thoughts toward you are countless as the sand on the seashore. Psalms 139:17-18
And I rejoice over you with singing. Zephaniah 3:17
I will never stop doing good to you. Jeremiah 32:40
For you are my treasured possession. Exodus 19:5
I desire to establish you with all my heart and all my soul. Jeremiah 32:41
And I want to show you great and marvelous things. Jeremiah 33:3
If you seek me with all your heart, you will find me. Deuteronomy 4:29
Delight in me and I will give you the desires of your heart. Psalm 37:4
For it is I who gave you those desires. Philippians 2:13
I am able to do more for you than you could possibly imagine. Ephesians 3:20
For I am your greatest encourager. 2 Thessalonians 2:16-17
I am also the Father who comforts you in all your troubles. 2 Corinthians 1:3-4
When you are brokenhearted, I am close to you. Psalm 34:18
As a shepherd carries a lamb, I have carried you close to my heart. Isaiah 40:11
One day I will wipe away every tear from your eyes. Revelation 21:3-4
And I’ll take away all the pain you have suffered on this earth. Revelation 21:3-4
I am your Father, and I love you even as I love my son, Jesus. John 17:23
For in Jesus, my love for you is revealed. John 17:26
He is the exact representation of my being. Hebrews 1:3
He came to demonstrate that I am for you, not against you. Romans 8:31
And to tell you that I am not counting your sins. 2 Corinthians 5:18-19
Jesus died so that you and I could be reconciled. 2 Corinthians 5:18-19
His death was the ultimate expression of my love for you. 1 John 4:10
I gave up everything I loved that I might gain your love. Romans 8:31-32
If you receive the gift of my son Jesus, you receive me. 1 John 2:23
And nothing will ever separate you from my love again. Romans 8:38-39
Come home and I’ll throw the biggest party heaven has ever seen. Luke 15:7
I have always been Father, and will always be Father. Ephesians 3:14-15
My question is..Wilyou be my child? John 1:12-13
I am waiting for you. Luke 15:11-32
Love,-ALMIGHTY GOD Used by permission Father Heart Communications Copyright 1999-2006 http://www.FathersLoveLetter.com
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Could it be the Government has been overrun by radical feminists who are planning to take over Canada by throwing all fathers in jail or to place them in those new jails for Dads and their children called supervised access centres? It’s time to put these civil servants back in their place. Canadians are fed up.
Why does this Liberal Government see fit to fund an organization that feels primary objective on addressing needs of children is to take them away from their Fathers?
Liberal Government upholding CAS in tactic to seize children from their Fathers to obtain control of population.
our rights and freedom to raise and protect our children are being taken away. Government refuses to make power tripping CAS accountable for unproven and unjustified alligations in an attempt to control our children.
CAS workers are systomatic of an ideology that is anti-family leading to total loss of freedom.
CAS- out of control, Court oblivious to CAS”S guesses,exaggerations and out right lies on court documents.
Elected Officials believe our rights as Fathers are something they grant to us and can be taken away.our rights are inalienable,and not removable at governments whims.
Political Officials communicate and conduct business amongst themselves and it is critical that they ensure accountability and authenticity to their constituents.
When children fight back at loss of Father, government see’s fit to drug child in an attempt to make child forget he has a Father.
Obolish CAS and create agency accountable that does not intimidate Government.
Stop the CAS power tripping.
Make CAS accountable.
Who has control/ CAS or Harper Government.
If CAS in control of Canada make it public knowlege.
We do not need A Government that is intimadated by CAS.
Courts lead by nose by CAS.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Mary had a little Lamb,
His fleece was white as snow.
And everywhere that Mary went,
The Lamb was sure to go.
He followed her to school each day,
T’wasn’t even in the rule.
It made the children laugh and play, To have a Lamb at school.
And then the rules all changed one day,
Illegal it became;
To bring the Lamb of God to school,
Or even speak His Name!
Every day got worse and worse,
And days turned into years.
Instead of hearing children laugh,
We heard gun shots and tears.
What must we do to stop the crime,
That’s in our schools today?
Let’s let the Lamb come back to school
And teach our kids to pray!
It is said that 86% of Canadian,
American & British people believe in God.
Why don’t we just ask the other 14% to be quiet and sit down
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Remember the 11 th commandment
“love one another”
New Testament
Two Choices
What would you do?….you make the choice. My question is: Would you have made the same choice? “When not interfered with by outside influences, everything nature does is done with perfection. Yet my son, Shay, cannot learn things as other children do. He cannot understand things as other children
do. Where is the natural order of things in my son?” The audience was stilled by the query. The father continued. “I believe, that when a child like Shay,physically and mentally handicapped comes into the world, an
opportunity to realize true human nature presents itself, and it comes in the way other people treat that child.”Then h told the following story: Shay and his father had walked past a park where some boys Shay knew were playing baseball. Shay asked, “Do you think they’ll let me play?” Shay’s father knew that most of the boys would not want someone like Shay on their team, but the father also understood that if his son were allowed to play, it would give him a >>much-needed sense of belonging and some confidence to be accepted by others in spite of his handicaps. Shay’s father approached one of the boys on the field and asked (not expecting much) if Shay could play. The boy looked around for guidance and said, “We’re losing by six runs and the game is in the eighth inning. I guess he can be on our team and we’ll try to put him in to bat in the ninth inning.” Shay struggled over to the team’s bench and, with a broad smile, put on a team shirt. His Father watched with a small tear in his eye and warmth in his heart. The boys saw the father’s joy at his son being accepted. In the bottom of the eighth inning, Shay’s team scored a few runs but was still behind by three. In the top of the ninth inning, Shay put on a glove and played in the right field. Even though no hits came his way, he was obviously ecstatic just to be in the game and on the field, grinning from ear to ear as his
father waved to him from the stands. In the bottom of the ninth inning, Shay’s team scored again. Now, with two outs and the bases loaded, the potential winning run was on base and Shay was scheduled to be next at bat. At this juncture, do they let Shay bat and give away their chance
to win the game? Surprisingly, Shay was given the bat. Everyone knew that a hit was all but impossible bec a use Shay didn’t even know how to hold the bat properly, much less connect with the ball. However, as Shay stepped up to the plate, the pitcher, recognizing that the other team was putting winning aside for this moment in Shay’s life, moved in a few steps to lob the ball in softly so Shay could at least make contact. The first pitch came and Shay swung clumsily and missed. The pitcher again took a few steps forward to toss the ball softly towards Shay. As the pitch came in, Shay swung at the ball and hit a slow ground ball right back to the pitcher. The game would now be over. The pitcher picked up the soft grounder and could have easily thrown the ball to the first baseman. Shay would have been out and that would have been the end of the game. Instead, the pitcher threw the ball right over the first baseman’s head, out of reach of all team mates. Everyone from the stands and both teams started Yelling, “Shay, run to first! Run to first!” Never in his life had Shay ever run that far, but he made it to first base. He scampered down the baseline, wide-eyed and startled. Everyone yelled, “Run to second, run to second!” Catching his breath, Shay awkwardly ran towards second, gleaming and struggling to make it to the base. By the time Shay rounded towards second base, the right fielder had the ball … the smallest guy on their team who now had his first chance to be the hero for his team. He could have thrown the ball to the second-baseman for the tag, but he understood the pitcher’s intentions so he, too, intentionally
threw the ball high and far over the third-baseman’s head. Shay ran toward third base deliriously as the runners ahe ad of him circled
the bases toward home. All were screaming , “Shay, Shay, Shay, all the Way Shay” Shay reached third base because the opposing shortstop ran to help him by turning him in the direction of third base, and shouted, “Run to third! Shay, run to third!”As Shay rounded third, the boys from both teams, and the spectators, were on their feet screaming, “Shay, run home! Run home!” Shay ran to home, stepped on the plate, and was cheered as the hero who hit the grand slam and won the game for his team. “That day”, said the father softly with tears now rolling down his face, “the boys from both teams helped bring a piece of true love and humanity into this world”.
Shay didn’t make it to another summer. He died that winter, having never forgotten being the hero and making his father so happy, and coming home and seeing his Mother tearfully embrace her little hero of the day!
AND NOW A LITTLE FOOTNOTE TO THIS STORY: when it comes to sending messages about life choices, people hesitate. The crude, vulgar, and often obscene pass freely through cyberspace,but public discussion about decency is too often suppressed in our schools and workplaces. We believes that we all can make a difference. We all have thousands of opportunities every single day to help realize the “natural order of things.” So many seemingly trivial interactions between two people present us with a choice: Do we pass along a little spark of love and humanity or do we pass up those opportunities and leave the world a little bit colder in the process? A wise man once said every society is judged by how it treats it’s least fortunate amongst them.
Annonmous
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
A lawyer is a person who thrives by creating confusion, Or when that is impossible, they profit by the confusion. In either case, confusion is their stock and trade. The wider the gap a lawyer can create between accountability and justice the more they profit.
The lawyer’s lucrative monopoly gives him an incentive to create obstacles to the smooth functioning of the life of ordinary people. Through their dominance of politics, the bureaucracy, and their monopoly over litigation, lawyers have insinuated themselves into every human relationship. Lawyers such as JJ Paquette (1kelopaq) and Patricia Meehan are no more than rapist of Society bleeding this government dry with their never ending self righteous, on accountable demands on unsuspecting parents. Any parent that would knowingly subject their children to this team of “Lawyers” may just as well give their children drugs and send them to an orgy. Family Court is Broken,corrupt and completely biased.
They are all about the Money,power and Ego’s and not about our children.
It is not in the Best Interest of the children, it is all about best interest of the lawyers and the easiest solution for judges driven by decades of sexual prejudice and Money. They willing stake their reputation backing which ever parent they foresee as being the biggest “meal ticket” . Nothing more than Society’s “puppy mill” of generating more profit for themselves. In a court of morals lawyers such as these would be stripped of their power and be made to endure the injustice they have so willingly subjected on others.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Against my advice, you argued why other claims against the CAS and access were not within the law. The CAS can make their own argument in superior court which is the accountability level that our children everywhere deserve! Why should their care be entrusted to only a “selected few” who are not accountable to anyone? Hennessy’s decisions have been questioned before by others. Many have resulted in sub-standard social policies for this community. Her removal of the conference briefs from the public record in Superior court today and putting your “argument” on the endorsement sheet for herself later this week is no surprise to me or others. I think its clear why Justice Hennessy insisted on being the judge to hear the motion. She had NO intention of bringing any accountability to Ontario’s Children’s Aid Societys
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Her decision released Nov11/07 is why she insisted hearing this months before and Brouillette is just another willing participatant
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
ccc2
GOVERNMENT KIDNAPPING OUR CHILDREN! (HOW THEY DO IT)
JANUARY 5/05 IN REPLY, PLEASE REFER TO: JEAN JACQUES PAQUETTE
Dear XXXXXX Re: CAS and XXXXX
.
The Society has received an opinion from the child’s mental health service provider, Dr. Milne, that access is detrimental to the child. The child has now, during the visit, threatened a worker,
Jean Jacgue Paquette
cc Jean O’Connor
Candice Poulin
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL NOTE :Milne’s opinion was from information provided by CAS and by an estranged parent. She will not consider alternatives to Ritalin. Who is advocating for the use of these drugs CAS,Milne,Government. http://www.ritalindeath.com/Adderall-Pulled-in-Canada.htm
A list of the most common symptoms of emotional discomfiture of children; those which bother teachers and parents most, and in a stroke that could not be more devoid of science or Hippocratic motive–termed them a ‘disease.’ Twenty five years of research, not deserving of the term ‘research., has failed to validate ADD/ADHD as a disease. Tragically–the “epidemic” having grown from 500 thousand in 1985 to between 5 and 7 million today–this remains the state of the ’science’ of ADHD.”). The governments newly created board to deal with com-plaints from parents who’s children have been kidnapped and drugged is much like the governments newly created CAS complaints board. All members are carefully selected and appointed ensuring that the outcome always favors the government and their service providers! This is not independent accountability!
Premier ,Ontario
Legislative Building Queen’s Park Toronto, Ontario M7A 1A1
December 2, 2005
Dear Mr. XXXX
Thank you for writing to me. Your concerns are important to me.
I value your views and appreciate the issues you raised. However, I am unable to specifically address the concerns you highlighted in your correspondence, as it would be inappropriate for me, as Premier, to comment.
I note that you have also written to my colleague, the Honourable Michael Bryant, Attorney General. He or ministry staff will respond to you. _
Dalton McGuinty Premier
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL NOTE : More Liberal Hypocrisy. They will use any means necessary to achieve their ends, legal or illegal. They have no morals, ethics, or conscience. They form “ghost boards” to self investigate “themselves”. All in an attempt to continue their no accountability governing ways. They are not beneath kidnapping young children, whether it be by cutting their biological parent from the child’s life or by drugging them with Ritalin so they become more compliant.
The Liberal Government fully protects the CAS, drug company’s and Doctors with no accountability to anyone.They form review boards, appeal boards etc that do no more than make dust..all in an attempt to give the allusion that they actually are accountable and are doing anything. These “Boards” don’t have the authority to even sweep the floor without first getting the Liberal “nod”.
Our children are being used to generate more make work projects. seems our children had less problems mentally,physically and emotionally before these people took control.
FEB.2/06
The Law Society of Upper Canada
Osgoode Hall 130 Queen Street West Toronto, Ontario M5H 2N6
tel 416-947-3300 February 2, 2006
Dear Mr. XXXXX
Re: Our File Number XXXX
I am writing in response to your letters dated December 13, 2005, and January 30, 2006, and your email dated January 14, 2006.
The Law Society has no jurisdiction to intervene in this matter.
You told us that Mr. Paquette represents the Children’s Aid Society (”CAS”) and that it was not in his interest to settle the matter. You had concerns about the positions he took on behalf of his client Kinsley, Poulin, Beavais, O’Conner, Cullain etc./
Your concerns fall outside-of our jurisdiction. The Judge encouraged Mr.Paquette to record the supervised access visits, but he did not. The Judge encouraged Mr. Paquette to arrange a visit through someone other than the CAS, but he did not.
Many of your concerns relate to the CAS and the social workers employed by the CAS, and as we have no jurisdiction over the CAS or their employees, I will not comment on those issues.
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL NOTE : (no accountability)
Jan.7/07
Ontario
Ministry of the
Attorney General
Office of the
Children’s Lawyer
04 January 2007
VIA MAIL:
DearXXXX
Re: File No: XXXXX
I am writing in response to your telephone call of January 3, 2007 to the Deputy Minister’s Office. My review of your file shows that your complaint has been thoroughly dealt with and we are refusing your request to remove your son’s current legal representative.
Clare E. Burns
The Children’s Lawyer, Ministry of the Attorney General, M. Bryant
Please be advised that we will not communicate further with you concerning this complaint.
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL NOTE : (kidnapping)
PATRICIA L. MEEHAN CHILDREN’S LAWYER 293 Elm Street West, Sudbury, Ontario P3C 1V6
Mr.XXX
Dear Sirs:
Re: CAS AND XXXX
I will no longer accept letter, packages, gifts, etc… for XXXX as of April 30,2007.
In the future, we will no longer return to you items forwarded. Rather they will be thrown out, regretfully.
DO NOT SEND OR BRING ANYTHING TO MY OFFICE FOR XXXX
Yours very truly,
for_, PATRICIA L. MEEHAN
Ministry of Community and Social Services
Ministry of Children
and Youth Services
Tel: (416)325-6340
Mr. XXXX Novemeber 23, 2007
Dear Mr. XXXX
Thank you for your letter requesting a meeting with the Honourable Deb Matthews, Minister of Children and Youth Services, regarding your situation.
As you know, the Minister is unable to discuss matters related to an individual case, particularly those currently before the courts. Therefore, no meeting can be scheduled at this time. I regret that the ministry cannot be of further assistance to you in this matter.
Sincerely,Josh Vandezande for Minister Mathews
Manager, Correspondence Unit
Ministry of Children and Youth Services
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL NOTE (Mr.Vandezande has been the so-called spokesman for this miserable ministry and for 3 former miserable ministers under the miserable McGuinty government including Buttriogaanni,Chambers and now minister Mathews.. These new ministers (businessmen) don’t have the authority to even sweep the floor without first getting the Liberal “nod” of approval.
Our children are being used to generate more make work projects and profits for drug companies. seems our children had less problems mentally,physically and emotionally before these people took control.
WAKE up to new government social policy.
All Children’s Aid Societies, politicians and lawyers thrive without accountability by creating confusion, Or when that is impossible, they profit by the confusion. In either case, confusion is their stock and trade. The wider the gap/conflict the CAS, lawyer or politician can create between accountability and justice the more they profit. Our children pay the price.
This lucrative monopoly and lack of acoountability gives them an incentive to create obstacles to the smooth functioning of the life of ordinary people. Through their dominance of politics,the bureaucracy,and their monopoly over litigation, Children’s Aid Societies,lawyers have insinuated themselves into every human relationship. Lawyers such as JJ Paquette (1kelopaq) and Patricia Meehan are no more than rapist of Society bleeding this government dry with their never ending self righteous,non accountable demands on unsuspecting parents. Any parent that would knowingly subject their children to this team of “Lawyers” may just as well give their children drugs and send them to an orgy. Family Court is Broken,corrupt and completely biased. Judge Hennessy instistance to hear the claims against CAS even though just months earlier she overturned and earlier finding of default for no clear reason other than there is no claim.
They are all about the Money,power and Ego’s and not about our children.
It is not in the Best Interest of the children, it is all about best interest of the lawyers,CAS, and the easiest solution for judges driven by decades of sexual prejudice and Money. They willing stake their reputation backing which ever parent they foresee as being the biggest “meal ticket” (usually the parent with CAS backing) . Nothing more than Society’s “puppy mill” of generating more profit for themselves. In a court of morals lawyers and politicians,police, CAS workers such as these would be stripped of their power and be made to endure the injustice they have so willingly subjected on others.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Ritalin is a stimulant that produces pharmacological effects similar to those of cocaine and amphetamines. Unlike other stimulants, however, MPH (its shortened chemical name) has not been produced by drug dealers in homemade labs, probably because it is an inexpensive, available medication with a prescription, even though it is a controlled substance. Some users dissolve the tablets with water and inject the mixture. The drug has been named with the street name of: “Vitamin R”, “R-Ball” and the “Smart Drug”. It is inexpensive to purchase from friends or dealers for anywhere from 5 dollars to 10 dollars per pill and up to 20 dollars per pill.
The dramatic increase in the consumption of this drug in recent years can largely be attributed to its increased number of incidents of drug abuse that have been associated with adolescents, young adults and college students who are using the drug for its stimulant effects. It is being used for appetite suppression in many teenagers with eating disorders who have gotten the pills from friends. In college students it is being used as a stimulant to help them stayed focused and awake (for long nights of studying) and for parents of children prescribed the drug for alleged ADHD, it is often being used as a stimulant and appetite suppressant.. Complications from injection are common since the fillers that used in MPH are not soluble in water and when injected they can block small blood vessels causing damage to the lungs and retina! lol , Ritalin is abused among adults as well. The Drug Enforcement Administration has received reports of Ritalin abuse among diverse segments of the population–including healthcare professionals, doctors, CAS, parents and street addicts.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
I ran into a stranger as he passed by,
“Oh excuse me please” was my reply.
He said, “Please excuse me too;
I wasn’t watching for you.”
We were very polite, this stranger and I.
We went on our way and we said goodbye.
But at home a different story is told,
How we treat our loved ones, young and old.
Later that day, cooking the evening meal,
My girl friend stood beside me very still.
When I turned, I nearly knocked her down.
“Move out of the way,” I said with a frown.
She walked away, her little heart broken.
I didn’t realize how harshly I’d spoken.
While I lay awake in bed,
God’s still small voice came to me and said,
“While dealing with a stranger,
common courtesy you use,
but the family you love, you seem to abuse.
Go and look on the kitchen floor,
You’ll find some flowers there by the door.
Those are the flowers She brought for you.
She picked them herself: pink, yellow and blue.
She stood very quietly not to spoil the surprise,
you never saw the tears that filled her little eyes.”
By this time, I felt very small,
And now my tears began to fall.
I quietly went and knelt by her bed;
“Wake up, little one, wake up,” I said.
“Are these the flowers you picked for me?”
She smiled, “I found ‘em, out by the tree.
I picked ‘em because they’re pretty like you.
I knew you’d like ‘em, especially the blue.”
I said, “Babe, I’m very sorry for the way I acted today;
I shouldn’t have yelled at you that way.”
She said, “Oh, Babe, that’s okay.
I love you anyway.”
I said, “Dear, I love you too,
and I do like the flowers, especially the blue.”
FAMILY
Are you aware that if we died tomorrow, the company
that we are working for could easily replace us in
a matter of days.
But the family we left behind will feel the loss
for the rest of their lives.
And come to think of it, we pour ourselves more
into work than into our own family,
an unwise investment indeed,
don’t you think?
So what is behind the story?
Do you know what the word FAMILY means?
FAMILY = (F)ATHER (A)ND (M)OTHER (I) (L)OVE (Y)OU
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
God created life and therefore it is precious. It should not be taken away without just cause. It should not be endangered in a careless manner nor should children be separated unjustly from their parents. Children should be nurtured and protected to the fullest extent of the law. All too often, though, children exploited and treated as expendable by governments and average citizens alike. Corruption, power, politics, get a higher priority than our children. Due to those kinds of attitudes, the moral fabric of our society is eroded.
(1) Abortion. If abortion is not a deplorable waste of human life, there aren’t any. Obviously, there are exceptions like cases of rape, non-consensual incest, and situations in which the life or health of the mother is at stake. Abortion for any other reason is nothing but legalized murder. No, convenience is not a justifiable reason for snuffing out the lives of unborn children before they get a chance to take their first breath.
Feminists, Planned Parenthood, N.O.W., Liberals, and those who are too spineless to speak up for what is right can call it a “woman’s choice” issue all they want, but it doesn’t change the sad reality. Yes, I do believe women should have control over their own bodies, including reproductive rights, but that’s not the issue here. In fact, that whole argument is a red herring. Women can choose to not get pregnant. Whether through abstaining from sex or using reliable methods of birth control, it’s their choice. Taking another human life, on the other hand, should not be a choice that’s available to any individual in a civilized society.
(2) Unnecessary wars. There’s nothing sadder than reading or hearing the names of young, vital, and talented young men and women who have been cut in down in the prime of their lives in a war that did not have to be fought.
Sometimes wars are unavoidable. Often, there are evil aggressors in the world who won’t respond to anything but brute force. In those cases, not fighting a war could ultimately cost more lives than actually fighting it.
However, many times there are viable alternatives to war, such as diplomatic maneuvers and containment. No war should ever be fought until all of those options have been exhausted. Unfortunately, there are leaders all over the world who are, at times, determined to go to war, regardless of the other available options. Political ambition or the drive to enhance their popularity at home often prompts leaders to send their young citizens off to war. Greed and the drive to seize more territory are motivating factors for other heads of state. Others are driven by bogus intelligence and unsubstantiated fear into fighting preemptive wars. Still others are well-intentioned individuals who honestly believe their war efforts are making the world a safer place. They seem to forget that “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.”
(3) Executions of non-violent offenders. Many countries around world impose the ultimate sanction on those found guilty of crimes that range from drug possession to adultery. Even many countries that have never been guilty of this practice sometimes appear to condone it.
I can understand any country wanting to show its displeasure with certain types of crimes, even though they may not involve violence. I can also appreciate the fact that even some types of non-violent crimes are particularly heinous and that there are requirements for strong deterrents to them.
However, committing any act of violence (execution, torture, etc.) against a non-violent offender is completely unethical and immoral and never justified. Non-violent offenders, unlike many of their violent counterparts, can usually be rehabilitated. If justice, not rehabilitation, is the goal, then they can be sufficiently punished with prison time.
(4) HIV/AIDS. Deaths from this disease are so regrettable because they are so preventable. The extremely sad part is that there are innocent victims like children and those receiving blood transfusions, who contract this pernicious disease through no fault of their own.
While those who get it as a result of their own risky behavior deserve our sympathy, they are not innocent victims, despite what the liberal media might have us think. No one has to get HIV/AIDS. The spread of the disease could be completely halted if people would only start making the correct decisions, i.e., to not do illegal drugs and to postpone sexual activity until marriage. Yes, for those who cannot control their own desires, “safe sex” should be emphasized. However, it is never as foolproof as abstinence.
Now, granted, in some third world countries, many people lack the education required to make these decisions. We should be willing to spend the necessary money to make sure they get that education, if it will help abolish the scourge of this disease from our world. However, I can’t help believing that most people know better, but just don’t care. The fleeting pleasure of immoral sexual activity and illicit drugs is more important to them than their own health and the health of the world community.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
A lawyer is a person who thrives by creating confusion, Or when that is impossible, they profit by the confusion. In either case,confusion is their stock and trade. The wider the gap a lawyer can create between accountability and justice the more they profit.
The lawyer’s lucrative monopoly gives him an incentive to create obstacles to the smooth functioning of the life of ordinary people. Through their dominance of politics,the bureaucracy,and their monopoly over litigation, lawyers have insinuated themselves into every human relationship. Lawyers such as JJ Paquette (1kelopaq) and Patricia Meehan are no more than rapist of Society bleeding this government dry with their never ending self righteous,non accountable demands on unsuspecting parents. Any parent that would knowingly subject their children to this team of “Lawyers” may just as well give their children drugs and send them to an orgy. Family Court is Broken,corrupt and completely biased.
They are all about the Money,power and Ego’s and not about our children.
It is not in the Best Interest of the children, it is all about best interest of the lawyers and the easiest solution for judges driven by decades of sexual prejudice and Money. They willing stake their reputation backing which ever parent they foresee as being the biggest “meal ticket” . Nothing more than Society’s “puppy mill” of generating more profit for themselves. In a court of morals lawyers such as these would be stripped of their power and be made to endure the injustice they have so willingly subjected on others.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Countries that are members of the United Nations Association, our governments, elected officials and Justice system are sworn to uphold the principles of cooperation and respect for law among nations concerning children , and encourage the development of a more humane and peacefull world. This applies to leaders at all levels of government. We ask that all who honor these principles consider signing our Petition, and making known to your friends, relations, co-workers and elected officials your demand for principled and accountable behavior on the part of our government.
The following text quotes from the Preamble to the Charter of the United Nations,.
WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED; to save succeeding generations from corruption the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind; and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small; and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom;
AND FOR THESE ENDS;
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors, and unite our strength to maintain international peace and security; and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used save in the common interest; and to employ international resources for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all (including children)
PM Harper’s first speech at the United Nations (UN) was quite the performance. Not once did he mention civil rights, global arming or the rights of children He claimed that the future of the world body depends on the success of the USA’s Afghan mission. How can this be possible? Over the UN’s history the US has sought to use the world body to its own ends with varying degrees of success. Where the UN is the worlds most effective force for multilateralism-the US is the worlds most belligerent unilateralist.
With Afghanistan the UN gives, what is really Americas war, an attempted respectability. How can Canadians or other NATO members have confidence in the integrity or outcome of the Afghanistan mission when we see the atrocity of Iraq? Reckless militarism has utterly destroyed that country, Yet we are seeing the same in Afghanistan and we are supposed to believe in a positive outcome? Who’s war are we fighting? One of the explicit dangers of serial warfare is the first war had better be successful if you want to sell the second. Should there should be an all out attack, possibly nuclear, on Iran? Iran has a very real ability to retaliate and the economic consequences of such an attack would be global and devastating.
Could it be that our war with Iran, like Iraq, is because it is sitting on one of the worlds last great oil reserves- and Iran is selling it to Russia and China?
One of the most compelling reasons for a more peace-driven solution to the Afghanistan problem is the citizens of that country whether they are Taliban or not have no reason to trust the West.. For the past several decades it has been ripped over, manipulated and abused. When it did establish a progressive stable government back in the 1970s that wasn’nt Western freindly was overthrown by the CIA. As Afghanistan is considered a failed state, imperial powers have been major contributors to the failure.
Still another issue begs to be addressed. Major countries, especially the UN Security Council, must challenge the US and not allow the effectiveness and integrity of the world body to be affected because of Western Policy.
Earlier this summer the British polling firm YouGov found that 75% of those polled flatly rejected the US current reason for being there. 39% had little confidence in the US ability to deal with present world problems, followed by another 28% who had very little confidence and 16% had none at all.
One reason, no doubt, Britons and most likely Canadians express such strong sentiments is they are tired of their government lacking leadership, accountability and being led like a puppy. Blair is now under heavy pressure from his party to take an early retirement for this very reason. It seems though Stephen Harper is determined to be a puppy.
We have all heard the horrific causualities in Afganistan, Iraq, and other areas on the news day after . Is war ever justified in a civil society?
Terrorists kill the innocents non-combatants with no hesitation or regret. How can someone have no respect for human life? Many, if not all terrorists seek power and control regardless of means. They use violence as a means to that end. This is instrumental violence. It does not differ from criminal violence anywhere in the world and likely has the same roots.
Often criminal violence has it beginning in the abuse, neglect, loss of parents, and exposure to violence in early childhood resulting in disruptions in attachments. Those with disrupted attachments fail to reach pro-social maturity interpersonally, in affect regulation and self control, and in moral development. They may not understand human reciprocity. Relationships are superficial. They may have little or no empathy or remorse. To them the world is not safe and they must always be on the offensive in order to be safe. Generations of war and violence in the Middle East continues to produce more terrorists. Children are not safe and they become orphaned. They are exposed to violence daily during times of open conflict in war and divorce and always have the fear for lack of security. The effect of this environment on everyone, especially young children can be psychologically devastating.
How do we defend ourselves against these governments and Justice systems that do not value life as we do without creating more terrorists, exploiting children ? The answer is we cannot unless we change our system and make govetrnments more accountable. Children and their families must be safe and well cared for so that they will not become cold, heartless and violent. Street children, one of the ripest recruiting grounds for terrorist organizations and governments CAS, must be accountable to the people.
Terrorism will not end of its own accord. People must protect and defend themselves, as terrorists will not stop. Additionally, terrorism will not end by humanitarian aid alone. Everyone knows that a long term solution is needed. However, a permanent end to war, humanitarian aid and services for those who have lost loved ones, those with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and children with attachments disrupted by war may have a chance of reducing terrorism in the Middle Eastern Region in the future.
Leadership lies at the heart of achieving victory and saving our children.. You only have to look to history to understand that when people needed to accomplish great things, whether in war or peace, great leaders had to rise to the occasion.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
There is no difference between judicial or provincial authority, the provincial government’s policy of no accountability is alive and well in cities in Ontario. Like a cult, they create the “standards” for our society. Committing crimes against humanity, children that are perpetrated in our justice system. Politics lack values, morality and independent accountability.
Nearly half (forty-one percent) of the discussions or decisions took place behind closed doors. Those concerned about secrecy at any municipality should file a complaint to the ombudsman. Municipalities that make secret decisions can now be held accountable. Without investigating the Children’s Aid Society the community or municipality can still be influenced by this unaccountable and publicly funded agency!
CITY TRIES TO AVOID INDEPENDENT AUDITOR- AGAIN! JAN.1, 2008
Mayor John Rodriguez political ally Paul Marleau is not an independent candidate to conduct a city audit. He was supported Mayor Rodriquez in his election campaign. When Mr. Rodriguez said that he wants the best qualified person to do the audit, does he mean his old political ally Mr. Marleau? The few tax payers that actually support the independency of Marleau are just that…a few. They either benefit from unaccountable government or they don’t pay taxes. Its obvious Mr. Rodriquez DOES NOT want to change the direction of the so-called bus he self-admittedly is driving. He even tried to get Mr. Marleau a position on the board at Greater Sudbury Utilities! Can we believe him that he won’t support Mr. Marleau or ensure that the tax payer is not insulted and demand an independent audit as per definition? The mayor and the majority of of city councilors want to avoid an independent audit at all costs. The media in this city is pathetic and bought and paid for. Mr. Rodriguez and a few others support non-accountable government!
For weeks there were announcements that millions of dollars were given to the city by MPP Rick Bartolucci. Mr. Bartolucci was also known as the Wizard of Cash. Why is the City of Greater Sudbury in the red? Where is this money going? Where is the Provincial gas-tax credit the city received from the provincial government? John Rodriquez doesn’t consider Ottawa or Queen’s Park as senior levels of government, does he means that the Children’s Aid Society is the senior level of government? During these same weeks of Bartollucci’s fountain of cash, Rodriquez was mimicking a concern for the lack of infrastructure money that is supposed to flow down from these senior governments. In fact during his campaign he said he’ld march with Bartolucci and Marleau to Queen’s Park. In reality,the moneys been flowing for years hence the opposition of an independent audit by a select few (city council). John is not a mayor for the people as he promised in his campaign but a mayor for his friends who support a Mickey Mouse Audit and no accountability!.
John Rodriguez elected mayor “strong and vocal leader in the mayor’s chair, and he’s going to give them what they want. He said “I’ve been there and I know the landscape” of how to exert influence with the provincial and federal governments to bring programs and funding (money for the homeless) to Greater Sudbury”, said Rodriguez, however its become clear he is willing to continue the tradition and culture of abuse and no accountability.
He says “I believe I’ve been given a great mandate by the citizens…I put my platform before the people and barely 50 percent agreed with what I had to say,” he said. “I’ve been there and I know the landscape” (culture).
He also supports building modern performing arts centre (paid $250,000 to decide whether or not to build it) and will continue to work to reduce problems with homelessness. Money well spent! Where will he spend the gas tax credit received from the province?
Another Liberal blunder? Who is driving the “Political Bus in Sudbury” Is John Rodriguez still driving the bus or is he under it? Seems there may be a touch of noticeable Dementia in Rodriguez’s remarks concerning what is said and what is NOT said… When asked if he could be helped in his capacity as Mayor, Rodriguez replied that “he could use someone to help him raise the gay rights flag at City hall during Gay Pride Day, and they could lead the gay Pride Parade in a pink, leather thong” Mayor Rodriguez who served as NDP MP for the Nickel Belt riding for 18 years now says he was misquoted.
SUDBURY CITY COUNCIL OPPOSED AUDIT
The quality of Sudbury’s roads and drinking water is deteriorating. However the mayor and council are raising our taxes to raise flags and build a theater center rather than help fund recreation centers for children and parents. Neither the mayor or city council welcomed a complete audit of the cities finances. Its clear that an audit may potentially permit a wealthy councilor some sort of unfair advantage or expose some sort of corruption. No one volunteered to drive the bus that day. It seems that for years our elected officials down at city hall have been avoiding an audit of the city’s finances. However in 2004 council did approve an independent audit to examine the city’s finances for potential abuse and waste of funds; but top administrators and senior municipal bureaucrats convinced council that an independent audit was ill-advised for no apparent reason. It becomes clear that no one at city hall including our elected provincial representatives (Bartollucci and Marleau) has demonstrated the understanding for accountability and fiscal responsibility. Instead city council, mayor, and top bureaucrats decided to audit one department at a time which would conveniently take years to complete. The mayor and council do not take the issue of fiscal responsibility seriously. The mayor and most of the council members were not concerned with what was happening with the audit file. An independent audit won’t happen with the same faces in city hall. The mayor, city council and bureaucrats will continue to avoid the issue of fiscal responsibility. The Children’s Aid Society of Sudbury and Manitoulin continue to avoid accountability. Our city faces real challenges and problems with regards to accountability. We do not have a city council, mayor, or Children’s Aid Society in Sudbury that is responsible and mature enough to solve these problems. Lack of leadership and accountability is rampant in city hall and the Liberal party of Ontario. As more time passes it becomes clearer who really is driving the bus and where its going.
Wednesday, December 06, 2006 – 11:00
Local News – Nickel Belt MPP Shelley Martel is demanding better protection for children after the release of a scathing auditor general’s report Tuesday.
The New Democrat MPP said the report shows the Liberal government allowed spending abuses at Children’s Aid Societies, while at-risk children didn’t get the protection they needed.
The report confirms her worst fears, said Martel in a written statement – money wasted by executives on sport utility vehicles, high-priced meals and $150 car washes.
The provincial government is supposed to oversee spending for Children’s Aid Societies, but the auditor said the McGuinty Liberals ignored quarterly reports on CAS activities.
It also cancelled important reviews of non-Crown ward and child protection files, as well as reviews of service levels and financial data.
Martel questioned how Ontarians can be certain vulnerable children are receiving “appropriate care and protection if Dalton McGuinty is ignoring reports, cutting reviews and failing to uphold his duty to oversee the spending practices of Children’s Aid Societies.”
Ward 11 candidate Janet Gasparini is the executive director of the Social Planning Council of Sudbury “There are many complex issues at stake-not the least of which involves social policy, CAS, or accountable government.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
JULY 16, 2007
Attention: Ashely Thompson, President Children’s Aid Society
and Jean J. Paquette, Council Children’s Aid Society of Sudbury and Manitoulin
In your letter dated June 13,2007, while acting as the President of the Board of Directors of the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin you stated that you and the Board of Directors of the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin denied my application for membership with the Society based on the Board members’ perception that I do not accept the authority or role of the Children’s Aid Society as conferred by statute, nor that of the Society’s Social Workers.
It is my understanding from your letter that the Society does not grant memberships to anyone who disagrees with how the Society operates in any way.
Could you please clarify this for me. Does the Society deny memberships to people who do not agree with how the Society operates and who wish to apply for a membership so that they can affect change that benefits our children?
Respectfully,
Affidavit Province of Ontario, City of Sudbury In the matter of The Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin
City of Greater Sudbury in the Province of Ontario, make oath and say.
I hereby apply for a list of the shareholders (or members) of the above-named corporation
I require the list of shareholders (or members) only for purposes connected with the above-named corporation. The list of shareholders (or members) and the information contained therein will be used only for purposes connected with the above-named corporation.
Sworn Before me at the City of Greater Sudburyin the Province of Ontario this day of May, 2007. XXXXXXX
David B. Rivard, Executive Director
David B. Rivard, M.S.S., T.S.I. Directeur general
Fax/telecopieur
(705)521-7372 (705) 521-7371
Legal/legal (705)521-7370
June 13, 2007
Dear Sir,
We are in receipt of your correspondence dated May 22, 2007 seeking to become a member of the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin and, failing that, requesting a list of the members belonging to our Corporation. We have reviewed your request to become a member and with respect to your request for a list of CAS members, the Corporations Act stipulates that, by necessity, only members who have submitted an affidavit form will have access to this information. Considering your request to become a member has been denied, we hereby deny your request for a list of CAS members.
We are returning your cheque in the amount of $5.00 made payable to the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin.
Sincerely, Sudbury Childrens Aid Society
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
An issue of grave concern to all caring people exists in our “democracy”. As a caring individuals it should be our obligation to bring this issue to the awareness of tas many people as we can to initiate or force the much needed changes.
Deliberate and systematic destruction of families, apprehension and seemingly intentional abuse of children. There is much eveidence that this abuse of power and children is being perpetuated for financial gains at tax payers expense and possibly also for the perversed satisfaction of having such power and be able to perpetrate serious abuse of that power, without ANY accountability. The legitimate need for removing children from abusive homes is being used as an excuse by childrens aid agencies (CAS ) and (CCAS) with “Gestapo” like powers, to apprehend children for any or no reason.
The unspeakable and systematic abuse of native children in the boarding school system has reemerged in a form that would preclude expensive settlements by the organized churches in class action law suits. The horrific abuse and death of five year old Geoffrey Baldwin, as documented by CBC, has brought no positive change to the system or the agency responsible, CCAS, ( Catholic Childrens Aid Society ), neither have any of its case workers have been held accountable. He was placed in foster care with a couple that had a long history of serious child abuse.
Such actions by the agency can hardly be unintentional. A mountain of evidence is accumulating that this case is only a small tip of a very large ice berg. The June 23, 2006 issue of the Toronto Sun contains a statement by Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin regarding CAS ( Children’s Aid Society ), …. “the perverse application of judgement by bureaucrats”. A college certificate and a job with a CAS agency will give a CAS worker more power than a Police officer in Ontario. Some parents have reported to “Court Watch” that some CAS workers have told parents that they have “more power than God.”
Those “children’s aid” agencies and their mostly unqualified and ruthless case workers, are seemingly operating “above the law” as even the Ontario Ombudsman is prevented by law to probe their activities and the Police are severely restricted in their efforts to investigate, because of complete lack of cooperation by the CAS agencies. This can only mean that protection from the highest political levels are being provided for those agencies for their destructive and criminal activities. Who are the high level elected, or unelected officials that have created this “Gestapo” of CAS and CCAS agencies perpetuating this criminal activity without ANY accountability? It is time to name names, prosecute and convict those criminals. Initial investigation has revealed that parents, caring case workers, Doctors and Lawyers are being silenced from speaking up under Gestapo like threats of severe harassments and repercussions. Once children are apprehended, parents are silenced from exposing abuse of their children with threats of no visitations, or to never get them back again. Most or all promises given to parents to get their children back are apparently false. Perhaps by following the money trail the truth becomes even more clear, as there are financial incentives to those “child protection agencies” to keep moving children around from foster home to foster home.
When law suits are being brought against the agencies and their case workers, they have unlimited access to tax payer funded defense. However, the outrage by the people that know about this monstrous criminal activity is growing so strong, that it is uniting people in a grass roots movement to stamp out this crime and…………
SAVE THE CHILDREN. To ALL caring people everywhere the call is going forth to UNITE for our childrens sake, so that those that have been apprehended may have their God given right to have the most Loving parenting possible, restored CHILDREN are God’s most precious gift and the future of ours and any country.
If you have been victimized by a CAS or CCAS agency, please contact us. To all parents and children whom have been the victim of these agencies , Know many of the tatics they have used against you are an infringement of Human Rights and violations of the charter under the UN .
km
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
2The Treasonous Acts Against Canadians
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
Article II: That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them.
Article III: That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation or community; of all the various modes and forms of government that is best, which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and that, whenever any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.
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.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Conclusion drawn from the above quote:
1. We, the People are creations of God – NOT creations of government.
2. The RIGHTS of LIFE, LIBERTY, PROPERTY and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS are bestowed upon us by our Creator – NOT by government.
3. We, the People create government and install kings, queens, prime ministers or presidents as our servant.
4. As creator of government, we are the “MAJESTY”, and government is our servant.
5. When the men and women, acting as members of a SERVANT government, scheme to overthrow the “MAJESTY” of the MASTER and subjugate or destroy the SOVEREIGN PEOPLE, there exists the crime of HIGH TREASON.
6. The Canadian People have NOT had one iota of opportunity to participate in deciding whether we will have the Monarch of Great Britain as the Crown of Canada, what form of government we will have in Canada, or any opportunity to write or ratify a constitution.
From the 1893 Dictionary of Law:
Treason. Betrayal, treachery, breach of faith or allegiance.
Treason may exist only as between allies: it is a general appellation to denote not only offenses against the king and government, but also accumulation of guilt which arises whenever a superior reposes a confidence in a subject or inferior, between whom and himself there subsists a natural, a civil, or even a spiritual relation, and the inferior so abuses that confidence, so forgets the obligations of duty, subjugation, and allegiance, as to destroy the life of the superior.
When disloyalty attacks majesty itself it is called, by way of distinction, high treason, equivalent to the ‘crimen loesoe majestatis’ of the Romans.
High treason is the most heinous civil crime a man can commit. If indeterminate, this alone is sufficient to make a government degenerate into arbitrary power.
The Treasonous Acts Against Canadians
The Canadian Governments, at all levels, by use of a “STRAWMAN”, a sound alike name of the name by which you have been called all your life, but usually spelled in all capital letters or family name first, and called a “PERSON”. The deceit is in the government’s (Crown) making the family name as the paramount name, a “surname”, where the root word “sur” means over, above, primary, and the given name(s) as a reference name. This is opposite to the intentions of one’s parents, and opposite of the origin and status of a “family” name – that being a reference name for the primary, or given names. That fraudulent name is then inscribed on a government money value instrument called a ‘birth certificate’. In one’s using/acknowledging the birth certificate name as being “one and the same” as oneself, that fraud intended name, it carries with its use, the status of ‘plantation slave’.
The ‘all caps’ spelling is a code signifying that the slave has been pledged as a debtor in the bankruptcy of the Crown. All western nations were declared bankrupt in 1930. The deceit by government in teaching people to use the birth certificate name through the educational system makes all Canadians SUBJECT to the CROWN by changing our status to that of a FEUDAL SERF of the MIDDLE AGES. For several hundred years, the British Monarchy bestowed ‘privileges’ (falsely called rights) on ’subjects’ (sometimes called ‘citizens’), but this ceased with the 1930 bankruptcy.
Since that time, these ‘privileges’, including ‘due process of law’ has been slowly removed, and the ’slaves’ have been subjected to increased forced extraction of their labour and life (life is time spent) by way of taxation and inflation of fiat counterfeit money. This is how people have been deprived of the protections of such documents as the Magna Carta 1225, the Habeas Corpus Act, the Bill of Rights, The Petition of Rights, and more recently, Diefenbaker’s Canadian Bill of Rights.
The Romans had an expression for disobedient slaves, called “homo sacer”, where the disobedient slave was deprived of all rights of due process of law. The disobedient slave could be murdered at will by “officers of Caesar” without any reprisal, just as modern police can murder people with their guns or tasers without fear of criminal justice, based upon their own testimony of right.
This is a deliberate act of HIGH TREASON against the People of Canada, as it results in the loss of the Creator bestowed rights of LIFE, LIBERTY and PROPERTY, and the right to a common law court (due process of law).
Queen Elizabeth II has allowed her name to be prostituted to this evil scheme in direct violation of her oath of office as Monarch of the British Commonwealth of Nations. In her oath, she swore on the Holy Bible that she would uphold and defend the rights of the People over which she reigns as Monarch.
There is a question as to whether the Monarch of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland has any right to be called the Monarch or the Crown of Canada, as the right to succession in the BNA Act (section 2) granted to the successors and heirs of Queen Victoria was struck by the British Imperial Parliament in 1893.
Any claim of absolute sovereignty rights by the English Monarchy was shown to be non-existent in the Magna Carta of 1215. [Actually 1225, as the 1215 Magna Carta was voided by the Pope.] Yet, over PERSONS, be they natural persons (man under contract of servitude with the Crown, and without right of free will – except for obedience) or artificial corporate bodies, as created by the Crown, there is absolute rights of the MASTER over the servant exhibited by the Crown over the People.
The Crown, whether it be in so-called right of Canada or of a province, by deviously changing our status before their corrupt courts as being corporate members created by the Crown, has deprived us of our lawful courts and plundered our lives which have been expended in labour to obtain the very necessities of life.
In ALL cases in a court in Canada, where Canadians are taken to court for disobedience to a statute, or regulation therein, they are considered a ‘CORPORATE ENTITY/NATURAL PERSON/MEMBER’. This fact is an unknown to most Canadians. People believe that they are dealing directly with the Canadian Justice system as a full liability man or woman with full rights.
England has been under the Roman system since King John signed over England FOREVER as a vassal state to the Holy Roman Empire/Pontiff/Vatican in 1213. All human institutions are make-believe ships/incorporations in the Roman system. Thus, All corporations and corporate (crew)members are a legal fiction, and are SUBJECTS of the Crown. The British Crown is subject to, or under the Crown of the City of London, the Vatican owned financial, legal and professional controls capitol of the Holy Roman Empire. So, the Crown referred to in Canada is most likely the 6 pointed City of London Crown (a corporation), not the British Crown. The Canadian people have a basic RIGHT to Common Law , and as such, are NOT SUBJECTS of the Crown for the imposition of corporate ADMINISTRATIVE Law – the ONLY type of law which is found in the Canadian Court system. This subterfuge is totally in the realm of legal sleaze and trickery for the purpose of denying your God Given RIGHTS.
In using the term “Common Law”, I refer to the Anglo-Saxon Common Law. The English Monarchy began the defrauding of the English people of their individual rights protecting Anglo-Saxon Common Law in a concerted effort by King Edward I in conspiracy with the Pope of Rome sometime around 1300 AD. The term “common law” and “English common law” was concocted as a fraud; and, is in fact, a system derived directly from Roman civil law – commonly called “dictator’s law”. As Roman Municipal Law, it points to Mercantile Law used against debtors, as ‘municipal’ means a debtor territory. Considering that Anglo-Saxon Common Law period of England preceded the Norman Conquest of England by some 500 years, we have evidence of this fraud posted on the Canadian Federal Justice website:
“The common law, which developed in Great Britain after the Norman Conquest, was based on the decisions of judges in the royal courts. It is called judge-made law because it is a system of rules based on “precedent”. Whenever a judge makes a decision that is to be legally enforced, this decision becomes a precedent: a rule that will guide judges in making subsequent decisions in similar cases. The common law is unique in the world because it cannot be found in any “code” or “legislation”; it exists only in past decisions. However, this also makes it flexible and adaptable to changing circumstances.”
The primary feature of Roman Municipal Law, a variation of Roman Civil Law, [derived from Maritime Law], used by the deceitful English Monarchy, and it’s so-called justice system, was/is the “notwithstanding clause”. The Monarchy called this ‘Equity’. This clause derives from the fact that Roman Law is based upon all commercial and political organizations, in fact all human institutions, being make-believe ships.
All ’ship’s orders’ – laws, rules and regulations concerning the ship, have within them the necessary right and duty of the captain to disregard any such rules or regulations when he deems it necessary for the ‘good’ of the ship. The complete “flexible and adaptable” feature of so-called English or British common law is nothing more than the common usage of the notwithstanding clause to insure that the Crown’s pleasures, prerogatives and privileges come before the individual rights of the people.
–
Few will have the greatness to bend history; however, each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope… and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.
- Robert F. Kennedy
Cherish The Children. Lets be The Change We Wish To See In The World
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
CRIMINAL HARASSMENT:
A HANDBOOK FOR POLICE AND CROWN PROSECUTORS
CANADA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
INTRODUCTION Criminal harassment consists of repeated conduct that is carried out over a period of time and that causes victims to reasonably fear for their safety.
264. (1) Criminal harassment – No person shall, without lawful authority and knowing that another person is harassed or recklessly as to whether the other person is harassed, engage in conduct referred to in subsection (2) that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them.
(2) Prohibited conduct – The conduct mentioned in subsection (1) consists of
(a) repeatedly following from place to place the other person or anyone known to them;
(b) repeatedly communicating with, either directly or indirectly, the other person or anyone known to them;
(c) besetting or watching the dwelling-house, or place where the other person, or anyone known to them, resides, works, carries on business or happens to be; or
(d) engaging in threatening conduct directed at the other person or any member of their family.
These guidelines support a commitment by Federal/Provincial/Territorial Ministers Responsible for Justice to strengthen the criminal justice system’s response to criminal harassment.
1.1 Purpose The purpose is to provide police and Crown prosecutors with guidelines for the investigation and prosecution of criminal harassment cases.
1.2 Legislative History of Criminal Harassment
On August 1, 1993, the Criminal Code was amended to create the new offence of criminal harassment. It was introduced as a specific response to violence against women, particularly to domestic violence against women. However, the offence is not restricted to domestic violence and applies equally to all victims of criminal harassment.
1.3 What do we Know About Criminal Harassment in Canada?
The most current Statistics Canada police and court data relating to criminal harassment1 reveal the following facts for 2002.
• In total, 9,080 criminal harassment incidents were reported to a sample of 123 police forces in Canada in 2002.
• Of those 9,080 incidents, 4 in 10 (45%) were cleared by charge and the complainant declined to lay charges in 1 in 6 (16%
The cumulative effect of harassing behaviour and actions causes victims to experience intimidation, as well as psychological and emotional distress. How many parents and children alike are intimiated by police and CAS?
Criminal harassment or “stalking,” as it is commonly called, is not a psychiatric diagnosis
MENTAL HEALTH ACT OF ONTARIO
Introduction (used at the discretion of police)
The Mental Health Act in Ontario is a law that governs how people are admitted to psychiatric facilities.
Admission
Under the Mental Health Act, “psychiatric facilities” have the right to refuse admission to a person if their problem is “not urgent or necessary” (Section 11). But someone with a “mental disorder” ["any disease or disability of the mind"; Sec. 1. (1)] may be admitted as a voluntary patient if they are “believed to be in need of observation, care or treatment” (Sec. 12). (CAS’s or police’s opinion)
Anyone can bring sworn evidence before a justice of the peace to have someone else “examined” in a psychiatric facility [Sec. 16(1)]. A justice of the peace can do this by signing a Form 2 if they find the person:
• “apparently” has a mental disorder “of a nature or quality” that will likely result in: a) serious bodily harm to self, or b) to others; or c) serious physical impairment of the person, and the person:
• threatens or has threatened to cause bodily harm to self
• attempts or has attempted to cause bodily harm to self
• behaves or has behaved violently towards someone else
• causes or has caused someone to fear bodily harm,
Under Section 17 of the Act, a police officer can bring someone to a facility for an examination if the officer has “reasonable and probable grounds” to believe a person has acted in a “disorderly manner” (meaning irrational such as trying to make CAS accountable) but not necessarily illegal) as long as the person “apparently” has a mental disorder and has threatened or attempted to harm themselves, or has behaved violently or caused someone to fear bodily harm, or has shown a lack of competence to care for themselves. Note that police cannot use the new criteria involving treatment issues. Police must stay with the person until the facility decides whether to admit them.
Under Section 21, a judge (not a justice of the peace) can order an examination for someone who appears in court and is charged with or convicted of an offense, but seems to have a mental disorder (Form 6). Or a judge can remand such a person for admission to a psychiatric facility for up to 2 months (Form 8).
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
How social services are paid bonuses to snatch babies for adoption
SUE REID
The number of babies under one month old being taken into care for adoption is now running at almost four a day (a 300 per cent increase over a decade).
In total, 75 children of all ages are being removed from their parents every week before being handed over to new families.
Some of these may have been willingly given up for adoption, but critics of the Government’s policy are convinced that the vast majority are taken by force.
Time and again, the mothers say they are innocent of any wrongdoing.
Of course, there are people who are not fit to be parents and it is the duty of any responsible State to protect their children.
But over the five years since I began investigating the scandal of forced adoptions, I have found a deeply secretive system which is too often biased against basically decent families.
I have been told of routine dishonesty by social workers and questionable evidence given by doctors which has wrongly condemned mothers.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Pure Evil is running CAS. Select individuals have been purposely placed in positions of authority, including CAS, the courts, adminsistration, and it doesn’t stop there. There is a Network of evil doers in many different sectors, both private and public; business, court systems and government; all who are connected to CAS to ensure the devious plans are successful.They have devised a “fail safe” method to be able to legally steal helpless children away from loving parents. There is no coincidence or mistakes, families are targeted, systematically broken down and destroyed. Children are pawns, used to have complete control of the parents.It is a multi-million dollar child abuse industry that makes them rich and powerful.
One CAS team works on the parents, making sure they are being emotionally tortured; parental right termination hearings to keep them terrified of what will happen, wondering where their child is and begging and pleading with CAS for mercy. Meanwhile another team works on brainwashing the already traumatized child, coaching the child to say their parents had done something bad to them, just so they would quit badgering them for hours at a time. They have been known to tell children their parents don’t want them, they are dead, or have left the province.After the CAS henchmen are finished breaking down the child’s spirit, they have psychologists and psychiatristrists evaluate the children and the parents mental health. It’s a set up from the beginning to end, perfectly orchestrated to get the results that CAS is directed to get by the leaders of the Network. Drug addicts, sex offenders, hardened criminals, Satanic cult worshippers and child hating misfits are among the hundreds who foster and keep abusing the children CAS alleges are in need of protection from loving parents. It’s not just the money that is the driving force behind the greed and corruption, it is the power to destroy that feeds the evil monster Satan and the Network that serves him…but we can fight back, and win!
corruptioncentral.com
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
This criminal enterprise seems to leave children at high risk in homes .that seem to have a very tragic ending ..Its a psychological strategy so the public can see without their intervention ,,how some children are subject to severe abuse even to death. However they do this by design to ensure they create this impact with the public to keep their tax dollars rolling in and keep their jobs and luxury SUVs .
I know of a few cases where children should be removed open case files for years however they do NOT remove these children there must be a reason and I solely believe that is why,,
The public needs to wake up and realise this evil empire of child snatchers only has one care to trick the public and receive more Tax Dollars ..
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
way back when Canada banished native languages, even before they OUTLAWED potlatch (to further war effort in the Great WAr- protect it from economic abuses) there was a history involving canada, orphans and alcoholic, sadistic, satanic freaks. Most recently ONTARIO’S CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETIES. The freaks were commonly retired military or “retired” priests or unaccountable publically funded assholes.. They were retired into positions of overseeing the orphanages and Children Aid Societies. In the beginning it was mostly aboriginals. Latter lower classes, deviants’ offspring etcetcetc were added to the pool of victims and now children of innocent hard working parents.
Graves? try ditches.
Records? why?
Public Trials? too embarasing.
Same old same old. Governments amd CAS merely recognized a good resource.
And its not slowing down one!
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Who amoung the French in Quebec who were formallya part of experimenting on children in your province have decided to move operations to Ontario?. Who amoung you French at CSIS is a part of apprehend and experimenting on my child?
I am not a joke. I am a ten year lawyer and former drug prosecutor at the Department of Justice whose child is caught up in some Children’s Aid racquet, apprehended for the purposes of experimentation. Why do know there is some jealous French bitch behind this who decided to fuck my kid up. I will find you.
CANADA WILL PAY 50’s TEST VICTIMS
By CLYDE H. FARNSWORTH,
Published: November 19, 1992
In a footnote to an unusual chapter of the cold war, Canada has agreed to compensate victims of psychiatric experiments carried out mainly in the 1950’s and financed in part by the Central Intelligence Agency.
The experiments began after some prisoners returned from the Korean War brainwashed, and Western intelligence agencies began studies and experiments on the nature and possibility of mind control.
An institute at McGill University in Montreal, headed by Dr. D. Ewen Cameron, a psychiatrist who died in 1977, was one of the centers where such experiments were carried out.
Now, the Canadian Government says the 80 or so patients who underwent the so-called “psychic driving” treatment in Montreal, intended to wipe the brain clear of all trauma, can receive almost $80,000 each.
The decision, which was announced on Tuesday, represents an about-face for the Government of Prime Minister Brian Mulroney. Seven years ago, when the matter came up after a number of suits were filed by victims, Ottawa refused to pay compensation. U.S. Already Made Payments
“I believe that this financial assistance responds in a way that expresses the fairness and compassion Canadians expect from their Government,” Justice Minister Kim Campbell said in announcing the decision.
One reason for the change was that the United States has already settled with some of the Canadian victims. Another, lawyers said, was that many of the suits filed early in the 1980’s were still open and promised evidence that could embarrass a Government gearing up for elections.
The patients at the Allan Memorial Institute at McGill were put into a drugged sleep for weeks or months, subjected to electroshock therapy until they were “de-patterned,” knowing neither who or where they were, and forced to listen repeatedly to recorded messages broadcast from speakers on the wall or under their pillows.
Linda Macdonald, 55 years old, an employment counselor now in Vancouver, is one of those who sued for compensation. “I walked through those doors with a husband on one arm and a guitar on the other and was a healthy person and coherent,” she said.
Diagnosed as an acute schizophrenic — she had gone to Dr. Cameron for treatment — she spent 86 days in the “sleep room” and was subjected to 109 shock treatments and megadoses of barbiturates and other drugs. Reduced to a Blank Slate
When she got out of the experiment, she could not read or write, had to be toilet-trained and could not remember her husband, her five children or any part of the first 26 years of her life.
Reached in Los Angeles, where she is discussing a film on her life, she said the compensation “is minimal and won’t go very far, but that wasn’t my purpose in my suit against the Government.”
“It was to make sure that Canadians understood that such a thing happened in their country and to get the Government to take responsibility so that it won’t happen again,” she said.
David Orlikow, a retired member of Parliament, whose now-deceased wife, Velma, was another subject, said she emerged from the treatment “really a disabled person, not physically but emotionally.”
“There were days when she would do nothing and then be subject to unexplainable rages,” Mr. Orlikow recalled. “She was a very intelligent person, but her ability to read was destroyed.”
Mr. Orlikow initiated litigation in the United States against the C.I.A., recruiting the civil liberties lawyer Joseph L. Rauh to take his wife’s case.
In October, 1988, the Justice Department announced an out-of-court settlement with Velma Orlikow and eight other victims, a total of $750,000. Ms. Macdonald was not among the nine. The C.I.A. had cut off financing of the program at the time of her treatment.
John Hedley, a C.I.A. spokesman, commented: “It’s a sad episode that happened more than 30 years ago, and the case is closed.” Noting the 1988 settlement, he said the agency had “nothing to add concerning the decision in Canada.” American Author’s Testimony
John Marks, a former State Department official whose 1979 book, “The Search For the Manchurian Candidate,” called attention to the experiments, said that a C.I.A. front called the Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology, funneled more than $60,000 to Dr. Cameron for the studies. Ottawa gave him more than $200,000.
Despite the decision to pay compensation, the Canadian Government has not acknowledged legal responsibility for the experiments. Justice Minister Campbell said the money was being awarded purely “on compassionate and humanitarian grounds.”
At the time of the experiments, Dr. Cameron was trying to find a cure for schizophrenia and other mental illnesses. In the early 1950’s, he theorized that people with neurotic thoughts or behavior could be changed by listening to repeated taped messages. He called the technique “psychic driving” and published an account in the American Journal of Psychiatry.
The C.I.A. was attracted to his comparison of psychic driving with techniques of coerced interrogation and brainwashing.
Patients went to see Dr. Cameron voluntarily and didn’t realize until much later that they were being used in experiments.
Correction: November 20, 1992, Friday
Because of an editing error, an article yesterday about an agreement by Canada to compensate victims of psychiatric experiments misstated the year of the death of Dr. D. Ewen Cameron, a psychiatrist at McGill University in Montreal. He died in 1967, not 1977.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Openness, transparency, and accountability are non-existent at Sudbury’s city council and the Children’s Aid Society of Sudbury. The current politicians in the City of Greater Sudbury and its administrators are uncommitted to any kind change with respect to accountability. The city’s leaders complained and rejected about any criticism. Instead they are fighting tooth and nail to protect their secret abuse of everything associated with running the city. Who are these clowns that hire lawyers at the tax payers expense to cover-up their crimes and refuse an independent audit? Perhaps the members at city council would serve the city better curled up in one of the many potholes in the city’s roads. .Without new faces, new ideals and a new standard of morals in city hall; the citizens here will continue to be short changed. Hence, Rodriquez’s’ endorsement of Boitanno so early in his term (2007) in an effort to maintain the “status quo” at city hall. Janet Gasperinni bought the most tickets (22). The mayor and the city councilors all lack truthfulness, credibility and integrity. Remember this the next time you hear Rodriquez cry about the homeless problem in Sudbury and the $12,000 dollars he spent and measures he and council took to hide the truth from the citizens of Sudbury. The city also admitted to spending well over 1 million annually on legal fees however refused to disclose the name of the law firm.
Mark Meito Sudbury’s chief administrator officer vows to develop a policy on concert ticket next month, but refuses to have an independent audit since this would undoubtedly embarrass everyone at city hall. It seems everything connected the city including the Sudbury Arena, Sudbury Hydro, Sudbury Children’s Aid Society, etc Meito says “ the city has developed a practice of moving business units to private corporations including city airports, hydro utility and housing and therefore all matters would be private and the public will no longer have access to any information. It would seem city hall employs the same tactics as Sudbury’s Children’s Aid societies. What is even more disturbing is Mark Meito failing to provide the public with the facts as requested by local newspapers. Does he as an employee think he is above the truth? Certainly when our own mayor refers to himself as “royalty” we in Sudbury are surely privileged to have a royal subject as mayor. He doesn’t see anything wrong with his staff misrepresenting the facts as long as no actions are taken using the information. How are we to know which information is true and which is misrepresentation? Certainly the citizens of Sudbury deserve a mayor that would demand much more from his staff, councilors and the city’s service providers. We already know the mayor, his councilors and Sudbury’s MPP R. Bartolucci support the current non accountable and publicly funded Children’s Aid Society of Sudbury; who much like city hall also operate in secrecy and are ripping off the tax payer as well as destroying families for profit.
If our elected officials and hired staff cannot be trusted to handle the purchase of concert tickets in an honest and open manner, how can we feel confident to trust them in how they handle the complex business of running our city? Election 2010 can’t come soon enough.
Why has the cost of doubling hwy 69 doubled? Sudbury MPP Rick Bartolucci said this would be complete in 10 years and now he says it will take 17 years. Has the cost of labor and material double? Then on the other hand we have “king Rodriquez” who has proclaimed he will march hand in hand with Marleau and Bartolucci to Queens Park for money and he cant even maintain the 40 kilometers of roads in Sudbury. It seems maintaining the few kilometers of roads in the city has proved most challenging for our mayor and city councilors and completely ignored by MMP Bartolucci much like the they all ignore the crimes committed by Sudbury’s Children’s Aid Society.
Write the Ontario Ombudsman and demand an audit of Sudbury’s municipal government. As of New Year’s Day, 2008, the Municipal Act requires all meetings of municipal councils, boards and committees to be held in public, with a few exceptions. use the general online complaint form (simply specify you are complaining about a closed meeting). Or call us at 1-800-263-1830. http://www.ombudsman.on.ca/welcome.aspx?langID=1
Its about time we throw all the snakes in the Pit together , it will be rather entertaining to watch the feeeding frenzy as they all turn on each other and begin consuming each other , the rats in the bag is next yekkkkk what a mess that will be you throw them in one bag wait only 2 hours open the bag and out falls body parts heads little claws arms legs ,,its a well known fact you cant place rats in one bag tied up together , they soon go crazy and chew off each others heads literally. Oh well leave the children and families of Ontario in peace and stop legally kidnapping the children and drugging them . or one by one there will be rat catchers with bags waiting ..and pits dug deep for the snakes .. Its coming snakes and rodents your days done ..
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Disgusting videotaped interview of Barrie, Ontario child by the CAS
(July 3, 2008) A recently released video reveals disgusting work done by CAS workers to a child from Barrie, Ontario in which one of the workers made a young girl take her clothes off including her underwear so that the CAS worker who has no medical credentials could do a vaginal examination. Absolutely disgusting does not even begin to describe the intrusive exam done on this child! The child even tells the worker that mommy told her to tell the worker that daddy touches her but the worker quickly diverts the child away from this disclosure about her mom.
On top of this, the incompetent and stupid worker asks a bunch of leading and totally inappropriate questions clearly intended to get the child to say bad things about dad and to avoid all things that mom has done. Shame on you, CAS!!!!!! This video brings your agency to the pinnacle of child abuse! Who is watching these workers with the CAS? Obviously some of these CAS workers haven’t the foggiest idea of how to conduct an interview with a child. Shame as well, on the judges in the Barrie, Ontario court such as Justice Olah and Justice Perkins who seem to believe these CAS workers without question. If Justice Olah or Justice Perkins would like to have a copy of this tape to see for themselves how CAS workers interview children and take their little panties down, then please contact Court Watch and we will arrange to have a copy of the video delivered to you for your private viewing. While Justice Olah and Justice Perkins criticize Court Watch for its efforts to expose the truth and to help children, it’s the CAS who are making fools of everyone at the court and making a mockery of justice! Court Watch has another video of a boy telling how a male CAS worker, stopped the CAS van at the side of the highway and then grabbed his penis! Watch for that Court Watch video to be posted soon. It’s a simple case of judges like Justice Olah and Justice Perkins backing the wrong horse in too many cases with tragic results for children. It’s no wonder why CAS agencies fight hard to keep these videos secret – they don’t want to be scrutinized for their lack of professionalism!
RCMP National Investigation unit reports that CAS have acted inappropriately and have wrongly taken children!
(July 3, 2008) Documents recently released were reviewed by Court Watch reporters today which clearly indicate that the RCMP at the highest level, did conduct an investigation involving the CAS in Ontario and did conclude from their investigation that the CAS had acted inappropriately and had wrongfully taken away children from their parents. In addition to this, information has been uncovered which would indicate that police at a local level where this family lives kept this report a secret until the documents were eventually uncovered. Thanks to the honestly of some good officers at the RCMP, the CAS perpetrators of this crime may be brought to justice. A number of good lawyers and police officers are now refusing to support a family court system which even they see is out of control and unaccountable. It’s only a matter of time till many of these CAS workers who engage in criminal activities are going to find themselves and their agencies facing big lawsuits as the truth begins to surface of their wrongdoings.
Reign of terror in Barrie, Ontario as police terrorize girl and her family as part of police goon squad assistance to Children’s Aid to “serve and protect” children and members of the public.
(July 3, 2008) A video posted on Youtube shows graphically how our tax dollars are being spent by police and child protection workers in the Barrie, Ontario region, to supposedly “protect” children from harm by forcing children to return to the care of the Children’s Aid Society. If anyone wonders why a growing number of children and families in the community are beginning to hate the police and the CAS, this video shows graphic reasons why.
This sort of public relations disaster created by police and the CAS is only destroying the public’s faith in the police and the CAS. These organizations need the respect and support of the people of Barrie, not their disrespect and scorn. Another 13-year-old teen from Barrie contacted Court Watch to tell us how police broke down the bathroom door at her friend’s home to take her away to the CAS after forcing her into the back of a smelly police cruiser. She had run back to her loving family after being sexually approached while in foster care with the CAS. CAS workers who often don’t even have the credentials as social workers are in effect telling the police what do do. Police are often listening and taking orders from inexperienced CAS workers who often are not even registered Social Workers. This girl and her sibling you can be sure now hate the Barrie, Ontario police force as well and will be certainly sharing their views with many in the Barrie, Ontario region including other teens. Next time the Barrie, Ontario police have a riot and have kids jeering and making fun of them, they can blame their own policy of acting as the goon patrol for the CAS for turning the kids against them. What the police should be doing is insisting on Court Orders for apprehension rather than to take orders from unregistered CAS workers. Make the CAS workers get a court Order first and get it on the RECORD! Stop taking orders from these incompetent CAS workers who have a long history of messing up kids and their families.
Videos like this are helping to expose the truth of the child protection industry in Canada. You don’t need to go to third world countries like China or South America to see children being terrorized and taken away – we have the police and the CAS doing that right here in Canada. If you think that human rights are being respected in Canada, you had better think again. All this nonsense by the CAS being funded by the taxpayers of the Province of Ontario, of course!
Link to You Tube video
And let’s not forget as well, that it was officers from the Barrie, Ontario police force who bullied and intimidated a 70 year-old senior citizen and would not let her enter the Barrie, Ontario courthouse to use the public washrooms because the elderly woman was wearing a Court Watch T shirt. Read the article at the link below. The police at the Barrie, Ontario courthouse called her a “gang” member for protesting for justice outside of the Barrie, Ontario court.
Link to Barrie Courthouse article in PDF format
Career criminal claims his life in crime began right here in Ontario under the care of the Chatham CAS!
(July 1, 2008) Placing children into the care of the Children’s Aid Society is one way of ensuring that those in the legal and law enforcement industries will be ensured an ongoing supply of criminals to keep their systems running at full tilt. A recent court case in London, Ontario involving former CAS Crown Ward, Mervyn Breaton, supports what a recent study out of British Columbia has shown – that kids placed in foster care are more likely to be involved in a life of crime than they are to go to school. The 87 year-old Breaton appeared before Justice Ross Webster in London, Ontario on charges relating to drugs and breach of probation. Breaton said his history of being involved in crime began after he was placed into the care of Children’s Aid Society in Chatham as a child. Braeton said that since the time he was placed in the care of the CAS that crime and jails is all that he has ever known. “They threw me into Children’s Aid and from then on it was one jail to another,” he said.
Article in Adobe PDF format
For kids in care of child protection agencies, jail a more likely future than graduation!
(June 27, 2008) A study conducted by the provincial government in British Columbia has revealed troubling findings which show that children in care of child protection agencies are more likely to end up in jail than to graduate from school. This article compliments the article published by Canada Court Watch of June 27, 2008 which deals with the issue of kids running wild without supervision in many CAS agencies and that many kids are being corrupted by the influences they face when in care of the CAS. In many cases, the actions of CAS agencies is akin taking kids out of the frying pan and then throwing them into the fire!
Article in Adobe PDF format
Teenage girls turning to prostitution and delinqency while in care of Children’s Aid Society in Ontario
(June 27, 2008) An article published in Canada Court Watch Reports describes the problems of teens running wild while under the care of the CAS. Last week it was revealed during a criminal trial in Brampton that one CAS foster child turned to prostitution at 15 years of age and earned over $360,000 for her pimp. Court Watch has received calls from a number of children who describe wild and crazy things going on inside CAS group and foster homes with out of control kids.
link to article in PDF format
Hamilton MPP introduces Ombudsman oversight bill to make CAS more accountable!
)June 18, 2008) Hamilton NDP MPP Andrea Horwath MPP has re-introduced the CAS Ombudsman Oversight Bill, which, if passed, will grant the Ontario Ombudsman, Andre Marin, the right to finally have the power to investigate the actions of Children’s Aid Societies within the province of Ontario. Officially, that Bill is known as Bill 93, Ombudsman Amendment Act (Children’s Aid Societies), 2008. Most of those in Ontario will recall the Auditor General Report of 2006 in which it was reported that the four Children’s Aid Societies that were investigated had misspent money that should have gone towards protecting our children. The Auditor General found that that all four CAS agencies involved in the investigation were paying for personal vacations and luxury vehicles, etc. with our tax dollars. That was plain wrong. The report also found that the CAS agencies were either unwilling or unable – whichever the case may be – to adhere to child welfare policies, as stated in the Child & Family Services Act, which policies have been made in order to protect the province’s children. Children were dying because of the CAS’ failures in this regard. At the same time, numerous other parents were losing their children unnecessarily to the Crown because of poor record keeping, or sometimes, because of incompetent or vindictive social workers whose management was also either unable or unwilling to prevent these “mistakes”.
The Child & Family Services Review Board was introduced to the general public as what was supposed to be the independent investigative body that would ensure that children were protected from this point on, and that, on the rare occasion when mistakes were made, the CFSRB would be there to “fix” what went wrong. The CFSRB’s role, however, became so watered down during its establishment that the Board really does not now have any investigative powers whatsoever. The only power that the CFSRB actually has – as admitted to by the CFSRB itself – is to compel the complained-about CAS agency to put in writing the reason for their decision on a given matter. There is absolutely no oversight over CAS agencies at all – even with the CFSRB in place – despite Minister of Children & Youth Services Deb Matthews’ false allegations to the contrary. The offending CAS agency can still rob parents of their children – and children of their parents – inappropriately and illegally. The CAS agencies can still destroy lives and lie in affidavits, which they do repeatedly without penalty.
Parents are urged to contact their MPP’s and to request that support Andrea Horwath’s Bill. Parents can also help by obtaining a copy of a petition form from Andrea and collect signatures. We can no longer allow CAS agencies to continue to be unaccountable any longer. All of our children are counting on it.”
Simcoe Children’s Aid Society accepts psychic’s prediction as basis to commence sexual abuse investigation!
(June 17, 2008) If the latest news out of Barrie is any indication of what what CAS agencies have added to their risk assessment tools, CAS agencies should soon be regularly making front page news in the National Enquirer! It seems that the bumbling idiots from the Simcoe Children’s Aid Society (most of whom are unlicensed social workers) commenced an investigation into child abuse based on the reports of a local psychic and card reader. Check today’s top news stories in various newspapers. We can expect that the Simcoe Children’s Aid Society will soon be hiring its own psychics, card readers and witchdoctors. What’s next? Will the Simcoe CAS start a new department to begin investigations of sexual abuse of Aliens from Outer Space? Risk Assessment tools for green children from outer space could very well be the next project coming from the Barrie, Ontario Region if this latest incident is any indication of the thinking that goes on with workers at the CAS. The real tragedy is that the Province of Ontario is taking money away from schools and hospitals in order to fund this CAS nonsense. BEFORE any investigation even commences or a file is even opened up, CAS workers should be verifying the source of the information. In this case with information coming from a psychic as the source, school officials and CAS workers should simply have hung up the phone before taking any further action. The school worker who went to the psychic in the first place should be fired for being mentally unfit to care for children.
Internationally acclaimed Canadian scientist to speak about abuse of children and families by Canada’s family court system!
(June 10, 2008) One of Canada’s highly acclaimed and internationally recognized scientists has contacted Court Watch and has indicated that he is willing to come forth publicly and speak about what he has seen is the systemic abuse of children and families by Canada’s morally corrupt family court system. His testimony will soon be spread throughout the world how the legal profession together with the courts in Canada are helping to destroy their own citizens. Readers should stay tuned for when Court Watch breaks this new story. According to this highly respected scientist, the family court system is creating unnecessary work for lawyers and failing to serve the interest of the Canadian people.
Ontario judge grants recess in court to allows party to purchase recording device and to bring it back into the courtroom!
(June 3, 2008) One Ontario Court judge has demonstrated that he has the fortitude and respect for justice to boldly step where few other judges would dare to tread. In court, the judge acknowledged that a party appearing in court had the right to record his own court hearing. The judge was then so gracious as to grant a recess for the party to leave the courtroom to purchase a recording device at a local electronics shop and to bring back into court. At a previous hearing, the judge admitted that after over 20 years of the bench, he was not familiar with section 136 of the Courts of Justice Act which allows recording and had told the party at the first hearing that recording would not be allowed. At the second hearing, however, the judge did not dig in his heels, but honourably admitted his previous error and to make amends, allowed the party to obtain a recording device at a local store and to bring it back to the court. An article with full details will be published. Hats off to this judge who not only showed that judges are human and that they can make mistakes too, but showed that he was going to put justice and the law above even his own pride! It’s the actions of judges like this who help restore the public’s respect in the administration of Justice. We need more judges like this who understand that they are working to serve the people of Canada in the interests of justice.
It’s too bad that more of our other judges would not follow the example of this judge. Justice Craig Perkins and Justice Lydia Olah are some of these judges who, by their actions, have demonstrated contempt of the law. Justice Lydia Olah had OPP officers from the Collingwood detachment of the OPP physically lock courtroom doors with a lock and key at her court in Collingwood, Ontario and Justice Craig Perkins appears to have made arrangements to have his own court Order violated by certain firms who publish case law. Many argue that the time has come for elections for judges so that the people of Canada can weed out those judges who work against the fundamental principles of justice. Just like a garden needs to be weeded out, Canadians need the ability to weed out those in the judiciary who fail to serve the true interests of justice.
Mother testifies about her family’s horrible ordeal with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer!
(June 3, 2008) A mother has come forth to speak about her horrible experience with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer. This is only yet another in the series of videos intended to expose Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer for failing to live up to it’s mandate to properly protect many children. Hopefully, this will motivate Claire Burns, the Children’s Lawyer, to introduce some much needed changes, such as requiring interviews between children and workers to be videotaped.
Link to Court Watch video index
Child Protection worker caught with drugs in vehicle while transporting foster child
(May 28, 2008) From CBC News – An employee of West Region Child and Family Services is on paid leave and facing criminal charges in connection with drugs found in a vehicle. RCMP said they stopped a car not far from Winnipeg on May 21 and found nearly half a kilogram of marijuana in it. One of two men in the vehicle was an employee of West Region Child and Family Services. A 13-year-old foster child was also in the car. (Maybe this is where some of the workers from the Hamilton CAS get their illegal drugs from. Link to Hamilton CAS article)
Link to CBC news Article
Teen speaks up about how kid’s are being drugged up while in CAS approved foster homes!
(May 25, 2008) A teen speaks up about how kids in foster care were pumped up with drugs until they were zombies and then go downhill after that. She witnessed kids go from good to bad once CAS workers put the kids on prescription drugs. A chilling testimony of just how things are really like in a CAS foster home.
Link to Court Watch video index
Government may compensate foster-home victims!
(May 30, 2008) An article written in the Sun Media regarding how the government of Manitoba is considering a compensation package and apology for the many, many children who were abused while in the care of child protection services in that Province. Seems as if these child protection agencies just cant get it right, not matter how much funding they get.
Article in Adobe PDF format
It would seem that there is a problem in Ontario as well and even more current as the below links from children testify. The links below are very recent situations as well.
Link to CAS abuse video
Link to CAS abuse video
Link to CAS abuse video
Christmas at an Ontario CAS approved foster home!
(May 28 2008) A teen speaks up about her experience at Christmas along with three other foster kids. Locked in a damp and cold basement, this girl along with three other teens was made to stay in the basement while the CAS foster family ate turkey dinner and shared Christmas upstairs. She was also told by CAS workers that she was not allowed to call her mother or her family at Christmas. This video is a just a short clip from an extensive interview in which the girl discloses beatings of kids by CAS providers, psychological abuse and drugs being forced on kids in care. She describes many times, how abuse is reported to CAS workers but workers turn their backs on the kids and do nothing. The more comprehensive video interview will be posted in the near future with high quality DVD copies available from Court Watch. The full length DVD video could be used as a resource by parents to take to their MPP’s and MP’s and also to give as evidence in CAS court cases to show that CAS is not a safe place for children.
Link to Court Watch video index
Teen speaks up about her experience with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer!
(May 25, 2008) A teen speaks up about her experience with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer. Her testimony is typical of the type of feedback that children are reporting about the Office of the Children’s Lawyer.
Link to Court Watch video index
Mother and Daughter claim that they waited for almost a year to get a return call from the Children’s Lawyer and still after more than 1 1/2 years absolutely nothing constructive has resulted!
(May 19, 2008) In response to our call for witnesses, a mother and daughter have come forth to complain about what they say is their “horrible” experience with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer headed by Ms. Claire Burns. In their situation, it took almost a year from when the case was assigned for the children’s lawyer to return their phone calls and even then it was only after the mother sent a complaint letter to head office did the lawyer call them back (in 3 hours after the complaint letter). But even after the lawyer called them back, nothing effective ever got done after that. Both the mother and the daughter say that the Office of the Children’s Lawyer had done absolutely nothing to help them in almost 19 months. The girl even tried to fire her Children’s Lawyer but the Children’s Lawyer’s Office refused the girl’s request. How’s that for service to the children of Ontario!
While Ms. Claire Burns spouts off in court in an effort to denigrate Court Watch and to stop Court Watch from observing her agency in court, she forgets that many of the children who her agency has provided lousy services are voluntarily coming to Court Watch to tell how the agency she heads has failed them. These parents and their children want their stories heard about how the lawyers have miserably failed them. There is an old saying, those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. It is time for Ms. Claire Burns to come out of her glass tower on University Ave, step up to the plate and to do her job as head of the Children’s Lawyer Office by implementing a few simple procedures which would stop these sorts of situations from happening in the first place. Video interviews with this mother and her daughter will be posted soon. Court Watch does not wish to embarrass the Office of the Children’s Lawyer, but sometimes this is the only way to get positive changes implemented. Court Watch only wants the Office of the Children’s Lawyer to work in an accountable, transparent and professional manner in the interest of children and families in Ontario.
In this day and age of inexpensive recording devices, there is no reason whatsoever for children and parents to be contacting Court Watch to report that they have been threatened and abused by their children’s lawyer while in meetings. Court Watch manages to provide videotape service with no money coming from the taxpayers, so why can’t Ms. Burns’s agency do the same with the millions of tax dollars it receives every year from the Ontario government! There should be no reason for children reporting that their Children’s lawyer is lying about what they have said. There should be no reason why children are reporting physical abuse to their lawyer and then have the lawyer do nothing about it! THERE IS NO REASON FOR THIS WHATSOEVER! If Claire Burns, as the Children’s Lawyer of Ontario, does not take steps to fix the problem of selective reporting, then she is part of the problem herself and in the public’s interest, Court Watch will do its part to expose injustices committed against children by her agency. If changes don’t come soon, a public inquiry may be the solution.
The Archbishop Dorian A. Baxter, the National Chairman of Court Watch, stands ready to meet with Ms. Burns to discuss how her agency can begin to make positive changes which will better serve the children of Ontario. One thing we can predict for certain, that unless Claire Burns takes her duty to serve the citizens of Ontario seriously and takes positive steps soon to fix the sorts of problems that Court Watch had uncovered, that it will be only a matter of time until our elected officials will decide to have her replaced with someone who will get the job done with far fewer of these sorts of unnecessary and easily avoidable complaints.
Link to video to be posted here soon
Information wanted from children and parents about their experience with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer!
(May 17, 2008) In a recent court hearing, Ms. Claire Burns, the Children’s Lawyer of Ontario, personally intervened and attempted to discredit Canada Court Watch by claiming that Court Watch should not be allowed to monitor child protection cases in the courts and that Court Watch should not be considered as a media source for getting information out to the public. By her actions, Mr. Burns has only demonstrated that her agency is more worried about protecting the interests of its lawyers than it is interested in promoting accountability and transparency which are some of most basic principles encompassed within the meaning of “the Administration of Justice.” Court Watch has a copy of a video from the Law Society of Upper Canada in which Ms. Burns has stated on the public record that her office has determined that the recording of children by their children’s lawyers can psychologically harm them. Yet, the Supreme Court of Canada has contradicted the position of Ms. Burns and has said that the video recording of children is a reliable source of evidence. (Canada Court Watch supports the position that interviews between children and professionals in any matter which could have a significant impact on a child or family must be recorded using audio or video)
Ms. Burns, representing the Office of the Children’s Lawyer, takes the position that her government funded agency is a reliable source for providing services for children and that organizations such as Canada Court Watch should not be allowed to monitor how the Children’s Lawyer’s Office does its job at the expense of taxpayers. What Ms. Burns failed to mention is that her agency had previously argued this same position in the past and at a court hearing where lawyers with the Office of the Children’s Lawyer were given time by the judge to present their arguments and where Court Watch was given a fair opportunity to present it’s arguments, that the lawyers with the Office of the Children’s Lawyer and the Children’s Aid were defeated in court by a single Canada Court Watch reporter. This is not the first time that the Children’s Lawyer’s office has attempted to pervert the administration of justice and to keep Canada Court Watch from monitoring how its agency represents children in Ontario. It would seem that Claire Burns does not support a fair process when it comes to dealing with those who monitor her agency. There is an old expression in the English language with says, “what is good for the goose is good for the gander” so as a public figure, Ms. Burns must be prepared for what members of the public have to say about how her agency is performing in the public’s interest. Court Watch has received many complaints from children about their distrust of the court appointed Children’s Lawyer. Children have testified that their court appointed children’s lawyer has lied to the court about what they are saying and that they don’t trust their children’s lawyers. This being the case, why is Ms. Claire Burns so opposed to having her worker maintain an accurate record of meetings with children by simply audio recording them? And what about the psychological damage to children as Ms. Burns claims – hogwash say many parents and children!!
A previous report Link to report released by a committee of citizens about the Children’s Lawyer on just one case, provides some evidence as to the poor job this agency has done in the past. This report which was produced by the citizens of Ontario at no cost to the taxpayers, resulted in the Office of the Children’s Lawyer being hauled before the Divisional Court In Toronto and harshly criticized by the court. This is a good example of how the citizens of Ontario can fight back and make a difference! Recent video testimony from a mother gives some more indication of how some children and parents feel about this government funded agency and that problems continue to exist with this agency. Link to video
Canada Court Watch feels that it is time for children and parents of Ontario who have had dealings with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer, to have their say so that the elected officials of the Province of Ontario can know how the Children’s Lawyer is performing under its mandate. Court Watch would like to gather testimony and other evidence from children and parents who have had dealings with the Office of the Children’s Lawyer for the purpose of producing an investigative report on this agency. We are looking for video interviews with children and parents as well as court documents which will show how the Children’s Lawyer has performed in various Ontario court cases. We want the names of individual lawyers who have worked as children’s lawyers and we want feedback as to how well they performed. Testimony from mature children and teens will be most helpful. Whether a good or bad experience, Court Watch would like to hear from you. If you are interested in providing information or testimony in support of this effort, please contact Canada Court Watch at info@canadacourtwatch.com
Women’s Shelter supervisor reports abuse of tax dollars by women’s shelter!
(May 16, 2008) A women’s shelter supervisor contacted Canada Court Watch to disclose that she has witnessed considerable problems within the women’s shelter where she works and that there are many things that she has seen which she does not feel are right but unable to say anything publicly about due to fear of losing her job at the shelter for abused women. During her interview she disclosed that records were being altered and that the shelter for abused women was taking in many women of questionable background for the sole purpose of maintaining higher levels of government funding from the Province of Ontario. She indicated that violence was occurring in the shelter and that homeless people, people on drugs and
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Greater Sudbury Police charged two people who attempted to block their search of a 12-year-old ward of Children’s Aid Society.
Officers went to a home in the east end of the city Wednesday looking for the child, who “was considered a child in need of protection under the auspices of the Child and Family Services Act,” police said in a release.
While the child was found and returned to the care of the CAS, “during the course of their investigation, officers were obstructed by a 42-year old female, as well as a 16-year old female.”
As a result, both were charged with obstructing police, while the teen also faces a charge of causing a disturbance.
The woman will appear in court July 9, while the teen appears in court July 10.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
“Obfuscation and Public Deceit for Dummies”
How to destroy Children and Families, use the Taxpayer to do it and then hide behind it all by avoiding the questions and shutting out the Observers.
by Tom Thompson,
Independent Justice Reporter
4th June 2008
Tax dollars and resources meant to help children are being squandered by Ontario’s Children’s Lawyer in efforts which ultimately harm the interests of children and of Justice in Ontario. Under legislation in Ontario, the Office of the Children’s lawyer (OCL) is the taxpayer-funded agency which is appointed to represent the interests of children in many family court proceedings.
While most taxpayers would expect this government agency, with its lawyers and social workers, to spend tax resources in a manner which would best help children and promote justice in an open and accountable manner, evidence would reasonably indicate that this agency is often failing in these objectives.
The person assigned the responsibility of managing this taxpayer-funded agency is Ms. Claire E. Burns, a lawyer who also serves as the Vice-Chancellor of the Anglican Diocese of Toronto.
Analysis of documents and testimony from the very children and families which the OCL is supposed to be helping, reveal that significant problems continue to plague this agency and that significant changes are required to repair the serious flaws in the way in which this government agency operates under the direction of Ms. Burns.
Of significant concern is that a number of children and parents who have had dealings with the OCL state that their experience has not been a good one.
Many say that they do not trust the OCL or its workers and report that they have been harmed by the agency.
Some children report that OCL workers showed clear signs of bias against one of their parents and that they did not think this fair while some others reported that they wished they had a recording of their meeting with the OCL worker so that the workers could be exposed for lying.
While Ms. Burns has been questioned as to why she does not support the concept of having OCL workers simply employ the use of audio recording devices to maintain accurate records, Ms. Burns has stated on the record that the recording of meetings with children by her staff will cause the children harm.
Yet the Supreme Court of Canada has disagreed with Ms. Burns and has stated that the recording of children’s testimony for court purposes is a most reliable form of record keeping. Police routinely record children’s testimony as well, especially when interviewing them during investigations involving sexual assault or domestic violence.
Yet even when children say they wish to have their meetings with OCL workers recorded they are refused this option.
One 13-year-old from the Barrie, Ontario area told the Canada Court Watch group during a videotaped interview that she caught the OCL lawyer attempting to record her but that the lawyer lied to her about this when she asked.
By far, the most common and alarming complaint voiced by child clients of OCL is that their lawyers fail to make their wishes properly known to the court and that OCL workers use leading questions and coercive questioning techniques during meetings. Children have reported being completely ignored by their lawyers and their wishes and opinions are never heard by the court at all.
One child informed her mother that she had not seen her lawyer in over a year and that during a subsequent telephone call to an administrative assistant at the OCL, the parent was told that the file had been closed some time before. Yet, according to the parents, in spite of the child being told that she no longer had a lawyer, the lawyer continued to attend court appearances afterwards and to “speak to the child’s wishes” in court.
Given that this lawyer had no contact with the child it is difficult to imagine how the lawyer in question was able to determine the child’s wishes without actually speaking to the child. It would be reasonable to assume that the taxpayers of Ontario were paying for this lawyer when she did go to court as it is unlikely that she went to for free. Last month, one parent from Halton, Ontario reported that he was concerned that the OCL lawyer for his daughter had billed the Ontario government for services which his daughter had not received.
The 15-year-old girl involved testified in a videotaped interview that she did not trust her OCL lawyer and that she felt that he had been “useless.”
Currently, there appears to be no reliable method which would allow clients to verify the billable hours charged to the taxpayers for services provided to children being represented by the OCL with some saying that the OCL billing process lacks transparency and could be easily abused.
The Office of the Children’s Lawyer also employs clinical investigators that that are assigned to conduct assessments and provide reports during high conflict custody and access cases. In some cases, OCL workers are refusing to provide any written documentation as to work they have done and in some cases where reports are provided, serious flaws can be found with the manner that evidence is gathered and with its accuracy.
A report from a clinical investigator from the OCL was submitted as evidence in a recent high profile case in Newmarket, Ontario which related to the health and welfare of two morbidly obese children.
When the OCL investigator was cross examined at trial on the content of the report, it was admitted that this OCL worker had failed to interview any of the collateral contacts provided by the father and had refused to review crucial medical evidence provided by the father relating to the weight of the children.
Simply, the OCL worker had failed to exercise due diligence in the gathering and reporting of the facts.
Significant tax dollars are being paid out to so called, “clinical investigators” from the OCL to produce what many parents and even professionals say are highly flawed and unprofessional reports with many of these reports costing thousands of dollars in each case. In another case, OCL workers demanded that a videotape of an 11-year old disclosing that he was being coerced by his children’s lawyer child be destroyed.
Just last week in a Hamilton courtroom packed with media representatives from all over the Province, Ms. Burns singled out the media representative from Canada Court Watch and immediately asked the court to exclude Court Watch from observing the proceedings, involving a young leukemia patient apprehended from his parents by the Children’s Aid Society in Hamilton.
Ms. Burns wasted the court’s valuable time and that of many other people to exclude Canada Court Watch in spite of the fact that this individual held valid press credentials and despite the fact that a court had ruled against the OCL in a previous court on this identical issue. Most believe that the real intentions of Ms. Burns were to silence those who dare to criticize her agency.
Ms. Burn’s efforts to muzzle Canada Court Watch would indicate that she has more interest in keeping her agency unaccountable and that she holds little respect for the fundamental role that the media play in protecting the public’s interest in the administration of justice. The entire court was forced to sit and listen to arguments that had absolutely nothing to do with the best interests of the child and everything to do with Ms. Burns own personal agenda to stifle those who dare expose the failures of her agency.
Already distraught at having their seriously ill child apprehended these poor parents were forced to watch as Ms. Burns turned their child protection hearing into a personal attack against Canada Court Watch.
It was a good example of Ms. Burns wasting tax dollars to lessen transparency and accountability.
Ms. Burns and her agency are supposed to be focusing their energies on providing legal services to vulnerable children and to do this job in a most efficient and transparent manner, not squandering tax dollars for the purpose of muzzling criticism of their agency.
As a government funded agency, the OCL should be placing the interests of children and families first, not the interests of its lawyers and social workers.
Disturbing complaints which continue to arise about the OCL raise serious questions as to the ability and willingness of its director, Ms. Claire Burns, to find solutions to these repetitive problems.
The Auditor General of Ontario, Mr. McCarter who delivered a scathing report after conducting his value for dollars audit on the spending habits of CAS agencies might be well advised to review the financial records of the OCL sooner than later before more children are adversely affected by the actions of the Office of the Children’s Lawyer
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Credibility and Accountability
The Ontario Liberal government has lost it’s credibility over and over again and this is continuing into their second term. McGuinty’s ministries provincial agencies (Children’s Aid Society) and the court system have ignored the public and a report prepared by the Ontario Ombudsman Electoral Reform: Provincial Ombudsman says Ontario Can Do Better. Instead these ministries and agencies boasted about their strong performances when in fact every government service under the Liberal government has deteriorated such as health care and education, auto sector jobs and healthcare (Canada rated the worst out of seven countries for wait times and access to care facilities). There is still no independent oversight for Ontario’s Children’s Aid Societies. Accountability is non-existent and services continue to deteriorate. When governments or their service providers are described by the public they serve as being corrupted or incompetent; their reaction is to either sideline the issue or promote that particular ministry or agency as a world class or international leader. The Liberals allowed property tax increases in Ontario ignoring cries from Ontario homeowners (OMPAC). The ombudsman called this agency ” an arrogant cut-throat agency will little regard for homeowners” at the same time this agency was promoting itself a “global leader”. Similar “delusions” existed with Ontario’s Children’s Aid Societies, Family Responsibility Office, Ontario Lottery Corp., etc. All presented a proud face but in reality they were ignoring corruption and any accountability to they people they serve. The Liberal government spent 2.4 million dollars and battled in court for 8 years with Ontario parents to try and conceal how much it spends defending lawsuits from parents who’s children receive services from the CAS.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Unlocking The Logic.
To fully understand why our “system” is structured in the way it is,we need to understand the structure it is built on.
There is reason and purpose for every illogical rule written.
Since Prohibition the Government has made illegal numerous products until it found a way to capitalized from it themselves. Alcohol and marijuana which are now both Government regulated but which have numerous spin-off liabilities against the user.
We have Courts that are logical law and we have courts that are assimilated to resemble logic. Mainly family Court.
You may wonder why a Government would put in place and embrace laws that put children in the custody of the parent that is less capable of supporting the child? It is yet another way the Government has seen in profiting from humans weakness and sense of accountability.
When a parent is supported financially by the government, it has proven most likely that they will be awarded custody of their children. The benefit to this tactic generates more revenue than the balance of support the government pays each month.
Revenue from “kidnapping” training for Children’s Aid Workers.
It spins off and generates jobs for Court officials,Judges,lawyers and most time correctional facilities.Schools,mental health professionals,Doctors, Prescriptions to help children forget their alienated parent.
Is the time nearing that Fathers will be striped of their ability to father children. Does this government have fathers so tightly by the balls that we will one day see Government funded sperm banks to ensure that the next generation has no family values?
The Key.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Social Policy Sudbury Style!
We here at http://www.corruptioncentral.com are here to stay and take great offence to have our code of ethics and morals likened to those of current Social Policy administraters. Namely overzealous Social Workers,Police, Lawyers, Judges and Politicians. Their interpretation of Social Policy “Sudbury Style” affords all involved a very comfortable standard of living but at who’s expense and at what cost to tax payers and society? All these people would not have jobs without kids being kidnapped, creating false cases against innocent people, and wasting valuable court time at the tax payers expense.
Why is this abuse unacknowledged by community leaders and elected government officials? They sacrifice our youth for good paying jobs. Paid for by the tax payer!
All willingly exploit children and support each other ensuring each others workload which translates into more government funding and jobs in their community contained industry.
What the C.A.S., Politicians, Community Leaders and heads of other government funded agencies and institutions have done and continue to do is unregulated or regulated in a way with NO effective safegaurds for abuse of powers. Therefore they have the power to create future generations that are dependant on these government services by destroying our youth, ie. generations of those dependant on welfare, criminals for jails, and doctors creating drug addicts for drug companies. There is no shortage of kids to kidnapp or citizens that willingly collect welfare and are more than happy to accept the FREE drugs available from our government “service” providers! Some doctors willingly and freely support indiscriminately writing prescriptions at anyones request.
False flimsey cases are created against good hard working parents in the corrupted industry that is masked as government services!
Help stop this culture of corruption in our society!
corruptioncentral.com
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
I quite clearly said to you in court on 13 August , that I was sick of your corrupt courts, and that I knew exactly what you were doing , in that you were playing for time, waiting for the summer school holidays to be over, so that you would not have to deal with this issue, and once again pander to the mother and her wishes.
I now hold you personally responsible for the latest abuse of my daughter, as you have done exactly what I have said, something I have learnt to accept as normal behaviour, over the last 7 years, in these corrupt, devious and evil courts, that you do what the mother wants, at the cost and abuse of innocent children and
there fathers.
I also understand you have played a part in the corruption and abuse of Mark Harris, and his innocent, defenceless daughters. Once being labelled as unlawful and unfair by another judge. Thankfully now, no thanks to you or your corrupt associates, they live with their father who loves them, not a revengeful mother, using the children as a weapon, backed by you.
You could have quite easily made an order, going along with the recommendations of cafcass. You could have quite easily put an end to 7 years of abuse, torture, persecution and corruption. You could have quite easily made an order, to give my daughter the chance of a balanced, secure upbringing. You could of quite easily, halved the rest of this holiday, and then dealt with term time arrangements at a later date.
But no, you stall it, with only one intention to do what the mother wants.
Going against, the recommendation of cafcass, going against the request of my daughter and going against me doing, what my daughter would like, and needs, and what is clearly in my daughter’s best interest.
Lacking any backbone, integrity or conscience, working your corruption behind closed doors, under the secrecy shroud of the secret family courts.
How you sleep at night I will never know.
If somebody, had tortured and persecuted you and your children, would you just sit back, and let it destroy you and your children, or would you try to do something about it.
I will let you decide the answer to the question, as to what you think I will do.
DADS MATTER: Fathers 4 Justice wants to raise awareness about equal
shared parenting after separation or divorce and is calling for an end to the
removal of either parent from children’s lives by family courts. (Photos.com)
Driving across the country in a large purple “Barney Mobile,” a group of parents dressed up as the Hulk, Spiderman and other superheroes are hoping to spur change in Canada’s family court system.
Through its Cross Country Crusade, which will make 30 stops between Vancouver and St. John’s, Fathers 4 Justice Canada aims to promote the concept of equal parenting after divorce.
Legislated equal parenting, says F4J, would do away with the current “adversarial system” in place in family court in which one parent usually gets sole custody while the other — most often the father — has to make do with seeing the child only during designated times.
In equal shared parenting, both parents remain as custodial parents and children are spared being embroiled in the conflict over who’s going to win custody.
F4J and other father’s rights groups say that with the mother being granted sole custody in about 85 per cent of disputed custody cases, the family court system is unfairly stacked against them.
Gender bias, they allege, is rampant in the system and they want change. “I think when these laws were drafted, the will of Parliament was meant to be maximum contact for both parents,” says Kris Titus, national coordinator for F4J.
“Unfortunately the language was too loose and too open for interpretation at the court level. We want to see that sewn up so it is very clear to the courts and the parents what is expected when the family breaks down.”
After her own divorce 10 years ago, Titus’ ex-husband was allowed to have the children only every other weekend. When both parents saw the negative effect this arrangement was having on their two sons, they decided to go back to court to request equal custody.
It took two tries, but the court eventually saw it their way and the difference in the kids’ demeanor was almost immediate, says Titus.
Fathers 4 Justice “superheroes” travel across Canada in their
Barney Mobile.
F4J is calling for an end to the removal of either parent from children’s lives by family courts and advocates the dismantling of Canada’s family law system to be replaced by a “fair, balanced and transparent rules-based environment.”
Department of Justice (DOJ) spokesperson Carole Saindon says that because family circumstances can vary greatly, the Divorce Act does not dictate or favour any particular type of parenting arrangement.
“All decisions must be based solely on the best interests of the children, given the particular circumstances of each case,” she says. “Courts currently have the discretion to order that custody be shared equally if they feel that it would be in a child’s best interests based on the facts presented to them and the input from both parents.”
However, University of British Columbia sociology professor Edward Kruk, Canada’s foremost expert on custody, says the removal of one parent from the life of the child is widespread. He calls the family court system “a national shame.” “I don’t actually see this issue as one that only affects fathers because there are increasing numbers of mothers who are losing their children and children who are losing their mothers,” says Kruk. “I like to see it more from the child’s perspective because it is a form of child abuse to have a fit and loving parent forcefully removed by a court in the absence of any child protection concerns or issues.”
Numerous studies show that equal parenting is best for children and is actually desired by children themselves. Growing up fatherless can result in a host of problems, including depression, teenage pregnancy, delinquency, bullying, drug abuse and suicide. Non-custodial fathers, too, are “a very at-risk group,” says Kruk, with homicides and suicides disproportionate to the rest of the population.
And while a 2007 survey by SES research found that 80 per cent of Canadians support equal parenting, Kruk says Canada currently has one of the highest removal rates in the world. The divorce industry is booming in many western countries including Canada, where a contested divorce costs an average of $25,000, according to F4J. This is why, says Kruk, “there’s a very strong vested interest in maintaining the status quo on the part of the legal professionals.” “It almost guarantees that the conflict will be ongoing and protracted if one parent gets sole custody, then the other one is always fighting for more access, so it drags on. Parents can lose their life savings over a custody battle and it’s set up that way to benefit the legal profession.” he says.
Saindon says that while many parents prefer to retain the services of a lawyer, that’s not a requirement. DOJ provides funding to develop and implement family justice services that assist families in resolving their issues “in the least adversarial manner possible,” she adds.
Perceived unfairness in the family court system is also an issue in the United States, where dozens of father’s rights groups are pushing for equal parenting and custody laws like those already in place in Maine and Iowa. In Britain, the U.K. chapter of F4J has staged several high-profile stunts to raise awareness about custody rights.
Australia has gone further than other countries in that it now has a law stipulating that when parents divorce and can’t agree on custody arrangements, joint custody will automatically be implemented.
“In most jurisdictions that put forth some sort of shared parenting norm, the overall divorce rates have dropped and the number of parents entering the court system has dropped,” says Titus. “You really remove the incentive to even go to court in the first place.”
Equal parenting also reduces false allegations of assault or sexual abuse, which is a common occurrence and monopolizes the court system, says Titus.
Steven Howitt, a house builder in Calgary, says his wife falsely accused him of assaulting her after he refused to sign authorization allowing her to take their two-year-old daughter out of the country. Although the charges were eventually dropped, he lost everything.
“After 10 days in the women’s shelter…she decides to go to court with a story that gives her the house, gives her custody of the children, she already had my car, she cleaned out my bank account so she had my money, yet I still had to pay for the mortgage, food and everything else,” says Howitt.
Howitt believes the “ex parte” system is unfair. In ex parte proceedings, designed to protect women in emergency situations, one party can appear in court without the other party’s knowledge and without having to provide any evidence.
“That’s a really good weapon for women to wield because 10 minutes in court she gets everything and the man is basically kicked out.”
Howitt’s wife took him to court seven times using legal aid although she is not a Canadian citizen. She now lives in Germany and is attempting to use the courts there to have Howitt pay her $5,000 per month in living expenses and child support.
Howitt is fighting on this end to have his daughter, who he says was illegally taken out of the country, returned to Canada and have the courts here decide who should have custody.
Equal parenting is also being championed by MP Maurice Vellacott, who introduced a private member’s motion in April seeking “more equity” in the way Canadian courts decide on custodial and access questions.
With an estimated 40 per cent of Canadian courts’ legal time taken up with custody and access disputes, maybe it’s not surprising that Vellacott’s motion, which comes up for debate in the fall, has received some backing.
The Legislature of the Northwest Territories unanimously passed a supportive motion for Vellacott’s initiative, and it also has the support of some Conservative and Liberal MPs.
“I think we have to fundamentally challenge that whole notion that the court has that authority to remove custody from a fit and loving parent in the absence of any kind of proven abuse,” says Kruk.
A message to Canadian Men and Women Brothers and Sisters in the struggle against the tyranny of “Family Law” and for Justice and Equality
Although it sometimes seems to be an impossible struggle, Fathers and Men and their supporters really can make a difference. But they have to at least try to make that difference. One of the biggest ‘negatives’ in the fight for equality rights in parenting and in law is apathy and indifference. Don’t let apathy infect you. Don’t pass it to others if it does. Its bad enough that the public at large and the media don’t really have a clue as to what you are fighting about and why. But yet look at what our brothers in F4J have achieved in less than 2 weeks of hard-core direct action activity. Imagine what more they could do with more support from you and others? It makes absolute sense what they are doing and remember they are doing it and paying a heavy personal price for YOU and your children.
As they have shown if you really think that the system needs to change and improve then you really have to actually do something about it. You have to get involved and you have to ‘join the battle’. You can’t afford to be a spectator and expect someone else to fight the battle for you all the time. You have to join a group and support them in every way. You don’t have to wear a super hero suit but you can turn out to cheer and applaud them-at least. And there are many groups around. Support and join one of them. or more.
Write to your local media. Call in to a radio show. Make your position know and make it clear. Write to the Justice Ministers. Write to your MP and MPP. Write to anyone involved. And keep writing until someone pays attention. Talk to everyone you know about what is happening. Spread the word around at work and among your relatives about the absurdity and distinct inequality of ‘family law’. Make it clear that for Fathers and Men mostly the law is biased, discriminatory and destructive and that you and others in many groups are fighting to correct it. Tell them we are rational and well adjusted and that we are not ‘crazy kooks’ but are simply reacting to what is real and evident. More than anything tell them we are only agitating for that which is guaranteed to us under the Charter,
Come out to meetings and rallies. Make an effort. Get yourself into the movement for change and stay with it until things do change. Don’t give up until you change ‘family law’ and restore sanity to the legal system forever. If not for you then at least for your children-and their children. What is happening to Fathers and their children, not only in Canada but around the “Western” world is nothing short of a disgraceful unchecked and destructive social evil of the highest magnitude. it has to be countered and it has to be fought.
Remember that not so long ago in our own history in 1837 in the Upper Canada rebellion (look it up) brave men took to the streets to oppose another social evil in another time. They were violently put down-in fact shot down and beaten and even killed-by troops in the streets but the message was clear and social change followed. We don’t “do” the violence and forceful thing anymore even though in those old days our forefathers would have poured into the streets in response to what we are forced to endure today. Ask yourself what they would have said to what in any century amounts to the legal kidnapping and ransom of our children and the destruction of the family. The people of that time without email, cell phones and even telephones ‘voted’ with their physical presence and sacrifice. They made the difference. So must you. And it does not require violence. It simply requires engagement, commitment and tangible action.. As they say in North America “Ya gotta get out there man”
Change will come in time and every time someone gets out there and demonstrates or even writes a letter they are adding to the building of the ‘front’ against this disgusting system ironically called “family law” . It can be done. But it starts with you. Make a difference. Get involved. Listen to your leaders. Support them. Go to the courthouse with your brothers. . Attend a rally. Join a group. Donate money, resources and your time. Make sure you and your voice and those of the people you support are heard. its all about self-help and support. And solidarity. You have right on your side
“A Goodbye to my Son”
By …..
Wednesday 3rd September 2008
After four years of battle to gain access to my son I have to let go and say goodbye…
Please always now that I love you and that this is no decision on my part But it is a decision that your mother has made (in keeping you from me using the CAS) and I hope that she can live with the consequences of the decisions that she has Made. I know deep in my heart that she has influenced you because I have not recieved any letters or phone calls from you. It must be hard when your mother and the CAS tell you that you will get in trouble if you called me. It doesnt make sense does it?
I need you to understand that I left your mother due to her constant threat Of violence that I could no longer endure. You witnessed this first hand in 2007.
I also know that your mother is keeping me from you as a last resort to supplement her social assistance and to have access to Ritalin.
Yes, You have become strangers to me too, but I have tried so hard to see you.. I have kept a detailed file of all the events so when you are older You will understand and you can make up your own mind as to what the events Where since 2004.
I have decided and told your mother that I will no longer make any attempts to speak with her and your mother should in return not contact me or manipulate you. Please know that you will be in my mind and hart every second of the day and That I love you.
Until we meet again
Love Dad
To M … , my ex:
You know that it is through your doing that I have not had access to my son and that they see me as a stranger. You know that I have in the past 4 years tried to contact you to make arrangements to see my son, but you would lie to cas, have an excuse, put the phone down on me, call the cops, or not take my calls at all. I have a file with all the proof that I can show the our son one day when he decides to come looking for me.
I am tired of being accused and treated like a criminal when I am doing what is right and I am not the one that is in the wrong.
Just remember that what you are doing to our son is not right,but you are going to have to live with the consequences of the decisions that you have made. One day he will know the truth and if then they resent you, I will know that I did try and do what is best for them.
Proof CPS and CAS nees to legally kidnap the kids to make their budget
Parents of Ontario, HIDE YOUR CHILDREN!
Hastings CAS will be on the lookout to legally snatch your children to get their “Funding”. Executive Director Len Kennedy says “If more children come into care over the course of the year, the CAS would be eligible for more funding”
Lack of Provincial support blamed.
Hastings CAS projects $2.1 Million deficit (wonder what CAS Sudbury projects). The Hastings Children’s Aid Society is projecting a $2.1 million deficit by the end of this fiscal year. A fact it attributes to a continued lack of provincial support.
While the shortfall won’t stop the agency from delivering essential services, (That part made me laugh) executive Director Len Kennedy said it will put MORE pressure on STAFF who oversee hundreds of kids in care.
“On a couple of occasions this year we’ve not replaced a person or delayed the replacement to save a few months of salary,” he said.
“We’ll continue to exercise all diligent measure to try and reduce the deficit, but there isn’t a whole lot we can go after because we are delivering mandatory services”
At a board meeting Thursday, finance director Mark Stevens presented a report showing that the agency’s projected expenditures for the 2008-09 fiscal year are $32.5 million (Sudbury’s is 45 million). Yet based on the number of children it cares for, the agency is only eligible for $31.1 Million in provincial funding-resulting in a $1.4 million deficit for the year.
However, the CAS is still carrying deficits from the previous 2 years -nearly $266,000 from 2006-07 and nearly$468,000 from 2007-08. It adds up to $2.1 million, a number that is significant, but not surprising Kennedy said, given the provinces flawed funding formula.
Kennedy said the Province provides CAS with $87 a day for each child in its care. But additional money is needed to pay for such things as therapy and counselling for children who often come into care following reports of abuse.
(See how Mr. Kennedy only stated “reports of abuse”, He doesn’t mention the 100’s of children that that kidnap legally based on false allegations and the lies twisted by the CAS workers in court documentation)
During the meeting Kennedy noted to the board members that 38 other Ontario Children’s Aid Societies sent first-quarter financial reports to the province. Together those agency’s were expecting an accumulated deficit of about $38 million.
“Our scenario is in keeping with what other agencies are reporting at this time”, hesaid
Last March, the province provided an extra $800,000 to the Hastings CAS to reduce a previously anticipated $1.3 million deficit, just before the fiscal year ended.
Kennedy does notknow whether a similar rollout will be offered this spring, but he said the Agency is talking with the province about raising these funds.
“We’re hoping that there will be some relief again”, he said. “Our position is these are the costs of delivering the mandatory service of child welfare in Hastings County. Those costs continue to be above the level of funding we receive, but we dont have any choice about the service that must be delivered”
He stressed however, that the $2.1 million figure is only a projection.
“IF MORE KIDS COME INTO CARE OVER THE COURSE OF THE YEAR, THE CAS WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR MORE FUNDING” Kennedy said,”but the money wont be enough to erase a deficit”
HIDE YOUR CHILDREN PARENTS OF ONTARIO!
SUDBURY CAS IS LOOKING TO STEAL YOUR KIDS AND GET RICHER!
< <"I am a parent with a job to do -- raising my child properly. And it's his right to have his father in his life, not my right to make his father's life hell because I'm unhappy.">>
“This is from a Mother But certainly not yours”
” To my Children, I can’t imagine how much better your lives would have been had your mother not dragged us through the Court of hell for 6-years??
We will never know, but please, as you each strive to find your places in this world and when you are facing the choice of using a child as a weapon, remember that your weapon will always show the signs of battle. A battle that could have been avoided. With Love from your Dad “.
Open Up The Courts – Social Workers To Be Held Accountable. Justice in the family courts will be better served, and professionals held properly to account, if the courts are open to scrutiny from the press.
The Times
October 20, 2008
Sir Mark Potter, President of the Family Division, makes an important call in today’s Times for greater openness in the family courts. The interview ranges more widely than this topic alone and he believes that many criticisms of the family justice system, including some made by this newspaper, have been unfair and misleading. But Sir Mark is quite clear: the balance has now come down in favour of greater openness. It seems likely that the Justice Secretary, Jack Straw, is set to act to allow the public to see what is being done in their name. It will be a salutary change.
Since launching our campaign to open up the family courts and make social workers properly accountable for their actions, The Times has received many phone calls and letters from parents who feel that they and their children have been the victims of injustice. Many of those parents fear that the professionals are amplifying problems which should be solved by supporting, rather than by accusing, families. Some have been denied access to their own case papers by local authorities which seem to be interpreting the Data Protection Act in surprising ways. Many are afraid to speak out for fear of being in contempt of court. The lack of openness distorts the natural course of justice. As a result, the sheer number of parents who feel the system is stacked against them is alarming.
The 1989 Children’s Act enshrined the principle of minimum state intervention in family life. But recent reports by the watchdog Ofsted into Cafcass, the Children and Family Court Advisory Service, suggest that some local authorities are wilfully disregarding this principle. The Times campaign stems from the belief that some social workers are too quick to jump to conclusions about parents, and that grievous miscarriages of justice are occurring because professionals can operate without scrutiny in closed courts. Gagging orders and reporting restrictions mean that cases do not come to light unless judges choose to make their judgments public.
It should be quite possible, as Sir Mark Potter argues, to hold professionals to account while also preserving the anonymity of children. There is no reason to increase the suffering of innocent children by dragging their names into the public domain. Rape cases are a useful analogy. The police give evidence in open court in rape cases. The media can report that evidence in full. But we do not name the victim. That process works perfectly well and in the interests of open justice.
Sir Mark argues that family courts should be open to the press, but not the general public. This also makes sense. Most family cases are deeply personal and involve intimate details which relatives are understandably keen to protect. The press is subject to codes, which means that it can be trusted to protect certain details which nosey neighbours could use to spread misery. Experience in Canada, where the family courts are open, suggests that many cases are of no interest whatever to the press in practice. Open courts would change the experience of families in only a minority of cases, usually where the family wanted the press to see what was going on.
Child protection is fraught with difficulty. Judges and social workers operate in a minefield of emotion and complexity. Many do an excellent job. It is clear that some children are at risk from family members and they need protection. But the removal of children from their parents has consequences for all of society. The statistics on children taken into care – their life chances – make grim reading.
The public which funds the child protection system has a right to expect it to be accountable, and transparent. Sir Mark’s words are an important step in this direction.
The government is running a 500 million dollar deficit. I have a solution for the Ontario government that could save them some if not all that amount.
Withhold some of the 1.5 billion they pay to the CAS agencies and they won’t be in the hole anymore. We all know that the majority of that money they give the CAS agencies is for the workers and head guys wages and their lawyers wages. Without money to pay lawyers then there would be less children being taken into care, less workers employed, less lawyers needed, less overloaded family courts and maybe more actual working to keep the families together and the children in their real homes and less drain on the tax payers.
From Edmonton Sun
The controversy engulfing Alberta’s child welfare system has unearthed valuable ammunition for a lawyer spearheading a class-action suit on behalf of foster kids.
Robert Lee told Sun Media that the provincial child advocate’s internal quarterly reports, which detail a litany of complaints against the foster-care system, are “evidence” in his lawsuit involving 400 former foster kids.
“I didn’t know they existed,” Lee told Sun Media.
“They’re going to be very helpful for me, but whether they create enough pressure for the government to fix the system remains to be seen.”
The reports were released to the public this week by NDP MLA Rachel Notley after she acquired several years’ worth of them through an access to information request.
They reveal complaints of illegal restraint techniques used on kids in care, kids sexually assaulting other kids, and children being placed in inappropriate or even dangerous homes because nothing better was available.
Yesterday, opposition politicians called on Children’s Services Minister Janis Tarchuk to resign, charging she had no control over her department.
But Premier Ed Stelmach stood by his minister, saying that there are few people in Alberta who have as much compassion for children as Tarchuk does.
Lee represents 400 former foster kids who claim they were abused in a system that leaves child welfare workers overworked and ill-prepared to ensure the well-being of kids in the state’s care.
He commissioned a study of the system that determined it “fails to meet the most basic safety, permanency and well-being needs of children in foster care.”
Last month, Lee got his class-action suit certified, but government lawyers have appealed the certification.
At the time, Lee said the government appears to prefer fighting hundreds of lawsuits individually.
One of his clients said this week’s release of the reports show little has changed since he was a ward of the Crown in the early 1980s.
The man, now 33, said he lived in 16 or 17 foster homes and group homes throughout his childhood, and suffered physical and emotional abuse at the hands of his caregivers.
In 2000, the man said, he was diagnosed with childhood post-traumatic stress disorder.
He says he’s unable to hold a job, suffers from debilitating nightmares and can only sleep for about three hours a night.
“This is obviously a generational thing,” the man said.
“If they don’t step up to the plate and change things, a whole new generation is going to go through what I went through.”
Former CAS head unaware of pregnancies at group home
By TREVOR PRITCHARD, STANDARD-FREEHOLDER
The former head of the local Children’s Aid Society told the Cornwall Public Inquiry he couldn’t recall learning that two teenage girls assigned to a Martintown group home in the 1970s had been impregnated by the sons of the foster parents.
Thomas O’Brien testified that had he known that first Larry Lapensee, and then his brother Brian, had children with the two girls, the home would have been closed long before allegations of sexual abuse against Brian Lapensee came to light in December 1982.
“It might have been the end of the home after we knew about Larry, never mind the two boys,” said O’Brien, who was the executive director of the CAS from 1966 until 1990.
Yesterday was O’Brien’s second and final day at the inquiry, which is probing historical sexual abuse allegations in the Cornwall area.
In 1982, girls staying at the home told the CAS they were being abused by Brian Lapensee, who would allegedly grope them and shove his hands down their shirts.
The Lapensee home stayed open until 1983, when one of the family’s former foster children, Roberta Archambault, told the agency Brian Lapensee had made sexual advances toward her while she stayed there over the Easter holidays.
Shortly after that holiday visit, Archambault attempted suicide. When she testified at the inquiry in 2006, she alleged that Brian Lapensee had previously molested her and forced her to perform oral sex.
Dallas Lee, a lawyer for The Victims Group and for Archambault, took O’Brien to last week’s testimony from the home’s supervisor, Ian MacLean.
MacLean, Lee said, had “no idea until the Cornwall Public Inquiry came about” that there had been two pregnancies at the home.
The caseworker for the first impregnated girl made a note in her file, but that information never made it into the file for the Lapensee home – something Lee described Thursday as “a major error.”
He further suggested a 1983 letter sent by O’Brien to the Crown attorney’s office, outlining the facts of Archambault’s allegation, should have included the entire history of Brian Lapensee’s involvement with CAS wards.
Would you agree with me that the CAS failed the girls it was putting into that home?” asked Lee.
“Knowing what I know now, I think we should have been much more thorough in our investigations and, if necessary, taken action to close the home,” said O’Brien.
Brian Lapensee was never charged in connection with the sexual abuse allegations. The inquiry resumes this morning with the testimony of another former executive director, Richard Abell.
COMMENT
CAS failed to do anything correct it appears and nothing but excuses, it seems that they only heard the sounds of there own brain which seems to be that of. No that would be an insult to someone we would refer to as brainless, ya they would qualify it that order,see know evil, hear know evil, speak know evil. Don,t want to hear about it not on my shift.
This kind of thing is still happening all over Ontario today and in fact all of Canada and still it is swept under the rug and kept hidden from the public. All the government parties both provincial and federal are aware this is still happening to the children of this country but they chose to do nothing, hoping it will go away. Ontario cas’s especially need to be put under investigation for wrong doings like what is beginning to happen in Alberta and held accountable for their lack of action and compassion for the children in this country.
You would think that the motto of the CAS is “WE DON’T KNOW NOTHIN!” about any stinkin abuses! Yah, yah, and “the cow jumped over the moon”! And I also see this rag has doubled up on the stories again today, eh? What is it, “tech glitch” or what? Good job y’all, good job! And I say that with tongue firmly planted in cheek!!!!
FURTHER TO THAT, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT BETWEEN THE CAS AND THE CCAS, THE TWO OF THOSE SOCIETIES WOULD MANAGE TO PHUCK UP A WET DREAM.
WHAT WOULD CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY DO WITH BABY JESUS?
HE WAS BORN IN A BARN WITH DIRTY FARM ANIMALS. CAS WITHOUT A WARRANT OR PROBABLE CAUSE BROKE DOWN THEIR DOOR EVEN THOUGH CAMPING IS NOT ABUSE OR NEGLECT. THE TWO OF THEM WERE ONLY SUPPOSE TO STAY THERE, THE BIRTH CAME ALL OF A SUDDEN. THEY WERE ONLY THERE TO REGISTER AS THE LAW REQUIRED, THEY LIVED OUTSIDE THEIR JURISDICTION. RISK OF HARM IS NOT PROBABLE CAUSE AS THE HIGH COURT HAS RULED.
THE BIOLOGICAL FATHER WAS IN QUESTION. CAS WOULD TRY TO FORCE DNA TESTING ON THE FATHER IN ORDER TO GET JOSEPH OUT OF THE WAY SO THEY COULD THREATEN AND ATTACK THE MOTHER.
THE FATHER’S MENTAL HEALTH WAS IN QUESTION BECAUSE HE STATES HE SPOKE WITH ANGELS. HE HAD TO TELL OTHERS THAT MARY WAS PREGNANT BUT NOT BY ANY HUMAN. CAS WOULD TRY TO FORCE THE FATHER FOR MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION AND DRUG SCREEN.
MOTHER’S MENTAL HEALTH WAS IN QUESTION ALSO BECAUSE AN ANGEL TOLD HER THAT HER SON WAS THE SON OF GOD. MOTHER ALSO NEEDED A MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION AND MAY EVEN BE ADMITTED FOR OBSERVATION WITH DRUG SCREEN.
SHE HAD TO TELL OTHERS THAT JOSEPH WAS NOT THE FATHER. IN FACT, NO HUMAN WAS THE FATHER, SHE BECAME PREGNANT BY GOD.
MARY WAS PROBABLY GETTING WELFARE BECAUSE SHE KEPT ON PUTTING ON THE FORM, “FATHER UNKNOWN”. CAS WOULD INTERPRET THIS AS THE MOTHER SLEPT AROUND.
HE WAS BORN TO A YOUNG UNWED COUPLE AND ON THE RUN.
THEY DIDN’T HAVE MUCH MONEY BECAUSE FATHER WAS A CARPENTER.
THE GOVERNMENT WANTED TO KILL THEIR FIRST BORN AND HAD TO FLEE DURING THE NIGHT. WHY DOES THIS SOUND SO FAMILIAR?
THERE IS NO RECORD OF JESUS FROM A YOUNG BOY UNTIL HE TURNED 30 YEARS OLD.
CAS would probably destroy the family and place the child in an abusive fostercare system even though the baby was not in imminent physical danger.
I’m reading this article and I am in shock!!! Why is it? Because, I too was a victim of rape by Larry Lapensée who is Brian’s brother. I was not a resident of the Lapensée foster home, I was a friend. There was only one incident and I ended up pregnant, at 16. My parents were, strict, prominent figures in a small community at the time. I hid my condition for 7 months and when they found out I was sent out to an Ottawa Home for unwed mothers. When my daughter was born, I was coerced in giving her up by my parents and the local CAS. This event was life altering, as I’m sure it was for the other victims. One has to wonder if maybe the CAS decided to turn a blind eye to this situation because we were supplying them with healthy babies. 35 years later and this situation still haunts me. I realize now that I should have spoken out about the rape, but when you’re 16 and scared to death and made to feel like you are a bad, worthless person by the people who should be protecting you it becomes difficult to trust in the system. It was easier to remain quiet and pretend it was all going to go away; besides who would have believed me. I also remember contemplating suicide back then. I sincerely hope that justice prevails and that these two men suffer the consequence of their actions. Larry Lapensée should be reported to the (OASW) Ontario Association of Social Workers, as he is a social worker and:
‘’SOCIAL WORKERS BELIEVE IN THE VALUE AND WORTH OF ALL PEOPLE. THEY BELIEVE THAT ALL MEMBERS OF SOCIETY REGARDLESS OF AGE, RACE, PLACE OF ORIGIN, LANGUAGE, RELIGION, GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION OR ABILITIES DESERVE THE SAME BASIC RIGHTS, PROTECTIONS, OPPORTUNITIES, OBLIGATIONS AND SOCIAL BENEFITS.’’
The following letter was sent twice (2007 and 2008) to Sudbury C.A.S. President Ashley Thompson. There has been NO reply or explanation to date. Area Director Collette Prevost, who claims not to receive a salary or any compensation from C.A.S. (therefore not an employee) also had no reply. Its clear the current “regeme”of C.A.S. “bandits” are determined to prevent positive change . By denying memberships, and operating without accountability, they are able to continue abuseing our children, parents, and tax dollars.
JULY 16, 2007, 2008
Attention: Ashely Thompson, President Children’s Aid Society Sudbury, Ontario
and
Jean J. Paquette, Children’s Aid Society of Sudbury and Manitoulin
In your letter dated June 13,2007, while acting as the President of the Board of Directors of the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin you stated that you and the Board of Directors of the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin denied my application for membership with the Society based on the Board members’ perception that I do not accept the authority or role of the Children’s Aid Society as conferred by statute, nor that of the Society’s Social Workers.
It is my understanding from your letter that the Society does not grant memberships to anyone who disagrees with how the Society operates in any way.
Could you please clarify this for me. Does the Society deny memberships to people who do not agree with how the Society operates and who wish to apply for a membership so that they can affect change that benefits our children?
Respectfully,
XXXXXXXXX
A 26-year-old mother has been convicted of steadily giving her toddler cocaine over 14 months, finally administering a near-lethal dose that left him brain-damaged.
“It’s difficult to see what would motivate her to give him cocaine, possibly to stop his crying, or to get him to sleep, or to control him. Was it to punish him or to get back at the father?” Justice Tamarin Dunnet said yesterday. The Scarborough woman, who cannot be named to protect the identity of her son, also intentionally fractured a number of her son’s ribs over time and failed to take him to hospital for a broken forearm, the judge said.
Cocaine levels discovered in the 2-year-old in testing at Hospital for Sick Children were so high that if he were an adult, he would be in the top 5 per cent of users, an expert testified. Now aged 6 and living with his father and grandmother in Scarborough, the boy is happy but has permanent brain impairment, family members said outside court.Yesterday Dunnet convicted the mother of assault causing bodily harm, aggravated assault, failing to provide the necessities of life and administering a noxious substance. In September 2004, the woman split up with the boy’s father – then a drug dealer – and became the sole caregiver.
In early 2005, she limited the father’s access, and he became concerned when he noticed the boy had an arm injury and black marks under his eyes, court heard.
In the early hours of Aug. 1, 2005, the mother took the boy to Scarborough General Hospital, claiming that he had an unexplained seizure. But she had actually given him a cocaine overdose that night and delayed getting help until “she realized he was dying in front of her eyes,” the judge said. She phoned the father from the hospital and said she feared the boy might die from ingesting cocaine she claimed he likely had picked up somewhere in her Midland Ave. apartment building.
Yet she never told doctors about the cocaine – knowledge that would have helped them treat her boy, who was transferred in a coma to the Hospital for Sick Children. Doctors had to cut open his skull to relieve the swelling.
When a doctor told the mother at 10 that morning that her son had cocaine in her system, she expressed surprise, Dunnet said. A children’s aid worker who accompanied the mother to the hospital heard her say she hoped her son would be okay “because he is so cute. He’s bad but he’s cute.” In a police interview she covered her face as if crying, but shed no tears; next minute she was laughing, the judge said. “She expressed no concern about the child.”
After the judgment, the mother brushed past reporters without comment. She remains on bail, at least until her sentencing hearing on May 8.
Her lawyer, Terry Kirichenko, said she is disappointed.
The father, 26, it said it hurts to think what his son went through. “I wasn’t able to protect him.” He said he believes that his former girlfriend is a psychopath, and that the only emotion she can express is anger.
***probably a crackhead too AND associate to Sudbury CAS and Dr. Sheila Milne***
If Canadians could cram en masse into the bitter courtrooms where child-custody disputes play out, there might be fewer nasty divorces. Since they can’t, they should be allowed to read about them, which is why an Ontario judge was right to reject a request from the provincial Office of the Children’s Lawyer for a gag order on the lawyers and family members in a notorious case of “parental alienation syndrome.” A cautionary tale that no one can hear is not much good to anyone.
Would a gag order have benefited the children involved? Only if one believes that family law always protects children, that all the players have only the children’s interests at heart and would arrange for the best possible resolution, without any public scrutiny. Such paternalism should have died out a long time ago. The OCL’s request shows why World Press Freedom Day tomorrow remains important: Even in Canada in 2009, the openness of the courts is not guaranteed. Last month, a Quebec judge suggested that journalists could publish only information that people were authorized to give them.
Parental alienation syndrome is a label given to the brainwashing of children by their divorced spouses. No doubt such brainwashing happens, and is extremely harmful; but increasingly the courts have been ordering the Draconian solution of forced “deprogramming” at a clinic in the United States. This use of coercion, to the point of virtually kidnapping children, needs more public debate, not less.
Everything about the case before Ontario Court Judge Steven Clark this week cries out for debate. Why does the legal system tolerate a 10-year slugfest between parents? What can be done to protect children when parents use the courts as a boxing ring? What evidence made a previous judge in the case think that forcing a 12- and 14-year-old to submit to deprogramming would help, rather than traumatize them?
What the courts couldn’t fix, the siblings’ 19-year-old brother appeared, heroically, to have managed. He brokered a deal among the warring parents in which the children would be reunited with the mother they had been alienated from, without the younger boys being forced to take deprogramming. A local therapist would be retained. “We emancipated ourselves from these professionals that have been breathing down our necks the whole time,” the 19-year-old said outside court. Those words are well worth hearing.
And who could object to the deal? The Office of the Children’s Lawyer, which insisted on the deprogramming while asking for the gag order.
Judge Clark, to his credit, accepted the arrangement worked out by the young man, while rejecting the publication ban. “The principle of openness is deeply entrenched in our system.”
While people in democracies may associate World Press Freedom Day with the need to expand free speech in places such as China and Zimbabwe, there is no shortage of cases in Canada where limits are requested – or imposed – on free speech. Every time a judge gives in to a requested publication ban, more requests quickly follow.
All Canadians have an interest in making sure that the children of high-conflict divorce are protected, and that those charged with protecting them, including the courts and the Office of the Children’s Lawyer, do good, and not harm. That is why the courts are open. The freedom of the press belongs not only to the media, but to all Canadians.
Perhaps we have an explanation for the war on Fathers. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56494 Liberals clinically mad, concludes top psychiatrist Eminent doctor makes case leftist ideology is a mental disorder Posted: November 12, 2008 WASHINGTON – Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifyingthemselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making thecase that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder. “Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberalsrelentlessly undermine the most important principles on which ourfreedoms were founded,” says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book,”The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness.” “Likespoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilitiesof adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs fromcradle to grave.” While political activists on the other side of the spectrum have madesimilar observations, Rossiter boasts professional credentials and alife virtually free of activism and links to “the vast right-wingconspiracy.” For more than 35 years he has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined morethan 2,700 civil and criminal cases as a board-certified forensicpsychiatrist. He received his medical and psychiatric training at theUniversity of Chicago. Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by both BarackObama and his Democratic primary opponent Hillary Clinton can only beunderstood as a psychological disorder. “A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss thevital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity -as liberals do,” he says. “A political leader who understands humannature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personalappeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and socialequality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator whounderstands human nature will not create an environment of rules whichover-regulates and over-taxes the nation’s citizens, corrupts theircharacter and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do.” Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings ofinferiority in the population by: a.. creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization; b.. satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence andcompensation; c.. augmenting primitive feelings of envy; d.. rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him tothe will of the government. “The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearlyidentified by understanding how children develop from infancy toadulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefsof the liberal mind,” he says. “When the modern liberal mind whinesabout imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeksabove all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their ownlives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious.”
Vellacott recognizes Parental Alienation Awareness Day
April 25, 2009
OTTAWA – “Parental Alienation is a serious problem in Canada because too many children do not benefit from the active involvement of both parents in their lives,” said Conservative MP Maurice Vellacott (Saskatoon-Wanuskewin), speaking in recognition of Parental Alienation Awareness Day.
April 25th is Parental Alienation Awareness Day and much more awareness needs to take place around the impact of parental alienation today.
Canada’s high levels of divorce and non-traditional family arrangements often result in situations where children are no longer able to benefit from the consistent nurture and guidance and love of one of their parents. In most cases, though not all, it is the father who is missing from the home. Canada’s family law system often makes matters worse, which is why I have been working on a Private Member’s Bill that would require Equal Shared Parenting to be treated as the presumptive approach for resolving custodial arrangements among divorcing parents.
A new study has been released by Prof. Edward Kruk of the University of British Columbia using Canadian data. His research confirms conclusions that have already been well-established from much research around the world. Kruks’ report notes that 90 percent of runaways grew up in father-absent homes, as did 71% of dropouts and a majority of those identified as depressed, suicidal, addicted and pregnant teens. “Barring cases of abuse and neglect, the best interests of the child include the active involvement of both parents in their nurture and upbringing,” said Vellacott.
A very important symposium on Parental Alienation took place in Toronto in March. I commend all those involved in organizing this successful and important event.
One of the many speakers at the symposium was Dr. Terence Campbell, Ph.D., a clinical and forensic psychologist. He said that all separations must begin with the premise that joint physical custody is better than sole custody.
Many of the speakers at the conference were women, including Dr. Marty McKay, also an advocate of equal parenting. She expressed distress at the way many professionals contribute to Parental Alienation among children in broken homes. She listed the whole spectrum of professionals involved in divorce and custodial situations: judges, lawyers, assessors, psychologists, mediators, child welfare agencies and domestic violence agencies.
“I wish every success to those involved in raising awareness of the trauma of parental alienation,” said Vellacott. “I hope my Private Member’s Bill will move Canada in a direction that reduces parental alienation and advances our country’s support for the best interests of our children.”
- 30 -
For further comment, call (613) 992-1966 or (613) 297-2249
Debate Over Drugs For ADHD Reignites; Long-Term Benefit For Children at Issue
March 27, 2009
New data from a large federal study have reignited a debate over the effectiveness of long-term drug treatment of children with hyperactivity or attention-deficit disorder, and have drawn accusations that some members of the research team have sought to play down evidence that medications do little good beyond 24 months.
The study also indicated that long-term use of the drugs can stunt children’s growth.
The latest data paint a very different picture than the study’s positive initial results, reported in 1999.
One principal scientist in the study, psychologist William Pelham, said that the most obvious interpretation of the data is that the medications are useful in the short term but ineffective over longer periods but added that his colleagues had repeatedly sought to explain away evidence that challenged the long-term usefulness of medication. When their explanations failed to hold up, they reached for new ones, Pelham said.
“The stance the group took in the first paper was so strong that the people are embarrassed to say they were wrong and we led the whole field astray,” said Pelham, of the State University of New York at Buffalo. Pelham said the drugs, including Adderall and Concerta, are among the medications most frequently prescribed for American children, adding: “If 5 percent of families in the country are giving a medication to their children, and they don’t realize it does not have long-term benefits but might have long-term risks, why should they not be told?”
The disagreement has produced a range of views among the researchers about how to accurately present the results to the public. One e-mail noted that an academic review of the group’s work, called the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With ADHD (MTA), asked why the researchers were “bending over backward” to play down negative implications for drug therapy.
Peter Jensen, one of Pelham’s fellow researchers, responded that Pelham was biased against the use of drugs and was substituting his personal opinion for science.
Jensen said Pelham was the only member of the team of researchers who took away “the silly message” that the study raised questions about the long-term utility of drugs, but interviews and e-mails show that Pelham was not alone.
The MTA was designed to test whether children diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, do better when treated with drugs, with drugs plus talk therapy, with talk therapy alone or with routine medical care alone. Children with the disorder have trouble paying attention, are restless and hyperactive, and are sometimes disruptive in school.
The initial 14-month analysis published in 1999 randomly assigned children to one of four treatment options and showed clearly that those treated with medication did much better than those who got only talk therapy or routine care. The drugs’ manufacturers distributed thousands of reprints of the article to physicians at a time when diagnoses of ADHD were spiraling upward. Because children given drugs alone appeared to do about as well as those treated with both drugs and talk therapy, the study skewed treatment in the direction of medication.
In a second phase of the study, the researchers followed the children and compared how they fared, but researchers no longer randomly assigned them to the various treatment options, making this phase less scientifically rigorous.
In August 2007, the MTA researchers reported the first follow-up data, which by then no longer showed differences in behavior between children who were medicated and those who were not. But the data did show that children who took the drugs for 36 months were about an inch shorter and six pounds lighter than those who did not.
A news release issued by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) at the time, however, presented the results in a more favorable light. The release, dated July 20, 2007, was titled “Improvement Following ADHD Treatment Sustained in Most Children.” The release noted that the initial advantages of drug treatment were no longer evident, but it quoted Jensen as saying this did not mean that long-term drug therapy was ineffective.
Jensen said, “We were struck by the remarkable improvement in symptoms and functioning across all treatment groups.” And rather than saying the growth of children on medication was stunted, the release said children who were not on medication “grew somewhat larger.”
As the MTA study continued to find smaller and smaller behavioral differences between children who were medicated and those who were not, use of the drugs soared. Pelham said most parents and doctors took away the message that the study had found drug therapy effective over the long run. In 2004, physicians wrote 28.3 million prescriptions for ADHD drugs; last year, they wrote 39.5 million, according to data provided by IMS Health.
With the MTA having followed the children for eight years, the latest data have confirmed that there are no long-term differences between children who were continuously medicated and those who were never medicated. Some of the data were published online yesterday in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.
In a telephone interview, Jensen denied that the researchers had misled the public, pointing out that some children getting the drugs did do better over the long term. Looking at overall results was not as useful as studying how particular groups of children fared, he said.
Jensen and another co-author, L. Eugene Arnold at Ohio State University, who are both psychiatrists, emphasized the importance of individualizing treatment — and warned parents against abruptly terminating drug therapy.
The subgroup analysis found that children in homes that were socially and economically stable did the same in the long term with or without medication. Children from troubled or deprived backgrounds slid backward as soon as the intensive therapy stopped and they went back to their communities. About one-third — those with the least impairment to begin with — continued to improve over the long term.
Jensen and co-author Benedetto Vitiello at the NIMH said drugs may not have shown an overall long-term benefit because the quality of routine care that children received may have been inferior to the care they got during the initial part of the study. Jensen said the take-home message is that community care needs improvement.
Brooke Molina, also a co-author and a University of Pittsburgh associate professor of psychology and psychiatry, argued in an e-mail that if the researchers wanted to draw attention to subgroups that might be helped by medication over the long run, they also should acknowledge that “long-term treatment with medication may not be efficacious” for others.
In an interview, Molina said the data do not “support that children who stay on medication longer than two years have better outcomes than children who don’t.” In an e-mail she shared with Pelham, she noted that academic “reviewers thought we were bending over backward (inappropriately) to dismiss the failure to find medication effects at 8 years.”
James Swanson, another MTA co-author and a psychologist at the University of California at Irvine, said he believes that the researchers have been open about the diminishing benefits of medication therapy. He cited a variety of scientific publications in which he and others reported data showing that medications lost effectiveness over time and stunted growth.
“If you want something for tomorrow, medication is the best, but if you want something three years from now, it does not matter,” he said. “If you take medication long-term beyond three years, I don’t think there is any evidence that medication is better than no medication.”
Pelham, who has conducted many drug therapy studies, said the drugs have a valuable role: They buy parents and clinicians time to teach youngsters behavioral strategies to combat inattention and hyperactivity. Over the long term, he said, parents need to rely on those skills.
A yet-to-be-published study, Pelham added, found that 95 percent of parents who were told by clinicians to first try behavioral interventions for ADHD did so. When parents were given a prescription for a drug and then told to enroll their children in behavioral intervention programs, 75 percent did not seek out the behavioral approaches
——————————————————————————–
Autos 20.61%
Motor vehicle parts 5.81%
Gold – unwrought 4.96%
Medications – packaged for retail use 2.67%
Goods transport vehicles 1.91%
Telephone equipment (Includes modems) 1.52%
Engines 1.45%
Non-crude petroleum oil 1.36%
Nickel mattes 2.05% Furniture 1.09%
Source: Statistics Canada, International Trade Division, April 2009 (4/2009)
Export numbers are for domestic exports only.
Produced by Trade & Marketing Division, Ministry of International Trade and Investment
Ontario DRUG CAPITAL of the world?? Medications ranks # 4 as Ontario’s most exported commodity. If the Liberal govt had its way…99.9% of Ontarioans would be medicated…maybe thats the problem with our politicians and judges?
did you hear about the new “behind closed doors, domestic violence courts and mental health courts?????they operate like c.a.s. closed courts, and with the c.a.s. now mental helth proffesional, submitting their affidavits to the closed mental health courts, i sure you know how that going to work.but then chris bentley has put in the papers how hes opened the courts to the public for accountability,B.S. lip service, then theirs dalton mc guuity refuse ombudsman any powers to act.
Sudbury MPP Rick Bartoluuci, the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury Manitoulin the entire Sudbury City Council has been secretive for generations. They usually try and block new ideas or calls for accountability. We the pheasants and abused are supposed to remain silent and be expected to be grateful for the “trickle down” effect of their lavaish lifestyle and spending? All this a result of “billions” of tax dollars and funding to agencies and institutions that do not have any accountability.
The Sudbury Children’s Aid Society has been known to use the Sudbury Regional Police in an effort to promote the agenda of the CAS. Conspiracy etc…Sudbury CAS has denied members of corruptionalcentral.com membership to CAS, list of members and access to board minutes. They also refused to reply when asked if they refuse membership to citizens seeking to improve CAS.
Ms Horwath’s Bill 41 is a step in the right direction, however does as much as the Judicial Council and Law Society to address corruption in the court room; or the Child and Family Review Board to address complaints against CAS. Whether it addresses the corruption and abuse committed by CAS remains to be seen. If all unsatisfied parents were to attend meetings as proposed, surely police will be needed to keep the peace as some would be unable to contain themselves at the abuse committed by CAS against their children. The public’s participation as proposed by Bill 41 would be better applied allowing for the public to attend complaint hearings against CAS and police. I wonder why this Bill can’t pass as fast their 30% raise last year? Too many good paying jobs in this child protection industry. Any major reform would have devastating effects in the economy of any city. Suddenly billions of tax dollars would become available for use in other areas…healthcare, education, green energy, etc…The institution known as “no government accountability and abuse” is long entrenched. The small change (if any) proposed by Bill 41 is better than no change at all. Maybe the Ombudsman or Child Advocate will be attending on behalf of parents? McGuinty would have to hire many more…not that he actually listens to the Advocate or Ombudsman now anyway!
Police will be given new powers to eavesdrop on Internet-based communications as part of a contentious government bill, to be announced today, which Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan has said is needed to modernize surveillance laws crafted during “the era of the rotary phone.”
The proposed legislation would force Internet service providers to allow law enforcement to tap into their systems to obtain information about users and their digital conversations.
Police have lobbied for a new law for almost 10 years, saying that they need to access “Internet safe havens” for gangsters, sexual predators and terrorists. “This is really not about the warrantless tracking of Canadians’ Internet use,” said Clayton Pecknold, of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police.
Privacy advocates and civil libertarians, however, have vocally opposed the prospect of giving police “lawful access” to the digital conversations of Canadians by being able to access such things as their text messages, e-mails, web surfing habits and Internet phone lines.
“It is an issue that has proven to be very, very controversial,” said Michael Geist, a law professor at University of Ottawa and public commentator on Internet legal issues.
“The consistent criticism and concern that has been expressed is that there has to be some evidence that there is a real problem here and in the past we haven’t seen that,” he said. “Why is the status quo not good enough? What investigations have been impeded?”
Federal Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddard recently warned that forcing ISPs to surrender information “is a serious step forward toward mass surveillance” that violates the rights of Canadians.
When he was public safety minister, Day also promised that any federal initiative would require police to obtain a warrant to access personal information of users, such as names and addresses.
Pecknold said it is “an ongoing frequent occurrence” that police want to act to stop a crime, but they are blocked at the technological door at a time when criminals have shifted increasingly to online communications.
“Terrorist groups, pornographers and pedophile networks, illegal traffickers in weapons, drugs and human beings, money launderers and cyber criminals, Internet and telemarketing fraudsters all use technology to develop activities, perpetrate crimes and avoid detection,” the police chiefs said in a November 2008 position paper supporting a new law.
Police and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service already have the power to wiretap private communications, provided they have judicial authorization, but the law does not require ISPs to grant them access.
Tom Copeland, chairman of the Canadian Association of Internet Providers, said it will be a hardship for some of the country’s smaller providers to upgrade their systems to facilitate interception.
“There’s a very real and significant cost,” he said.
Copeland said a previous bill on Internet-based interception, introduced by the former Liberal government just before it fell in November 2005, contained an exemption for small ISPs.
Pecknold said it makes no sense to make exceptions because criminals will flock to the smaller providers.
Van Loan’s bill has been posted on a notice paper of pending government legislation and it is expected to be tabled in the House of Commons before MPs break for their summer recess on Friday. He has scheduled a news conference for today with Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.
Earlier this year, Van Loan publicly stated his intentions to pursue legislation, which had been promised for years, but relegated to a back burner by his predecessor, Stockwell Day.
FIU lab investigates the state of fatherhood
By Sissi Aguila
Family roles have changed substantially since the 1950s. Mom now works outside the home. And dad is expected to be more involved in raising the kids. But as parental roles and responsibilities become less defined, psychologists question: Are there essential characteristics of fathering versus mothering?
FIU’s Fatherhood Lab explores these issues and Psychology Professor Gordon Finley, who runs the lab, focuses specifically on how divorce impacts fathers and the development of their children. Finley has found that a father’s role is unique and far too often neglected by the family court system.
Using questionnaires and a retrospective technique in which he asked 1,989 young adults to think back on their relationship with their fathers, Finley found that children of divorce really miss their fathers. According to Finley, they are denied a relationship with them because of present-day family law and court practices.
“Divorce marginalizes or severs a father’s relationship with his child,” he says. “In reality, the father becomes a visitor in his or her life. He is no longer a father in the very literal sense.”
Risky behaviors
For decades, researchers focused on motherhood when studying parenting. Today more attention is being paid to fathers, and the data is consistently showing that fathers are vital to raising happy, healthy and successful children. “They contribute more than bringing home the bacon,” Finley says.
The statistics are alarming: children from fatherless homes account for 63 percent of youth suicides, 85 percent of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders and 71 percent of all high school dropouts. And 37 percent of fathers have no access or visitation rights to their children.
Finley’s research indicates that fathers are more effective at attenuating high-risk behaviors such as sex, drugs and other criminal activities. These behaviors also involve high social costs.
Yet Finley says that his findings on fatherhood do not match today’s social reality or family policy. In divorce cases, the father rarely gets custody (only in about 15 percent of cases) and shared parenting is not equal. Fathers usually see their children only once a week and two weekends a month.
A girl needs her dad
Finley’s findings also suggest that parent-children relationships are not as much about identification or imitation, as once thought, but about transaction. The way a girl learns to become a woman is through her interaction with her father. That will determine how she will relate to men in her adult life.
His study concluded that girls experience a greater impact by divorce than boys.
“The real cost is actually to the daughters of divorce. They don’t have relationships with their fathers. So when they enter adolescence and start questioning whether to have sex, they don’t have a realistic idea of what men are like.”
When evaluating the consequences of divorce for children, balance is critical, says Finley. Society has a vested interest in balance.
Informing social policy
The take-home message, according to Finley, is simple: “Fathers matter. Children need their fathers and, as it turns out, fathers need their children,” he says.
Divorced fathers are eight to 10 times more likely to commit suicide than divorced mothers. They also are higher on most indices of personal and social distress than divorced mothers.
Social policy, Finley argues, needs to catch up to the research: “Family law should be based on social science research – not ideology.”
Finley is a frequent contributor to journals that influence public policy. His study, “Father Involvement and Long Term Young Adult Outcomes: The Differential Contributions of Divorce and Gender,” was published by Family Court Review, an interdisciplinary communication forum for judges, attorney, mediators and professionals in the mental health and human services.
Earlier this year, Finley’s work provided the background for an article on divorced fathers and their adult offspring written for the American Bar Association’s Family Law Journal by Judith Wallerstein. She is a leading psychologist and researcher who conducted a 25-year study on the effects of divorce on the children involved. Wallerstein has had considerable influence on the California court system.
Says Finley, “Today my goals are to continue research but also to shift the foundation of family policy from outdated ideology to current social science through increased public and governmental awareness.”
June 16, 2009
Mr. Vellacott introduced a Private Member’s Bill this morning that would require a presumption of equal parenting. This is a BILL, not a MOTION. It’s # is C-422. Don’t refer to it as M-483 if contacting others such as politicians or media about this bill because M-483 as an equal parenting measure was terminated with the last election call, as most of you already know, so nobody will know what you are talking about if you refer to it incorrectly. Mr. Vellacott’s introductory statement in introducing this bill this morning was as follows:
Intro Statement – Equal Shared Parenting PMB – June 16, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to be introducing a Private Member’s Bill today which would direct courts in regard to divorce, to make equal shared parenting the presumptive arrangement in the best interests of the child, except in proven cases of abuse or neglect.
Over 10 years ago, a Joint House-Senate committee presented to Parliament a report entitled “For the Sake of the Children.” That report urged Parliament to amend the Divorce Act to make equal shared parenting the normative determination by courts dealing with situations of divorce involving children. This non-partisan recommendation from that Joint House-Senate was based on compelling research made available to the committee members. Over the past ten years, the best research has continued to demonstrate the far superior outcomes for children, in general, when both parents – mom AND dad – are actively involved in their children’s lives, even if the parents divorce or separate.
Polling from the past two years demonstrates overwhelming support from Canadians for equal shared parenting. There is, in fact, slightly more support among women than men for equal parenting. This strong support from almost 80% of Canadians exists across the country, with the strongest regional support coming from Quebec and Atlantic Canada.
Canadians claiming to be Liberal and Bloc supporters, expressed the strongest endorsement for equal shared parenting, at 80.6% among Liberals and 82.9% among Bloc Quebecois supporters.
A variety of countries, such as Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Australia, and various U.S. states, have implemented equal parenting, joint custody or shared parenting presumptive legislation, which has resulted in lowered court costs, less conflict and improved social outcomes for the children of divorce.
This bill is one of the most a-political, non-partisan pieces of legislation introduced in this current Parliament. I look forward to strong support for this important piece of legislation from all Members of Parliament who are committed to the best interests of our Canadian children.
========================================================================================================
You can send a message of thanks and appreciation to Mr Vellacott via email to: VellaM0@parl.gc.ca
A girl’s first hero
How dads inspire and support a daughter’s development
By JOANNE RICHARD
16th June 2009, http://www.torontosun.com/life/2009/06/16/9809501-sun.html
Hey, dads, what you sow now, your daughters will reap later.
How a woman feels about herself as a woman goes back to how dad treated his little girl, report experts.
“Behind every great woman, you will find her dad” — that’s if he was an engaged, present, involved dad, says Dr. Mary Jo Rapini.
“If dads are able to admire their daughters achievements, character and interests and not their looks, the daughter will grow up to be confident and self assured. She will choose men who treat her with the same admiration and respect as her dad did,” adds Rapini, a psychotherapist and author.
According to Rapini, a dad has so much power over his daughter.
“If he gives her gifts and focuses on her looks he will raise a girl who is more materialistic and thinks love and affection comes in a gift box.
“If he praises her looks all of the time, he will raise someone who loathes herself and is constantly checking to make sure she looks OK in a mirror — we do that enough anyway.
“If he focuses on her abilities and interests he will develop a daughter who is more self assured, confident and understands leadership.”
Studies show that dads give girls 90% of their self-esteem before the age of 12, she says. “What this means is that girls that grow up without a dad in the home, or one who abandoned them, are always going to be a little bit less confident and sure of themselves than peers who grow up with a dad in the home.”
According to Rapini, an involved, engaged dad will be viewed as the first man she ever loved, and someone who loves her unconditionally. “Unlike mom — who many daughters have emotional fights with — dads don’t get into all of the drama and are more accepting of them.
“Dads also have a way of redirecting a girl when she is being overly emotional. He can make her laugh and help her see the situation is not as bad as it appears. The daughter looks at dad as the type of man she wants to someday marry,” adds Rapini, co-author of Start Talking: A Girls Guide for You and Your Mom About Health, Sex or Whatever.
Dads need to be sure not to pull away from daughters during the teenage years, adds Dr. Venus Nicolino. “Many fathers feel uncomfortable with transformation from tween to teen — she’s no longer daddy’s little girl.
“A father needs to be there, emotionally available at all times but especially when he feels himself wanting to pull away during her teenage years. An emotionally available father can be the stabilizing force for a young woman. The little voice inside her that says, ‘I love you no matter what’, ” says Nicolino, a relationship expert.
She adds that the best thing a father can do for his daughter is to love her mother so that she will witness what to expect from the men in her life, and what she should not have to put up with. “Having a father who loves her mother makes her more likely to go on to choose a man who will truly love her.”
—
Do
Dr. Mary Jo Rapini suggests these five dosfor dads to positively impact his daughters:
- Focus on your daughter’s talents and make note of them.
- Focus on times you see her being respectful, confident, compassionate and compliment her.
- Help her/guide her in creating her vision, dreams and interests.
- Tell her she can be or do anything she puts her mind to.
- Talk less, do more with her, listen to her.
Don’t
- Be controlling and tell her you will decide what is best for her.
- Tell her she is pretty and say it all the time so she becomes focused on being pretty.
- Tell her she is getting chubby. Really, if you focus on their body you will create a girl with lots of issues and she may never get over them.
- Fight with her mom and be disrespectful to her in front of your daughter.
- Tell her she is not very smart — “if you do this, I promise she will fulfil it.”
Dr. Mary Jo Rapini
Unlawful abduction of children by school officials
A young boy who is shown in a video interview which details a story of how the principal of his school detained him in his private office to keep him from his father at the request of a CAS worker who was allegedly being told by the worker that the father must sign some form of agreement with him before getting access to his child at school.
So Its all so destructive and Unjust? Its time to make a stand then….
Jeremy Swanson
June 21st 2009
So. on this Fathers Day do you think your country is in a state of disarray? Have the courts destroyed you and your family? Fathers Day is nothing more than day os pain and anguish? Is it all a mess as far as you are concerned? Then help us to stop the evil of man-hatred for good. Help us to bring the family unit back together so our children can be safe. Help us to restore relationships between men, women and children and make our country stable again.
Look around you. The extreme political left and its feminist-Marxist practices have brought our country to its very knees. The so-called right wing have helped them do it. The politicians ignore us and regard us as angry men who “must have done something wrong”. The courts are biased and set up to make us fail.
The UN is like a huge political vacuum cleaner sucking the democracy out of every country foolish enough to go near it. Canada is just one of many countries being destroyed in this way and this all filters down to influence every aspect of our lives.
This fight has been going on for decades, yet none of our politicians are calling for what we, the people of Canada-the majority-want. Our children are being destroyed emotionally, psychologically, socially and educationally-and some are even dying- because of greed and the insane political ideologies that have targeted the relationships between men and women in the family for profit and control.
‘Politically inspired business’, the courts and politicians created this mess,and it is up to us, the people of Canada, to fix it. its up to us the Fathers and the Men and our partners, friends, family and supporters to do this.
You know that this is true, so stand up and say so. Take action. Be active and positive and take real action for change. Its time to actually DO something. Get involved ! Mobilize. Recruit others. Gather our collective resources.
It is up to us to drive out the corrupt from politics, legal corruption and ‘business’ interests.
It is up to us to restore respect between our children and their parents.
It is up to us to place curbs on ideologically driven greed and power.
It is up to us to save the family.
It is up to us to save our children.
It is up to us to restore sanity to our community
It is up to us to take back our country.
It is up to us to stop the lies and manipulations of the vultures and their funded interest groups which infest and corrupt the political process
It is up to us to restore real democracy and real justice.
Join the fight for what is right. Give everything you can. Give your time, money and prayers and stand up for the family and against totalitarian control. Without support and resources this fight for justice just becomes a merry-go-round of endless useless rhetoric.
Stand up for truth and against corrupt liars in Government and the Courts. Stand up for honesty and fight back against business greed. Stand up for the family and fight back against those that would destroy it. Stand up for the rights and against those who want to prevent you. Stand up for the rights of men and women to live free of hatred and against those who promote hatred between us to divide and rule us. Stand up for YOUR country!
Fight now, or lose your freedom forever.
Join us.
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada
“For The Children”
Jeremy Swanson
Fathers and Men’s Rights Activist
Ottawa, Ontario Canada
Years ago I received? a research article when Ritalin was just being introduced to the public. It was written by a doctor and warned that ADHD was not a real disorder but was created solely as a reason for the particular drug company to mass produce their new drug. In short, which came first the drug or the disease…..the drug. The Pharma Corporation decide…
God help us if people trust blindly that they have your interests at heart? rather than their profit motives or secret corporate agenda.
Social workers are committing some of the worse crimes of our century. ? Google for Camilla Cavendish of The Times. She’s run a massive campaign against social workers and corrupt secret courts.
You have to see what the SS are doing to children in our name. It’s beyond EVIL!!
Social workers are committing some of the worse crimes of our century. ? Google for Camilla Cavendish of The Times. She’s run a massive campaign against social workers and corrupt secret courts.
You have to see what the SS are doing to children in our name. It’s beyond EVIL!!
Twerpy school teachers and twerpy anti-social workers who possessing a bachelors in education or a masters in social work (two non-technical crip course degrees, fit for people with zero mathematical or scientific competence) come forth and make devastating snap psychological and medical judgements. The average person cannot practice medicine without a license, but schools, Juvenile Courts and CAS enable and empower? their quacks to administer drugs.
Many people in Ontario have been asking for changes to the way childcare services are adminstered in Ontario. As citizens we are asking our elected representatives (Bartolucci and Mathews) how many signatures is required on the petition in support of Bill 93 PETITION
before the Liberals will proclaim it law.
Respectfully,
The Citizens of Ontario
PS. Can you influence the Sudbury CAS to make public the dates of their monthly board meetings. Thank you
Sept 2008 – FAMILIES AND CHILDREN IN ANGUISH WITHOUT OMBUDSMAN’S CAS OVERSIGHT
Andrea Horwath the former MPP for Hamilton East and before becoming Ontario`s NDP leader in early 2009 called on the McGuinty Liberals to pass Ontario’s Bill 93 2008. Her private members Bill would give the Ombudsman independent oversight over Ontario`s Children`Aid Socieies. Horwath in the past asked the Liberals to fast-track it into law after the release of Ombudsman
André Marin’s annual report. The report condemed Ontario`s Children`s Aid Societies, and called for oversight of child welfare. Please sign this petition and get as many signatures as possible for the benefit of Ontario’s children. Contact us to deliver your signatues.
Jailed for Being a Dad
Alienated father tells the court, “No Kids, No Money”
An F4J Fathers 4 Justice member has gone to jail for 20 days for his independent protest and refusal to pay child support arrears for children he has, by the courts own admittance, been alienated from.
Richard Coulter, 47, of Cookstown, ON was yesterday sent to Central North Correctional Facility, for telling the court, “No kids, No money.”
Mr. Coulter has seen his children once in 5 years, despite repeated attempts to try to maintain contact.
While Mr. Coulter has fallen behind in child support, moneys owed to him for the division of the matrimonial home are yet to be paid, and his access was never enforced.
In his speech to Justice Mulligan today, Richard said, “Your system allowed this person, not only to dismantle the family, but you also gave her the authority and allowed her to make me homeless, fatherless, childless and jobless.”
In a recent order of April 6th, Justice Guy Ditomaso said, “Further, his children were alienated by _____ in that he was never able to see them and for this reason, his ability to pay child support was also impacted.”
Kris Titus, National Coordinator of F4J Fathers 4 Justice says, “Although we don’t recommend our members to take this type of action, we know how Mr. Coulter and his new spouse feel. This is what happens when the system is just too imbalanced for both parents to survive and thrive after divorce. We hear from a lot of second families and fathers just struggling to feed themselves after support payments.”
The group has concerns for Mr. Coulter’s welfare as the prison is otherwise known as Penetang Super Jail and houses 1500 inmates. The prison has previously been clouded by contraversy and health and safety issues including the death of a prisoner.
F4J Fathers 4 Justice Canada believes the best ‘child support’ is equal parenting. “It is important that parents are allowed to support their children in all ways, physically, spiritually, and emotionally, as well as financially,” says Titus. “People are just plain fed up.”
Studies have shown that those who see their children regularly more frequently keep their child support obligations.
—————————————————————————
CONTACT: Fathers 4 Justice Canada Canada: http://www.f4jcanada.ca
Jul 17, 2009By: Bill Bradley – Sudbury Northern Life
Greater Sudbury Police now have more resources to investigate those who produce and distribute child pornography on the Internet.
The police service will receive $527,440 from the province over the next two years as part of a $5.2 million province-wide strategy to protect children from sexual abuse and exploitation on the Internet.
“Keeping our children safe from Internet predators is a key priority of the McGuinty government,” said Sudbury MPP and Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services Rick Bartolucci, who made the announcement July 16.
“Internet luring is a despicable crime that warrants our full attention.”
The local funding allows a three officer undercover team to continue to monitor websites, chat rooms and newsgroups to identify suspected child predators and victims, and prevent further victimization.”
The announcement came just a day after a 15-year-old Sudbury boy was arrested and charged with possession of child pornography, making available child pornography and accessing child pornography.
The suspect appeared in court and was released Wednesday, said police.
The investigation into the suspect’s activities was conducted by the Greater Sudbury Police’ cyber crime unit, in conjunction with the Sault Ste. Marie Police Service.
Sgt. Tim Burtt, who heads up the cyber crime unit, said he appreciates the new funding.
“It sustains what we are doing now. In 2002, we did not have any support for this work. We investigated these cases by ourselves. We got training where we could. Now we have this unified approach to going out and doing this.”
Deputy police chief Al Lekun, said in the last year alone, the cyber crime unit investigated:
- 130 new cases
- charged 11 individuals
- laid 29 Criminal Code charges
- executed 16 search warrants
- identified three victims
“That work is facilitated through provincial funding.”
Lekun said there are more investigations due to more resources being available for the cyber unit.
The work is timely considering the kind of access youth have to the Internet, said Burtt.
“The Internet is their lives. That means they get exposed to a lot of material that nobody should be even seeing. So there is a chance they will be involved in it or be seeing it. Not every one will be involved in this. But the opportunity is there.”
He said an important message that parents need to hear is they need to know what their children are doing on the Internet.
“We can’t let them go into a room to be on the Internet. We have to know where they are going on the Internet. Yesterday’s case with the alleged 15 year old violator demonstrates what can happen when they are left alone.”
Seeing child pornography can be tough for the officers who are investigating it.
“We are dealing with pretty vile material. We are talking about people who exploit our children. These are not cute pictures. We are talking about prepubescent children in pretty graphic sexual acts. It will have an impact on anyone who sees it.”
The other two officers in the cyber crime unit are Const. Todd Bignucolo, a computer forensic examiner and Det. Const. Dan Zuliani, a victim identification officer.
“Eventually we may be able to have another officer trained to do this work.”
Partnering with other police forces to fight cyber crime is key, said Bartolucci.
“It (the provincial strategy) helps police investigators work with other agencies and jurisdictions to help apprehend offenders and assist victims.”
Since the provincial strategy was first implemented in 2006, nearly 4,800 investigations have been conducted and almost 2,000 charges have been laid against 634 people.
Steve Faz 7/17/2009 3:27:44 PM – Report Abuse
How can this unit, which investigates sex offences, be staffed by a member of the Police force that has been charged with sex offences in the
Re Post #1 “How can this unit, which investigates sex offences, be staffed by a member of the Police force that has been charged with sex offences in the past?
Wouldn’t this be considered a conflict of interest????” This is damage controlmore» or good media relations for Liberal government. This government hushed the names of high profile canadains on major porn bust few years back. Funny this “member” has same name as gaurd at CAS court house. If Liberals were serius about caring for our kids…they would have given Ombudsman oversight of Ontario’s Children’s Aid Societies. Bartilucci’s is funding another special interest group…thats all. Phedophiles! http://www.corruptioncentral.com
Children and Families in Anguish without Independant Oversight
Posted on July 6th, 2009 by cc | Edit
Sept 2008 – FAMILIES AND CHILDREN IN ANGUISH WITHOUT OMBUDSMAN’S CAS OVERSIGHT
Andrea Horwath the former MPP for Hamilton East and before becoming Ontario`s NDP leader in early 2009 called on the McGuinty Liberals to pass Ontario’s Bill 93 2008. Her private members Bill would give the Ombudsman independent oversight over Ontario`s Children`Aid Socieies. Horwath in the past asked the Liberals to fast-track it into law after the release of Ombudsman
André Marin’s annual report. The report condemed Ontario`s Children`s Aid Societies, and called for oversight of child welfare. Please sign this petition and get as many signatures as possible for the benefit of Ontario’s children. Contact us to deliver your signatues.
Contact Your Provincial MPP here!
Contact Sudbury City Council (C.A.S) here!
Tell our elected officials that our community and all of Ontario’s children deserve no less!
SIGN PETITION NOW!
Filed under: WAR ON DADS!
« MUST SIGN PETITION, Sign it for the kids who can’t! Sudbury CAS Scum Exposed again! We need a public inquiry! »2 Responses to “Children and Families in Anguish without Independant Oversight”
cc, on July 7th, 2009 at 1:43 am Said: Edit Comment
THE GLOBE AND MAIL MARCH 28, 2009
FAMILY LAW
Gender bias evident in parental alienation cases
Mothers are more likely to be the parent behind children’s estrangement, yet fathers more often ordered into counselling, study finds
JUSTICE REPORTER — A study of alienated children has found that mothers were significantly more likely to be the parent who emotionally poisoned their children than were fathers.
Toronto family lawyer Gene Colman told a Toronto symposium yesterday that of 74 court rulings that found parental alienation since 1987, the mother was the alienator in 50 cases. The father was the alienating parent in 24.
“I’m not trying to dump on moms,” Mr. Colman told about 150 psychologists, family lawyers, mediators and activist parents. “I’m just saying, that is what the data reveal.”
In parental alienation syndrome, an estranged parent systematically brainwashes a child into hating the other parent. The profile of the syndrome escalated over the past year, after three Ontario judges ordered that children be removed from an alienating parent and taken to U.S. clinics for deprogramming therapy. Print Edition – Section Front
Section A Front Enlarge Image The Globe and Mail
Mr. Colman said that alienating fathers were twice as likely to be ordered to undergo counselling as were mothers in alienation cases – a finding that raises serious questions about whether judges are exhibiting gender biases.
Twelve of the 50 alienating mothers in his study were ordered into counselling, as compared with 13 of 24 fathers. “As social scientists will tell you, that is a high level of statistical significance in terms of differential treatment by gender,” Mr. Colman said.
“As lawyers and judges, we have to be vigilant to make sure that we … are not influenced by whether the mom is the alienator or the dad is the alienator. There should be no differential in how either gender is dealt with.”
The other findings in Mr. Colman’s study included:
The number of parental alienation cases has shot up from 21 between
1987 and 2000 to 53 between 2000 and 2008.
Fathers who had their alienated children switched from their homes were granted some form of access by the courts in a “much lower” percentage of cases than were mothers.
Fathers who alienate their children are somewhat more likely to have their children removed from their residence and relocated with the mother.
Mr. Colman said that of cases where the father was the alienator, children were ordered to switch to the mother’s residence in 78 per cent of cases. In contrast, 62 per cent of the mothers who alienated their children had them switched to the father’s home.
“It would seem that if you are the dad, you have a greater probability of having the residence changed on you,” said Mr. Colman, founding editor of the Canadian Journal of Family Law and founding member of the Canadian Equal Parenting Council
cc, on July 16th, 2009 at 12:30 pm Said: Edit Comment
Good to get some news in Quebec.
Call & Write:
Your Member of Parliament
Federal Justice Minister, Rob Nicholson
Prime Minister Stephen Harper
and tell them to support MP Maurice Vellacott and this bill.
2008 Sudbury CAS Directors/Trustees and Like Officials
1 Last Name: Bals
First Name: Myriam
Initial:
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
2 Last Name: Callaghan
First Name: Ted
Initial: H.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
3 Last Name: Cote
First Name: Daniel
Initial: D
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
4 Last Name: Gillis
First Name: Frank
Initial: A.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
5 Last Name: Farrell
First Name: Kelly
Initial: C.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
6 Last Name: Jarvis
First Name: Louise
Initial: A.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
7 Last Name: Lacroix
First Name: Vincent
Initial: G.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
8 Last Name: Liboiron
First Name: José
Initial: H.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
9 Last Name: Recollet
First Name: Hazel
Initial: H.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
10 Last Name: Thomson
First Name: George
Initial: A.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
Last Name: Bidal
First Name: Marc
Initial: I.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Y
THREE COURTS AND NO C.A.S. ACCOUNTABILITY!
On January 19, 2009 CAS Paquette was successful in obtaining an order from Justice Renaud which further denied a parent their right to a supervised access visit and denied having a child’s views independently ascertained. As this was a much anticipate decision (holiday season), Renauds secretary “Anne Mare” assured the parent that they will be notified immediately when the decision was finalized. Neither the CAS, courthouse or Judges office (Anne Marie) informed the parent of this decision.
This decision was discovered on March 30, 2009. I’m glad to see the province of Ontario does not discriminate based on sex having been told by the (and I assume) newly hired transvestite at the Cedar St Courthouse who “insisted” she tried calling me. Nobody tried calling me to tell me the decision was ready. This is a stalling tactic to avaid responsibility, delay time and keep kids in system longer, and cover up their actions. Sad to see good faces leave. both at Elm and Cedar St. locations though.
March 31, 2009 Sudbury CAS Paquette will be “at work” taking out an order in another court, the Superior Court which was made by Justice Borque Smith that dismisses the fathers motion for a supervised access visit and CAS accountability as having “no merit”. This motion for a supervised visit was dated 2007.
There is no merit, ignoring 2 assessments, No merit denying a supervised visit. No merit as in causing emotional trauma to children and destroying natural bond of family. Sudbury CAS- Family is disoriented. Candice Poulin has since been promoted to supervisor? Sudbury parents should be warned.about Paquette, Poulin, and others strategically placed.
Corruption CAS Sudbury StyleFebruary, 2009 Justice of the Peace M. Hickler. Quashed charges against C.A.S.
January 2009 Justice Renaud denied 12 year old boy and parents a supervised access visit in Ontario’s Provincial Court.
April 2009 Justice Borque Smith that dismisses the parent’s motion for a supervised access visit and CAS accountability as having “no merit”.
March 30, 2009
In 2008 Sudbury CAS received 39 million of our tax dollars. Over 50% went for wages and “special expenses”. The CAS (Corporation) has a mandate that includes increasing the amount of funding it receives annually from both the Feds and Provincial govt. More funding results in increase wages but also requires more kids and court time. In order to facilitate this, cases are created against parents. And who does this? The CAS lawyer and Social worker. This cannot be accomplished without having selected individuals in place.
In 2004 CAS Donald Kinsley starts Child Protection proceeding which terminated any access that had been awarded in Superior Court. The father was not present to defend himself. Pierre Bradley (duty council for mother) argues for protection order and supports the CAS. Pierre Bradley was also the subject of a complaint the father filed against him in 1999. In 2004, Sudbury CAS interrupted access and demanded the father have “supervised access visits” only and undergo an assessment if further access was to. Also in 2004 the Sudbury CAS was provided with an assessment dated 2002 and formed part of the SOCIAL WORK REPORT OF THE CHILDREN’S LAWYER which awarded generous access for the benefit of children. . Both the report and assessment dated 2004 was ignored by CAS JJ Paquette, Candice Poulin, Justice L. Serre, “court appointed” Children’s Lawyer Patricia Meehan and “self proclaimed” Child Physiologist Dr Sheila Milne all ignored a report that was completed in 2002 titled SOCIAL WORK REPORT OF THE CHILDREN’S LAWYER. The report was completed in 2002 and dealt with the matter of custody and access and awarded generous access for the benefit of children.
There were six supervised visits between 2005 and 2007. The CAS would cancel the visits simply because the father would ask questions such as “ How were things in school today’? or How is everything going at home? According to Sudbury CAS questions of these nature pose a “risk” of emotional harm and therefore there should be access. The CAS campaign of terror court appearance etc begins…keeping in mind these fools are paying themselves with our tax dollars. The Sudbury CAS have contributed to Parental Alienation by telling children they will get punished for wanting to call their own parents! This amounts to government funded terrorism and crimes against the people by the government. I still am not allowed a supervised visit!
In 2006 a second assessment was provided to all “service providers” dated 2005. Again this assessment was ignored. Certification of parenting courses, witnesses that were ignored, etc and I still would not be permitted a supervised visit! Hmmm.
CORRUPT JUDGES OR
Lying in court is so common that judges sometimes thank witnesses for telling the truth. Lawyers suborn perjury and lie to the courts every day.You can tell that you are watching fiction on Law and Order because, unlike most real courts, the judges in Law and Order are awake and Child Protective Services are called when needed. Where, oh where do our tax dollars go? In 2004 Ontario Court judges earned about $216,000.00 a year and cannot ever be fired. Honorable? In fact, many of them are absolutely dishonorable. e. We have even had convicted criminals on the bench. We probably have many convicted criminals on the bench now. If the judiciary is so professional and competent, and the CAS are accountable to the public, then why are so many false convictions emerging? If the CAS is supposed to protect children? Then why so many stories of abuse and corruption? You can believe that there are thousands more. Living proof that power corrupts. Why is the government and CAS so intent in keeping the doors closed on Ontario’s Child Protection Industry? Judges should be appointed for limited terms and subject to review.
A Civic Holiday? How about an Accountability for Politicians Holiday? Jester’s Court Policing Politicians.
Notice persons who’s name appears below are publicly paid employees. Anybody receiving our tax dollars should expect to be scrutinized for corruption and incompetency.
Mayor John Rodriquez leader or just lame? It seems our mayor is aligned with the Children’s Aid Society more than he would like the citizens of Sudbury to know. Having been briefly involved in Sudbury’s most infamous CAS case and partial inspiration for http://www.corruptioncentral.com…He simply shrugged and said on behalf of our community’s children that”They are the CAS…we have to listen to them”. JR makes no secret of his backroom/flipflop politics and only has his own interests at heart…namely helping himself to perks that if undiscovered would have cost the Sudbury tax payer millions. Stuff like the Elton John scandal have been going on for generations. And i’l wager thats just the tip of the iceberg. Hence this select group’s efforts and expense to keep secrets from the public. JR’s own legal costs could have housed the homeless, fed the poor for his 4 year term I’m sure.. His legal fees should not be paid by tax payers. Rather than lick the plate, Step up to it. Since JR is from the old school of politics, his colleagues include the very very old Francis Calderilli (Ward 10 and CAS Treasurer) who has a better chance of getting picked up on Elgin St than being elected to ANY polical party. and Ted Callahagn (CAS Board Director for years) and no stranger to the dime lit dealings at the city council, CAS..and probably on Elgin St too. Its no wonder that Sudbury city council gets away with what it does they must have half the lawyers in town on retainer. Since everyone in Sudbury is basically accountable to their own longtime colleagues, there is no accountability. The City of Sudbury through their Assistant City Solicitor Eric Labelle cost the tax payer thousands of tax dollars to block the release of the protocol that exists between Sudbury Regional Police and the CAS. Sudbury and secrecy go hand in hand it seems. Local attorney Rejean Parise has also received thousands from CAS to prevent the release of the scheduled dates that CAS board meetings are held. Even more tax dollars spent to keep secrets. Not to mention the thousands they spent in court keeping me away from my son from 2004 to present.
The CAS wrote January 2009 “The CAS will continue withholding all access to father until mother is able to receive full custody with no access to father. The father continues to show the inability to be accountable for his continued actions. The mother has yet to take the required steps legal steps to protect the child without state assistance”. I think the mother pretty much has had full custody since 2004, which is the last time I seen my son. Its a scarily thought when certain individuals are considered “the state” who can operate without any fear of accountability namely Jean Jacque Paquette and his harem of unqualified anti social workers…protected by police, judges, and politicians serving our crackhead whores.
…I have no history of mental illness, never abused any children, The mother and CAS wanted me to have an assessment when I discovered the mother abusing drugs with CAS workers and lawyer. I voluntarily went for two 2 assessments. Sudbury CAS didn’t like these assessments which were done by doctors more qualified than can be found in Sudbury. No drug tests ordered for mother either. JR was not joking when he publicily said “lets go smoke some crack”. The assessments didn’t say what CAS wanted them to say. Sudbury Judge Renaud said that the Sudbury CAS has to choose the assessor. (hahah. so they can tell the assessor what to write of course) Well Judge Renaud you can kiss my ass (when you’re not kissing your cleaners). The mother is no stranger to a few judges in Sudbury and CAS lawyer having ‘cleaned their homes” in the past. In fact the mother’s mother would clean for senior judges and our very own MPP Rick Bartolucci! Two generations of working women serving the leaders of our communities in more ways than one. Why Sudbury CAS and judge Renaud denied even a supervised visit to the father is abuse. Ignoring my son for your financial gain is morally corrupt. Why Sudbury CAS denied a local child dental health care plan, then 2 years later Sudbury Credit bureau wants father to pay cash when CAS and the mother would not use the father dental coverage. I wonder who is on the board at the Sudbury Credit Bureua? More of the same familiar names I’m sure. Sudbury hydro anyone? Sudbury is corruptioncentral!
This is an open challenge to CAS Jean Jacques Paquette, Candice Poulin Makic, Jodie Marcotte, Judge Renaud, Judge Serre and any other publicly paid COWARD (CAS Board member, City Councillor) who have in the past refused to engage the public so that their buddies can profit. What is it you are afraid of? The world consists of more than your little bubble. Come join the discussion….We don’t need leaders or public servants of your kind who steal from the public their children, tax dollars and freedoms. In case your paranoid delusion happens to set in, You can make the arrangements for this open discussion. Whoops! Did I say open discussion? Maybe Sudbury Council,CAS, Police would like to discuss this behind closed doors. You know how to reach me. You can run but you can’t hide. 2012 is coming soon.
Why did 90 children die?
Posted on July 21st, 2009 by cc | Edit
Ontario’s child advocate was appalled to learn how many in the province’s welfare system die each year and is equally shocked at how difficult it is to get answers
Canada Day is a national day of celebration. We tell our children that we celebrate Canada Day because it’s our country’s birthday and NOTHING more. We don`t tell them of the wars, death and destruction (not necessarily these words) that were involved in the creation and maintenance of our great country . Our country was built on integrity, honesty, values and accountability. Many suffered and died so that these qualities would prevail in our societies that would be governed by accountable governments. None of this qualities exist today in any level of government or the organisations that they control. Until the explosion of the internet that empowered the average citizen, media in general has failed the public miserably. Now the government wants to invade, control and censor the internet further for complete control since it already controls 99.5% of media already. So what is Canada Day all about?! It should be a celebration of family, unity, and freedom. In the home, community, province and country. Freedom from unwarranted intrusions and attacks by unaccountable governments on the on the family unit and abuse of civil liberties. The values and qualities associated with Canada Day have become non-existent. There is a commercial by The Toronto Zoo that plays the Russian National Anthem` The Liberal Government is relating a family outing at the Toronto Zoo with the values of our one time sworn enemy (enemy to government not to me personally). In the last few years The Liberals Dalton McGuinty, Bartolucci, and `blow in the wind` Nim-rott have been under unprecedented pressure from `family law reform activists. Their response to this pressure was to create a new holiday ie Family Day ( celebrated 3rd Monday of February) strictly as a measure of damage control for the 5% of media or activists it doesn’t control. To date they have refused the Ombudsman powers to investigate certain government funded agencies. They created a Child Advocate who is also unable to investigate certain agencies … Locally, Rim- Rod, Ted Callahan and Francis Calderelli. (all affiliated with this agency) passed a bi-law to make it a crime to hand out pamphlets informing Sudbury citizens of government corruption. This on the wake of the Ombudsman critique of Sudbury`s secret city council meetings. Let’s not forget the `get rid of poverty bull”, the cost of fireworks every Canada Day, timing of ego inflating legacy projects, the cost of defending Elton, secret council meetings, tax hike, failed legacy. The three auditors for a predicted score of `2 out of 3 ain`t bad`.etc etc etc
Its really sad when a few `selected` members of the Sudbury Regional Police Service supports such destruction in our community. Its further disheartening to know that few in the Sudbury Crown Attorney office would support such charges. Convictions result in more funding whether guilty or not. Victims of this abuse generate income for the Corporation known as the City of Sudbury and their jail. Local Child Protective Service get more funding by creating false cases against parents. ALL THREE are in receipt of government funding. This funding is only shared by a select few. Namely CAS, Police, City Council and Crown Attorney Office. All 3 responsible for Parental Alienation. Lets make every holiday Parental Awareness Holiday for healthy communities and healthy families! Remember Parental Alienation Awareness «Day April 25.
Next Canada Day 2010..ask yourself just what it is you are really celebrating….
Sign Petition Now!
Children’s Aid Society workers should be reined in, critics say
>
> They are charged with the most essential of duties: protecting vulnerable children from abuse and neglect. They will intervene in the lives of roughly 200,000 Canadian children this year.
> For most of us, they are generally unseen, save for occasional mentions in news reports, when they rescue children from misery. Or, as sometimes happens, deliver it.
> Canada’s child-welfare agencies, says University of Manitoba social work professor Brad McKenzie, have among the broadest intervention powers in the Western world.
> Caseworkers come armed with vaster powers than any police officer investigating crime. It is an immense authority easily abused, without vigilant restraint.
> It is time, critics say, they were reined in.
> “The social worker system, as it applies to children, is out of control, seriously out of control,” says Katherine McNeil, a children’s advocate who has worked with families in Nova Scotia and B.C. “And nobody’s doing anything about it.”
> Child-welfare agencies step in when kids are homeless, exploited, hungry or abused. They do not stop there. As the highly publicized neo-Nazi case in Winnipeg demonstrates, they might seize children from parents for teaching racist views, or for “emotional neglect.” They have taken newborns from parents considered insufficiently intelligent; from religious families believing the Bible commands them to discipline kids with a rod. They order homeschooling parents to enroll children in public school, deeming them inadequately socialized.
> “They violate all kinds of privacy and rights,” says Chris Klicka, senior counsel for the Home School Defense League, which represents Canadian and American parents.
> Whether we wanted it or not, knew it or not, over time, the work of child-welfare organizations has become “parenting by the state and the imposition of their value system on other people,” says Marty McKay, a clinical psychologist who has worked on abuse cases in the U.S and Canada. Provincial agencies have the power to intervene when children are considered “at risk” of abuse or neglect – even if none has actually occurred. Or, where spousal abuse happens, but kids are untouched. And what they do with the children they take can sometimes be worse than what they suffered at home.
>
> ***
>
> When journalist J.J. Kelso founded Canada’s first Children’s Aid Society in 1891, it was from revulsion at what he had witnessed working in Toronto’s slums: the filthy, homeless urchins begging on the street, the school-aged girls whored out by parents for whiskey money; children needing “rescue,” Kelso exhorted, “from the environments of vice, cruelty or mendicancy.”
> Courts could imprison parents for cruelty, but not revoke custody. Backed by the 1893 Act for the Prevention of Cruelty to and Better Protection of Children, the society had unique authority to directly interfere in affairs of parents and children: Anyone under 14 found begging, receiving alms, out late, homeless, orphaned, imprisoned, thieving, or associating with thieves, drunkards or vagrants, would be appropriated by the province.
> Since then, as child-welfare agencies multiplied across Canada, their authority expanded, too.
> One Calgary mother said her kids were recently pulled from class and questioned by a caseworker after she kept them home from school for a week, fearing they might be exposed to Swine Flu. When the mother protested, the worker threatened to seize all six children in her house, including two toddlers.
> “All because I was overtly concerned about my children’s health,” says an incredulous Ms. K, who, as is the case with all investigations, cannot be identified. Nor can she ever know who lodged the complaint against her.
> The worker later visited the house. There, Ms. K reports (and witnesses confirm), when she further protested the interference – at one point calling police – the agent hollered at her, physically accosted her, and threatened to report her for abuse, of which, the caseworker later relented, there was no evidence.
> The secrecy that envelops these cases makes it nearly impossible to fully investigate Ms. K’s remarkable claims: caseworkers do not permit “clients,” as they’re called, to record meetings, and agencies cannot comment on any case. But the account doesn’t shock those who work closely with the authorities.
> “I’m certainly not surprised, and hear over and over again of workers … threatening [parents] with apprehension. They’ll never admit it in court, of course, but I hear it all the time,” says Bradley Spier, a Calgary family lawyer. “Most of the time they’re above board. … They all have an attitude, but they’ll do their investigation and, if they can’t substantiate it, they’re generally pretty honest about that, and won’t take any action. But until then, they’re god-like creatures, for lack of a better word. Or they think they are.”
>
> ***
>
> The government’s role in protecting vulnerable children treads an impossibly fine line. Without anonymous complaints, and the power to interview and apprehend, some children would undoubtedly suffer terribly. Accordingly, legislators grant workers astounding licence: a social work graduate, fresh from college, can enter a home without warrant; apprehend children without due process; and commandeer police officers to enforce his or her efforts. A caseworker can order children dressed, fed, medicated, and educated any way they consider appropriate. Parents who do not submit risk losing custody, even visitation of their kids. Or have them taken away permanently.
> It is an authority that is sometimes severely misused. When that happens, Ms. McKay says, families can be traumatized in a perversion of the very system designed to prevent abuse.
> The anonymous process, for example, invites bogus tips – commonly from divorcing parents, for instance, since agencies can unilaterally alter custody arrangements. Most complaints prove “unsubstantiated” : 55% according to the most recent Health Canada study.
> “Children’s Aid, even when they don’t start an investigation [themselves] , they can be manipulated by people,” says Ms. McKay.
> Prof. McKenzie says child-welfare agencies typically do good work under difficult circumstances. Overstretched caseworkers, with general training, can be unequipped to specialize in interventions and the complexities each case brings. What some, middle-class agents might consider neglect, for example, is often a matter of poverty, not necessarily cruelty.
> And some child-welfare workers also exploit their tremendous clout to behave unethically, prejudicially or illegally.
> “Some of them get a real power complex because they have a bachelor of social work, or a masters, and they suddenly have this power [to] apprehend,” says Ms. McKay. “They throw their weight around.” She sees in some workers a “police mentality.” It may be a coincidence, but in the largest English-speaking provinces, Alberta, B.C. and Ontario (Quebec data are incomplete), the number of children taken into care by provincial agencies between 1993 and 2001, rose a remarkable 97%, 63% and 72% respectively.
> Prof. McKenzie is encouraged by a nascent trend in Canadian agencies away from historic, heavier-handed investigative and apprehension focus, and toward working more co-operatively with families to improve home conditions.
> Studies show that under the current system, he says, “generally we find that the majority of children that are served [by welfare agencies] do well” – meaning they thrive at school, seem generally well-adjusted, are free from abuse and neglect. About 15% to 20%, he says, do not.
> That is not a trifling number. But the stories behind it – let alone the validity of the initial apprehensions – can prove impenetrable. Cases are shrouded in silence, media blocked from reporting details, or questioning workers, in the legitimate name of protecting children involved (even in the high-profile Winnipeg neo-Nazi case, most details were concealed). But such limits thwart public scrutiny into an arm of government as capable of error as any other, yet, in determining how much or even whether families stay together, working with some of the highest stakes imaginable.
> Last year, Ontario MPP Andrea Horwath tabled a private member’s bill to make Children’s Aid Societies answerable to the provincial ombudsman, something Ontario’s Children and Youth Services has repeatedly resisted (ombudsmen in some other provinces, such as Alberta, have that authority). Ontario’s CAS typically refuses to share files with its Child Advocate; in his annual report released earlier this year – which found 90 children in provincial care died in 2008 – Irwin Elman called it “almost impossible” to get information necessary to investigate potential agency wrongdoing. In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled parents could not sue child-welfare agencies; provinces, it ruled, owed no “duty of care” to families. The lack of oversight, says Ms. McNeil, creates departments accountable only to themselves.
> And there are numerous instances of caseworkers acting improperly. Two years ago, a Nova Scotia judge ruled that workers intervening in a divorce custody dispute were so biased against the mother, and in favour of the father – who lived with a woman previously the subject of interventions for violence and neglect – that they took “intentional and deliberate” steps to “mislead the court” by concealing evidence against him. A few years earlier, the CAS of Prescott and Russell, near Ottawa, and one worker, were convicted of contempt of court for refusing to return a two-year-old boy to his parents, defying a judge’s instructions to do so. Agents insisted they were acting in the boy’s “best interests.” In 2001, two judges in Simcoe, Ont., criticized the CAS there for “arbitrary use of government power” and unreasonableness “verging on blind obstinacy” in fighting to keep children from being adopted by certain foster parents. Several parents interviewed for this story claim to have faced A report this year from Saskatchewan’ s Children’s Advocate, Marvin Bernstein, found children suffering serious, ongoing abuse and neglect in the care of the province amidst a “culture of non-compliance with policy” among social services staff.
> Even when acting with utmost professionalism, whether agents are able to provide children a better, safer environment than where they came from is not certain.
> Mr. Bernstein’s report found staff knowingly placing children with histories of committing sexual abuse into crowded foster homes where they preyed on other kids, without alerting foster parents to the problem (one reported that a caseworker assured her “a certain amount of sexual abuse is to be expected in a foster home”). A quarter of children were placed in overcrowded homes, he found, as staff routinely used “manipulative methods” to “trick” foster parents into taking more kids than they were approved for. Two Saskatchewan caseworkers were suspended in February after being discovered shuffling children between foster homes to hide overcrowding conditions from investigators.
> “Children’s Aid has no business placing into care a child that they can foresee is going to come out worse the other end than when they went in,” Ms. McKay says. “If that’s the best they can do, just leave them.”
> Two teens charged in connection with the recent double murder near Edmonton were in care of a ministry-licensed group home – a place neighbours say they warned the government for years was poorly monitored. In March, a 15-month-old baby in care of Alberta’s Children and Youth Services suffered critical head injuries in a foster home; in the past four years, two Alberta children have been killed by foster parents. A 2008 report found Alberta caseworkers regularly placing kids in unsafe conditions, including abusive situations.
> Last year, seven-year-old Katelynn Sampson was killed in Toronto in care of a foster parent with a record of violent crimes, and in Vancouver, police discovered minors in provincial care working as prostitutes. In 2002, Jeffrey Baldwin was abused and neglected to death by a couple with a known history of child abuse but were nonetheless granted custody of the five-year-old by the Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Toronto. A 2006 CBC investigation uncovered Ontario caseworkers drugging a seven-year-old Ontario boy into a stupor with massive doses of psychotropic medications, which a psychiatrist would later find had “no actual treatment value,” except making him more compliant in his group home. While in his drugged state, he was sexually abused by fellow residents.
> Those who believe in the good intentions of child-welfare agencies argue they lack the resources to deal properly with each case; with some workers handling more than 30 clients simultaneously, it is impossible to act perfectly. One problem, believes Ms. McKay, is caseworkers spread too thin, drifting far from the original vision of the state’s role in family matters: protecting kids from verifiable and authentic abuse, cruelty and neglect.
> “They need to go back to the basics,” she says. “Do the children look well-nourished? Do they have bruises on them? Are they molested? Is the house crawling with cockroaches? If not, they’re not being abused or neglected.”
> But with powerful, generally unaccountable agencies, dependent on justifying their place in a world far improved from the cruelties of J.J. Kelso’s Victorian Toronto, the need to intervene in more cases, for more reasons, may make such discipline difficult. “I would love to just demolish the system and start from scratch again,” she says. “Because it’s gone very far awry here.”
>
> klibin@nationalpost .com
>
>
« Sudbury CAS Scum Exposed again! We need a public inquiry! BLUE RIBBON AGAINST Child Abuse – Sign Petition and tell a freind. »One Response to “Why did 90 children die?”
An Edmonton lawyer who represents hundreds of one-time foster children says a judge’s scathing comments about Alberta Children’s Services show the department is more focused on protecting itself than protecting children.
“I think that the judge has really seen how the government operates,” said Robert P. Lee, who represents more than 400 former foster children in two class-action lawsuits against the province. “It’s a bunker mentality (in Children’s Services). It’s, ‘Do whatever you can to defend yourself and deny accountability.’ ”
Lee was reacting to a decision released Thursday by Justice Jean Cote of Alberta’s Court of Appeal. In that decision, the senior judge said the department’s organization is “extremely convoluted and puzzling” with an administrative structure that creates opportunities for officials to deny responsibility. Cote also invited the attorney general to investigate the “disturbing” conduct of Children’s Services staff who failed to return a boy to his foster mother despite a court order to do so.
On June 23, Cote convicted director of child services Richard Ouellet of contempt for failing to ensure his staff obeyed the court order to return the boy.
Ouellet wanted the case reopened after his conviction, arguing that he was not directly involved with the file and the court order should have been delivered to those who were. However, Cote ruled that Ouellet was ultimately responsible for doing nothing while his staff ignored the order and tried to “wiggle out” of obeying it.
The judge also indicated that, next time, “those higher up” might have to answer for similar mistakes. Lee said he hopes the recent decision will bolster his efforts to win compensation for former foster children, especially in a class-action lawsuit that was launched in 2002. In that case, Lee is arguing the government did not have the legal right to keep about 600 kids in care, but failed to return them to their parents.
“If you read the (Cote) decision, that judge is really mad at what they’re doing and how negligent the whole system is…And so it’s very similar to our case. I think it’s almost identical. It’s a situation where the government does not have lawful authority over the child,” Lee said.
“In the recent case, they kept the child on the reserve rather than giving him back to the foster parents, and in the 600 kids’ case — in my class action–they kept custody of the kids in foster care rather than giving them back to the parents.”
Muriel Stanley Venne, president of the Institute for the Advancement of Aboriginal Women, said she hopes the recent decision forces more accountability in the department. Stanley Venne, who works with women whose children have been taken into government care, said she sees the damage done to families when decisions are dragged out in the courts.
“These are children, and they don’t stop growing,” she said.
Mr. Corruptioncentral It is my understanding that City Councils no longer sit on CAS’s board of directors since the province pay CAS’s directly.
If a councilor does it’s only because of their individual desire and not in an official capacity(this would include Ted Callahagn, Francis Calderelli, and propably a few more).
The Sudbury CAS’ are also in breach of the Child and Family Services Act for not posting the names of their board of directors or informing the public of their monthly meetings.
It is also a breach to their status to their designation as charitable organization. As you are aware they function in part as a private non-profit organization at the same time they are allowed to collect a % of their funds through donations. As a result of their actions they could lose one or both of designations for failing to comply.
Anybody can report them to
The Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA) (formerly Revenue Canada) http://www.cra- arc.gc.ca/ tx/chrts/ formspubs/ menu-eng. html
This is the government department responsible for granting organizations charitable tax status.
For further information: http://74.125. 155.132/custom? q=cache:CaqlW3vA 1GIJ:www. afterfostercare. ca/pdf/newslette r/vol1iss1. pdf+Children% 27s+aid+Societie s,+must+make+ public+the+ list+board+ of+directors+ and+members, +ontario+ canada&cd=15&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca&client=pub-16379396 2106952
How we judge judges is an injustice
By Alan Shanoff Email contact
Sun, April 19, 2009 http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/alan_shanoff/2009/04/19/9161746-sun.html
Who judges the judges? We have about 1,000 federally appointed Superior Court judges. They earn a good salary and have unsurpassed job security. Unless they retire early they are almost guaranteed a job until age 75.
That’s a good thing because we want judges to be independent. We want them to dispense justice without fear or favour to any party, including the government.
But what do we do when a judge’s conduct comes under fire? Here’s a sample of judicial conduct that has been the subject of complaints.
In 2007 British Columbia Supreme Court Judge Peter Leask repeatedly used foul language in open court in an exchange with the prosecutor. There were two references to a four-letter word beginning with “f”, a four-letter word beginning with “s” and a seven-letter word beginning with “g.”
Yves Alain, a Quebec Superior Court Justice, was convicted of impaired driving in 2007.
In 2005, Ontario Superior Court Justice Ted Matlow acted as a legal advisor to a neighbourhood group and used “intemperate” language in criticizing a development project.
Justice Mary F. Southin of the British Columbia Court of Appeal was the subject of a complaint for smoking in her office in 2003.
In the late 1990s, Ontario Superior Court Justice Paul Cosgrove presided over a criminal trial and made more than 100 erroneous rulings. He allowed the trial to turn into a “three-ring circus” and abused his contempt powers.
In 1998, Mr. Justice Frank Barakett of the Superior Court of Quebec made comments derogatory to Aboriginal culture.
In 1995, during a sentencing proceeding, Quebec Superior Court Judge Jean Bienvenue made sexist comments and minimized the suffering of Holocaust victims.
Before being appointed a judge, then mayor of Sudbury, Leo Landreville, received a large gift from a company which had business dealings with the city. The gift was discovered after his appointment to the bench.
Another judge sentenced an elderly aboriginal woman to jail on a contempt charge. She was in fragile health and died shortly after the sentencing.
Of all these cases only Cosgrove, Landreville and Bienvenue resigned after their conduct was deemed serious enough to justify termination and be referred to Parliament. The others remain as judges.
The Canadian Judicial Council consists of 39 judges. These are the cream of the cream, chief justices and associate chief justices. They ultimately decide whether a Superior Court judge’s conduct should be brought to Parliament for a vote on dismissal.
The number of complaints made against judges has increased from 145 in 1998-99 to 189 in 2007-08. There have been about 3,000 complaints since 1971. Remarkably, only seven complaints have resulted in public hearings and only four judges were deemed worthy of being brought before Parliament.
The reason so few complaints lead to a public hearing is in part due to the fact that most complaints are misguided.
There is no point in filing a complaint over the specifics of a decision. Judges are allowed to make mistakes. They are allowed to render erroneous decisions. They sometimes misapprehend the law. Sometimes they don’t get the facts right. No judge has perfect insight into whether witnesses are lying or telling the truth.
No dismissal
The general rule is a judge’s decision should be appealed and cannot lead to dismissal, whereas only a judge’s conduct may lead to dismissal. Conduct that can bring the judiciary into disrepute or lead to an irrevocable loss of public confidence in the judge’s abilities may lead to dismissal.
Serious judicial incompetence certainly brings the judiciary into disrepute and can lead to a loss of confidence in a judge’s abilities yet the CJC has never ruled that judicial incompetence can lead to dismissal. While that may one day take place, it is very close to disciplining a judge for an erroneous decision and that is a door judges don’t want to open.
The real issue for me is who should judge our judges.
While I agree with the CJC decisions I’ve read, I am uncomfortable in any situation where members of a group judge other members of the group. We are naturally sceptical about any self-regulating or self-investigating body.
It isn’t enough for the CJC to consult with outside sources. It’s time for some non-judicial members to sit with the CJC
The History and Evolution of the Western Feminist Movement:
The first wave of feminism evolved over the centuries, becoming more active and visible in the late 1800s, generally wanting basic equality in terms of being recognized as a “person”, voting rights, as well as property rights. The second wave pushed again for more complete equality in the 1960s. The main causes focused on employment equity, the family, and related issues. An outcrop of the second wave that developed in the late 1960s were the radical Marxists Socialist Feminist; this strain of ideology took hold and began co-opting the entire feminist movement in the late 1970s (probably around 1978) morphing into the 3rd wave. The second wave saw men more as partners and inviting them to take on more equal roles in the home, childcare, and related domestic issues. The key here is balance and equality.
The third wave feminists arose along side the “shelter movement” and eventually gained a foothold in the 1980s. This Marxist Socialist more radical third wave was like the second wave of the French Revolution in the late 1700s (i.e., executing the revolutionaries and taking over), pushing people like Senator Cools and Erin Pizzey out of the movement as being too moderate and not militant enough. Third wavers began to see men and boys as, at least, potential abusers who were/are the enemy. The main agenda of third wave feminists was a bifurcated effort in both shelters and academe. The shelters were looking for continued financing and creating what is now a “shelter industry”.
Academics in Women’s studies and related disciplines produced domestic violence research, parenting research, and related studies. Gaining power and finances in order to create favourable (to the third wave) definitions of the family, violence, and related issues are important projects for both groups in this wave. The third wave saw the family as their sphere of academic influence in terms of how mothering, fathering, the family, and other related issues should be defined.
The pro-feminist movement (third wave feminist men) facilitated definitions of masculinity, fathering, and related issues, which managed masculinity and created limitations for men as opposed to partnerships. Equality has been removed in terms of the Fatherhood Involvement Movement, which encourages certain men (usually part of intact families) to behave in diminutive parenting roles. This movement does not really promote the inclusion of separated and divorced fathers, especially those in the Fathers’ Rights Movement (FRM).
Instead, this “involvement” movement distances itself from the FRM, leaving fathers (and some mothers) outside the parenting equation, only adding in fathers that are taking what they deem to be their version of an ideologically pro-feminist fathering stance.
Ideologically, the third wave (feminists and pro-feminists) is generally adversarial, seeing men and boys as abusers or potential abusers, fathers as disposable, promoting forms of misandry (in the media), and being more interested in managing masculinity (and femininity), and not really trying to strike an equitable balance that favours children, the family, the common good.
GUESS WHO WAS SITTING ON SUDBURY CHILDREN’S AID BOARD OF DIRECTORS???
North Bay/Sturgeon Falls
Louise Lacroix Gauthier
278 Salter Street
Sturgeon Falls, ON. P2B 2T6
Tel: 705-753-5678
E-mail: loulacro@personainternet.com Back to Top
Sudbury
Judith Krasuski
349 Albinson Street
Sudbury, ON. P3C 3W4
Tel: 705-673-2942
Fax: 705-675-7091
E-mail: judith.krasuski@gmail.com
William Rowe
108 Roxborough Drive
Sudbury, ON. P3E 1J7
Tel: 705-673-4649
E-mail: b.rowe@persona.ca
This is heart-breaking but it isn’t only happening to soldiers. Men were-and still are-committing suicide because they don’t have access to their kids and/or have too little money left to live with. It’s a huge problem – one that you hardly ever hear about in the media. When I was doing research in 1999 – 2000, two cops, one in Calgary and one in Edmonton, were living in their vehicles because most of their reasonably good salaries were going to child support. I interviewed a lot of men who were paying child support-sometimes exorbitant amounts! – but were not getting access to their kids. With a couple of exceptions, these were honest, decent, hard-working men who loved their kids. Often they were not only paying child support but for court cases to try and get access to their kids. One man had been back to court 32 times ! Few things get solved until the public understands that not only is it a huge problem but it’s one that could hit their own families. If a father – or rarely, a mother – loses access to his/her children, so does the extended family. It’s devastating for children to lose half their total family members, especially when it’s a parent doing it for her/his own usually selfish reasons. This kind of hurt and grief and death will only stop when people demand it end.”
TRANSCRIPTS FROM TRIAL ON NOVEMBER 23, 2000, THE SAME WEEK OF 3 PARKING TICKETS WHICH
WERE PAID AND MYSTERIOUSLY RE-APPEARRED 10 YEARS LATER ON OCTOBER 2009. MOXAM’S PROMOTION ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 IS FROM THE TRAFFIC DIVISION. http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1755144
SGT. CRAIG MOXAM: SWORN JUNE 4, 2002
EXAMINATION-IN-CHEIF-BY MR.ABBOTT BEFORE JUDGE A.L. GAUY SUDBURY ONTARIO
CROWN. For what purposes do you need to refer to your notes if at all? (notes Moxam took of incindent).
MOXAM. Just to refresh my memory of the events that evening. I do have an independant recollection of the events that night.
VICTIM. (addressing Judge) Sir, I have to say I believe his (Moxam) interest to be more than somewhat normal nthan in other cases. You are aware of the past charges against me that have been dismissed or withdrawn for lack of evidence?
JUDGE. Believe me, I’m not aware of any of that,and even if I’ve heard of them, I have probably forgotten them by this point.
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL (After 14 different charges dismised over 4 years, thought I would have been somewhat known to local judges)
CROWN. I don’t know how Mr. xxx came to that conclusion.
VICTIM. Given the fact, Sir that the Crown’s first witness changed her story SEVEN times while under oath.
JUDGE. At the end of the Crown’s case, sometimes defense brings a motion to dismiss, but not while the evedence is still coming in. Follow me there?
JUDGE. The notes are now qualified.
CROWN. Now, can you tell me what happened that first got you involved in this matter?
MOXAM. That particular evening–I was assigned to Criminal Investigation Division, general assignment, general duties. I observed Constable O’Malley walk away from the vehecle. I believe it was Sergent Maki who was in another postion where he had an observation point of Constable O’Malley.
CROWN. As we approached, you say she was walking away.
MOXAM. Yes.
CROWN. Now when you say “we”, you were with Constable….
MOXAM. I was with Zembrzycki. Constable Zembrzycki approached the driver’s side and I stayed in the car to provide cover. I watched him approach and speak with the accused. I didn.t go right up to the vehicle. I was 15 feet away.
CROWN. Court’s Indulgence. So at any point were you at the vehicle?
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL (COURT’S INDULGENCE = CODE WORD?)
MOXAM. Yes I heard Constable Zembrzycki adise him of his rights and rights to councel. He was turned over to me and I escorted him to the car. He was loud, combative and arguementive. I believed at that point he was under influence of alcohol.
CROWN. As a result of “forming” that belief what did you do.
MOXAM. I demanded a breath sample.
CROWN. Now you told us you had a very difficult time reading demand to the accused? Could you explain why?
MOXAM. The accused was very combative and arguementive…he wasn’t listening to the demand as I was ging it to him.
CROWN. Before we go further Sir, I don’t know if you recall….
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL (Hmmm)
JUDGE. There was a ruling made.
CROWN. I was just planning on eliciting all the statements on the basis of that ruling.
JUDGE. Its in the ruling.
CROWN. You will have heard, Officer, that we’re going to come to the actual things that he was saying to you.
MOXAM. Alright.
CROWN. Before I do that though, I wanted to ask, before I forget, prior to the demand but in the period after the accused was turned over to you, how co-operative was he?
MOXAM. Prior to him being turned over to me?
CROWN. No. Up until the point you read him the demand.
MOXAM. I would say that he–he probably–I mean, heco-o perated. He didn’t resist in any waywhen-he was placed under arrest, or when he was turned over to me, or as I was escorting him back to the car. He came along with me voluntarily. He wasn’t resisting in any way.
CROWN. OK but you said he got combative and arguemntive as demand being read?
Moxam. Yes in the car. Thats when discussion heated up.
CROWN. OK, Why don’t you describe the discussion you had with accused?
MOXAM (Repeats all of the above) Believes Sgy Maki secured vehicle Does quote one word that I said during “discussion” but instead, gives his version. In the booking room says I was loud and causing commotion, but doesn’t repeat a word that I allegedley said. Moxam also tesified to the booking area being recorded. I made requets for this video tape for the next day of trial. Of course the video was conviently unavailable or destroyed because…..
CROWN. Can you tell me how many times you told him of his–he was told, to your knowledge, of his rights to contact a lawyer?
MOXAM. Oh, I would have told him, and he was directed to signs in booking area. So at least three times. I’m uncertain if–I believe, also, at the side of his vehicle when he placed under arrest.
CROWN. Did you have any conversation with the accused while you were in station?
MOXAM. I may have. I don’t have any notations that I did.
CROWN. Now, you say you’ve been an officer for just over fifteen years?
MOXAM. Yes.
CROWN. Was the accused ever out of your site?
MOXAM. No.
CROWN. And you told us that you stayed handy as the demand was recorded? During the demand we stayed nearby.
MOXAM. Yes. There is always two copies made. A master copy and as slave copy. The slave ccopy is forwarded to th Crown’s office for disclosure purposes and the master copy is sealed for evidence.
CROWN. Does that tape accurately portry what happened when the demand was given?
MOXAM. Yes.
CROWN. The courts indulgence. Now Sgt. Moxam, the accused seemed to be speaking to someone else?
MOXAM. I believe he was talking to me. I was standing out of the camera’s view with Sgt. Zembrzycki.
CROWN. No can you compare for me how the conduct that we’ve just seen on the tape was in comparison to the conduct you earlier reffered to?
MOXAM. It was a bit more reserved. Upon his arrival, the officer in charge brought his attention that the area was being recorded.
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL (Note that this tape conviently disappeared).
CROWN. Following this evening after his arrest, can you tell me what efforts if any you made to obtain a copy of that video tape?
MOXAM. Yes that evening, when I was completeing the paper work and crown breif, I completed a request form from our Technical Support Branch to make a copy for me. I checked with Technical Support on January 2001 and was advised that the copy had not yet been completed. And some time shortly after that in the spring of 2001, the officer that was assigned to that division resigned from our police services and the replacement officer made attemopts to locate a tape, if any that was made by the previous officer and came up with negative results on that–in that effort, so I have NO tape to provide to the court.
CROWN. Why do you think that tape would have been relevant to your investigation?
MOXAM. It would have should everything I said about the accused demenour.
CROSS EXAMINATION OF SGT. MOXAM BY THE VICTIM
VICTIM. Were you the senior officer at my arrest?
MOXAM. No, I was the–Constable Zembrzycki is senior to me.
VICTIM. Yes but you have authority over him, you are a sergeant?
Moxam. I have rank. Thats correct. In terms of who was in charge, Inspector Markiewich was in charge. Constable Zembrzycki and I worked together providing cover for Constable O’Malley. We were working as a team. I was not in charge of anyone.
JUDGE. If Sergent Moxam had gone out and committed a theft under, that would be irrelevant to what he was doing that night. That would be another matter.
VICTIM. Well Sir, what is relevant with the restraining order against Moxam is that it-it–its shows his demeanour in persecuting people simply because of their name or in my case being arrested 14 times only to have the charges withdrawn or dismissed. MIn fact the day I was arrested I had just had another charge dismissed! There was a restaining that was issued against Sergant Moxam.
JUDGE. Again the problem is it demands that we accept certain premises and its a very difficult thing to establish. Your contention is that you were discriminated or entrapped that night. Well you can call—have such a person, you can call them. All you can do this witness is say ” Do you know me?
VICTIM. Well I can bring in a copy of the restraining order.
CROWN. Well actually Sir you can’t, thats a collateral issue.
VICTIM. Well then Sergant Moxam is lieing on the stand.
CROWN. I’m speaking now. This is a collateral issue. The witness is entitled to answer the question. If the answer is “no there is no restaraining order against Sergent Moxam, the victim is stuck with it.
VICTIM. Where is the justice?
CROWN. The law in collateral issues is perfectly clear.
VICTIM. Where is the justice Sir? If he says “No” and I bring in a copy…this guy is allowed to lie on the stand.
JUDGE. Remember the copy you may bring in may say that a certain person was not allowed to have anything to do with another person. but again the difficulty you have is tying that into your case. And remember, if yo’re going to prove that, it can’t be—Well its with difficulty you could prove by calling somebody to say they have restarining order against Sergant Moxam. You’ld have to have some type of—Presumably, if you could show the order.
VICTIM. Yes I will try.
CROWN. For the record Sir, I object just so the victim is not taken aback
JUDGE. Alright he answered no, he is not the subject of a restraining order against a citizen. Thats his answer
VICTIM. Who gave you the call?
MOXAM. I believe it was Sergant Maki
VICTIM. Where was he?
MOXAM. I don’t know.
VICTIM. Where was Constable O’Maley?
MOXAM I seen her walking away from drivers side door.
VICTIM. O’Malley said she attended the drivers side, and therefore would have had to walk away from the drivers sie.
MOXAM. I dont know what she said I can only tell you wat I saw.
VICTIM. What is your definition of combative?
MOXAM. Combative is someone who takes an opposite position to you and who escalates a situation to the point of an argument or to the point of being the opposite.
VICTIM. Is that what you use to describe someone that doesn’y agree with you?
MOXAM. Well, the activity that was taking place prior to the demand was combative. (missing tape).
VICTIM. How very convenient because I put an application in to obtain that video. and the police don’t have it?
MOXAM. Thats right and I.ve testified to
VICTIM. And theres a little episode in the video you do have…which shows me very calm, cool, and collected. Is this what you describe as combative? Where is the vulgarity you claimed?
MOXAM. I never used the term vulgarity, Constable Punkkinen did.
VICTIM. You said you made a request fir the booking in video where I was allegedly combative?
MOXAM. Yes.
VICTIM. What was the date? January something?
MOXAM. No. This was — I think I said that I requetsed it that night, but I see now its dated the Novemebr 27th 2000. I followed that up on the 10th of January and attended in the Technical Support Branch and was advised by the officer that the tape was not yet completed.
JUDGE. They have not completed it yet, meaning they haven’t made a copy.
VICTIM. When I put my application in for the videoit went from 6 months from november 23, 2000 and 6 months to the day when they finally told me that they only keep videos for 6 months. Now if this was made in January, two months later, they still said it was not completed yet and they keep for 6 months,they still would have had it when I requested it.
JUDGE. So the point being?
VICTIM. The point being that this should have been made aware to me.
CROWN. Frankly, its the first time I saw it today, and he may have apoint. It ought to have been disclosed.In my respectful submission, nothing turns on it.
JUDGE. They never did prepare it obviously. That was the difficulty, the police and crown never got it. Everybody wanted it. And technical Services didn’t produce it.
VICTIM. Another example of incplete disclosure.
CROWN. The victim can characterize it as he wishes
JUDGE. Yes. I don’t think—-Well I’m not going to rule on what the document means. What it seems to mean is that of January the copy hadn’t been made yet, and we know from prior evidence that it was destroyed six months from the November date. So it was still in existenceat the time. It just never got done.
VICTIM. Another coincidence. I was calm cool nd collected through the entire proceedure.
MOXAM. as I indicted inmy evidence earlier, you remained handcuffed throughout the proceedure.
VICTIM. Where was I when you gave me the papers for “increased penelty”? You said I ripped them up?
MOXAM. You were sitting adjacent to the bench we seen in the video.
VICTIM. Handcuffed?
MOXAM. Yes.
VICTIM. How was I able to rip up those documents while handcuffed?
MOXAM. The handcuffs were removed.
VICTIM. Non of the papers were signed by me. I couldn’t sign. I was handcuffed from the back.
MOXAM. No I don’t believe you were handcuffed at that point. I’ll just refer to my notes. I didn’t take the handcuffs off you myself. I don’t know who did.
VICTIM. Well, you said the handcuffs would have been removed when I was offered to sign the papers?
MOXAM. Thats correct
VICTIM. So you served me the papers when I was handcuffed?
MOXAM. No thats not what I’m saying.
VICTIM. You served me the papers and someone else took off the handcuffs is that what you’re saying?
MOXAM. Someone else must have taken them off because I don’t recall taking them off. I served you with the papers and you tore them up.
VICTIM. Handcuffed in the back of course?
MOXAM. My notes do not say that, so your handcuffs obviously had to be removed prior to that.
VICTIM. Do you recall me asking for a phonebook to call a lawyer?
MOXAM. No.
VICTIM. I guess it would have been on that video that we conveniently never recieved.
MOXAM. I guess it would be on file somewhere. I know I took steps to try to get that video tape and it was my best intentions to obtain that tape and provide it to the crown. And do to whatever circumstance, I wasnt able to retrieve that myself to disclose it, and I can’t explain to you what happened to that video other than to say that the individual that was assigned to that division has resigned from the police service.
(CONTINUED CROSS-EXAMINATION OF SGT CRAIG MOXAM SEPTEMBER 30, 2002 BEFORE JUSTICE A.L. GAUY SUDBURY ONTARIO)
Loading ...
Judges that are spineless, with no ability to uphold the oath they swore to. Passing the responsibility of making decisions to unqualified people so as not to interfere in their “friends” livlihoods.They turn a blind eye to what is clearly before them. Shame on you!
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Lawyers are more than willing to defend child molesters and incompetant self serving social workers…They set their morals aside..(if they have any) to line their own pockets!! The legal proffession and the CAS’s credibility is the lowest ever. How far will Society allow the morals and ethics in our Justice System to plumet? Action is needed now!!
If these people are accepting of public money on pay day … They should be held accountable to the people. Delay and avioding accountability is an outright abuse!
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Needs lessons in meaning of Good Faith.
Our Government and society as a whole needs a lesson in the meaning of “good faith”. Good faith, or in Latin bona fides, is the mental and moral state of honesty, conviction as to the truth or falsehood of a proposition or body of opinion, or as to the rectitude or depravity of a line of conduct, even if the conviction is objectively unfounded. This concept is important in law and in “life”. How can we see a Judge who relinquishes his or her judgement and responsibility to a third party as having “good faith”? Or a children’s Lawyer who doesn’t take time to understand a childs situation? Or doctors who prescribe maximum dosages of Ritalin to young children with no medical test being performed,prescriptions that are written at the “mothers” request. Case workers that are fool enough to state a child would be better off not having their Father in their life. The only fault having been found against the Father was him asking his Son too many questions about his life! Its a disgrace that the only one true person in this childs life that truly cares about his well being, and that doesn’t see the child as a meal ticket..is being forced from his life.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
It is very alarming that a Doctor would prescribe a drug such as Ritalin with out extensive test being conducted first. There are test in place that can determine if a child has a medical need for this drug or if the parent is the one in need of a parenting course or other professional help.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Independent oversight by the Ombudsman or any other organization would be movement in the right direction… FATHER’S PRAYER
You may not know me, but I know everything about you. Psalm 139:1Â Â
I know when you sit down and when you rise up. Psalm 139:2
I am familiar with all your ways. Psalm 139:3
Even the very hairs on your head are numbered. Matthew 10:29-31
For you were made in my image. Genesis 1:27
In me you live and move and have your being. Acts 17:28
For you are my offspring. Acts 17:28
I knew you even before you were conceived. Jeremiah 1:4-5
I chose you when I planned creation. Ephesians 1:11-12
You were not a mistake, for all your days are written in my book. Psalm 139:15-16
I determined the exact time of your birth and where you would live. Acts 17:26
You are fearfully and wonderfully made. Psalm 139:14
I knit you together in your mother’s womb. Psalm 139:13
And brought you forth on the day you were born. Psalm 71:6
I have been misrepresented by those who don’t know me. John 8:41-44
I am not distant and angry, but am the complete expression of love. 1 John 4:16
And it is my desire to lavish my love on you. 1 John 3:1
Simply because you are my child and I am your Father. 1 John 3:1
I offer you more than your earthly father ever could. Matthew 7:11
For I am the perfect father. Matthew 5:48
Every good gift that you receive comes from my hand. James 1:17
For I am your provider and I meet all your needs. Matthew 6:31-33
My plan for your future has always been filled with hope. Jeremiah 29:11
Because I love you with an everlasting love. Jeremiah 31:3
My thoughts toward you are countless as the sand on the seashore. Psalms 139:17-18
And I rejoice over you with singing. Zephaniah 3:17
I will never stop doing good to you. Jeremiah 32:40
For you are my treasured possession. Exodus 19:5
I desire to establish you with all my heart and all my soul. Jeremiah 32:41
And I want to show you great and marvelous things. Jeremiah 33:3
If you seek me with all your heart, you will find me. Deuteronomy 4:29
Delight in me and I will give you the desires of your heart. Psalm 37:4
For it is I who gave you those desires. Philippians 2:13
I am able to do more for you than you could possibly imagine. Ephesians 3:20
For I am your greatest encourager. 2 Thessalonians 2:16-17
I am also the Father who comforts you in all your troubles. 2 Corinthians 1:3-4
When you are brokenhearted, I am close to you. Psalm 34:18
As a shepherd carries a lamb, I have carried you close to my heart. Isaiah 40:11
One day I will wipe away every tear from your eyes. Revelation 21:3-4
And I’ll take away all the pain you have suffered on this earth. Revelation 21:3-4
I am your Father, and I love you even as I love my son, Jesus. John 17:23
For in Jesus, my love for you is revealed. John 17:26
He is the exact representation of my being. Hebrews 1:3
He came to demonstrate that I am for you, not against you. Romans 8:31
And to tell you that I am not counting your sins. 2 Corinthians 5:18-19
Jesus died so that you and I could be reconciled. 2 Corinthians 5:18-19
His death was the ultimate expression of my love for you. 1 John 4:10
I gave up everything I loved that I might gain your love. Romans 8:31-32
If you receive the gift of my son Jesus, you receive me. 1 John 2:23
And nothing will ever separate you from my love again. Romans 8:38-39
Come home and I’ll throw the biggest party heaven has ever seen. Luke 15:7
I have always been Father, and will always be Father. Ephesians 3:14-15
My question is..Wilyou be my child? John 1:12-13
I am waiting for you. Luke 15:11-32
Love,-ALMIGHTY GOD Used by permission Father Heart Communications Copyright 1999-2006 http://www.FathersLoveLetter.com
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Could it be the Government has been overrun by radical feminists who are planning to take over Canada by throwing all fathers in jail or to place them in those new jails for Dads and their children called supervised access centres? It’s time to put these civil servants back in their place. Canadians are fed up.
Why does this Liberal Government see fit to fund an organization that feels primary objective on addressing needs of children is to take them away from their Fathers?
Liberal Government upholding CAS in tactic to seize children from their Fathers to obtain control of population.
our rights and freedom to raise and protect our children are being taken away. Government refuses to make power tripping CAS accountable for unproven and unjustified alligations in an attempt to control our children.
CAS workers are systomatic of an ideology that is anti-family leading to total loss of freedom.
CAS- out of control, Court oblivious to CAS”S guesses,exaggerations and out right lies on court documents.
Elected Officials believe our rights as Fathers are something they grant to us and can be taken away.our rights are inalienable,and not removable at governments whims.
Political Officials communicate and conduct business amongst themselves and it is critical that they ensure accountability and authenticity to their constituents.
When children fight back at loss of Father, government see’s fit to drug child in an attempt to make child forget he has a Father.
Obolish CAS and create agency accountable that does not intimidate Government.
Stop the CAS power tripping.
Make CAS accountable.
Who has control/ CAS or Harper Government.
If CAS in control of Canada make it public knowlege.
We do not need A Government that is intimadated by CAS.
Courts lead by nose by CAS.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Mary had a little Lamb,
His fleece was white as snow.
And everywhere that Mary went,
The Lamb was sure to go.
He followed her to school each day,
T’wasn’t even in the rule.
It made the children laugh and play, To have a Lamb at school.
And then the rules all changed one day,
Illegal it became;
To bring the Lamb of God to school,
Or even speak His Name!
Every day got worse and worse,
And days turned into years.
Instead of hearing children laugh,
We heard gun shots and tears.
What must we do to stop the crime,
That’s in our schools today?
Let’s let the Lamb come back to school
And teach our kids to pray!
It is said that 86% of Canadian,
American & British people believe in God.
Why don’t we just ask the other 14% to be quiet and sit down
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Remember the 11 th commandment
“love one another”
New Testament
Two Choices
What would you do?….you make the choice. My question is: Would you have made the same choice? “When not interfered with by outside influences, everything nature does is done with perfection. Yet my son, Shay, cannot learn things as other children do. He cannot understand things as other children
do. Where is the natural order of things in my son?” The audience was stilled by the query. The father continued. “I believe, that when a child like Shay,physically and mentally handicapped comes into the world, an
opportunity to realize true human nature presents itself, and it comes in the way other people treat that child.”Then h told the following story: Shay and his father had walked past a park where some boys Shay knew were playing baseball. Shay asked, “Do you think they’ll let me play?” Shay’s father knew that most of the boys would not want someone like Shay on their team, but the father also understood that if his son were allowed to play, it would give him a >>much-needed sense of belonging and some confidence to be accepted by others in spite of his handicaps. Shay’s father approached one of the boys on the field and asked (not expecting much) if Shay could play. The boy looked around for guidance and said, “We’re losing by six runs and the game is in the eighth inning. I guess he can be on our team and we’ll try to put him in to bat in the ninth inning.” Shay struggled over to the team’s bench and, with a broad smile, put on a team shirt. His Father watched with a small tear in his eye and warmth in his heart. The boys saw the father’s joy at his son being accepted. In the bottom of the eighth inning, Shay’s team scored a few runs but was still behind by three. In the top of the ninth inning, Shay put on a glove and played in the right field. Even though no hits came his way, he was obviously ecstatic just to be in the game and on the field, grinning from ear to ear as his
father waved to him from the stands. In the bottom of the ninth inning, Shay’s team scored again. Now, with two outs and the bases loaded, the potential winning run was on base and Shay was scheduled to be next at bat. At this juncture, do they let Shay bat and give away their chance
to win the game? Surprisingly, Shay was given the bat. Everyone knew that a hit was all but impossible bec a use Shay didn’t even know how to hold the bat properly, much less connect with the ball. However, as Shay stepped up to the plate, the pitcher, recognizing that the other team was putting winning aside for this moment in Shay’s life, moved in a few steps to lob the ball in softly so Shay could at least make contact. The first pitch came and Shay swung clumsily and missed. The pitcher again took a few steps forward to toss the ball softly towards Shay. As the pitch came in, Shay swung at the ball and hit a slow ground ball right back to the pitcher. The game would now be over. The pitcher picked up the soft grounder and could have easily thrown the ball to the first baseman. Shay would have been out and that would have been the end of the game. Instead, the pitcher threw the ball right over the first baseman’s head, out of reach of all team mates. Everyone from the stands and both teams started Yelling, “Shay, run to first! Run to first!” Never in his life had Shay ever run that far, but he made it to first base. He scampered down the baseline, wide-eyed and startled. Everyone yelled, “Run to second, run to second!” Catching his breath, Shay awkwardly ran towards second, gleaming and struggling to make it to the base. By the time Shay rounded towards second base, the right fielder had the ball … the smallest guy on their team who now had his first chance to be the hero for his team. He could have thrown the ball to the second-baseman for the tag, but he understood the pitcher’s intentions so he, too, intentionally
threw the ball high and far over the third-baseman’s head. Shay ran toward third base deliriously as the runners ahe ad of him circled
the bases toward home. All were screaming , “Shay, Shay, Shay, all the Way Shay” Shay reached third base because the opposing shortstop ran to help him by turning him in the direction of third base, and shouted, “Run to third! Shay, run to third!”As Shay rounded third, the boys from both teams, and the spectators, were on their feet screaming, “Shay, run home! Run home!” Shay ran to home, stepped on the plate, and was cheered as the hero who hit the grand slam and won the game for his team. “That day”, said the father softly with tears now rolling down his face, “the boys from both teams helped bring a piece of true love and humanity into this world”.
Shay didn’t make it to another summer. He died that winter, having never forgotten being the hero and making his father so happy, and coming home and seeing his Mother tearfully embrace her little hero of the day!
AND NOW A LITTLE FOOTNOTE TO THIS STORY: when it comes to sending messages about life choices, people hesitate. The crude, vulgar, and often obscene pass freely through cyberspace,but public discussion about decency is too often suppressed in our schools and workplaces. We believes that we all can make a difference. We all have thousands of opportunities every single day to help realize the “natural order of things.” So many seemingly trivial interactions between two people present us with a choice: Do we pass along a little spark of love and humanity or do we pass up those opportunities and leave the world a little bit colder in the process? A wise man once said every society is judged by how it treats it’s least fortunate amongst them.
Annonmous
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
A lawyer is a person who thrives by creating confusion, Or when that is impossible, they profit by the confusion. In either case, confusion is their stock and trade. The wider the gap a lawyer can create between accountability and justice the more they profit.
The lawyer’s lucrative monopoly gives him an incentive to create obstacles to the smooth functioning of the life of ordinary people. Through their dominance of politics, the bureaucracy, and their monopoly over litigation, lawyers have insinuated themselves into every human relationship. Lawyers such as JJ Paquette (1kelopaq) and Patricia Meehan are no more than rapist of Society bleeding this government dry with their never ending self righteous, on accountable demands on unsuspecting parents. Any parent that would knowingly subject their children to this team of “Lawyers” may just as well give their children drugs and send them to an orgy. Family Court is Broken,corrupt and completely biased.
They are all about the Money,power and Ego’s and not about our children.
It is not in the Best Interest of the children, it is all about best interest of the lawyers and the easiest solution for judges driven by decades of sexual prejudice and Money. They willing stake their reputation backing which ever parent they foresee as being the biggest “meal ticket” . Nothing more than Society’s “puppy mill” of generating more profit for themselves. In a court of morals lawyers such as these would be stripped of their power and be made to endure the injustice they have so willingly subjected on others.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Gerald Broiullette October 22 2007
Elizabeth Broiullette-Schmitz
Against my advice, you argued why other claims against the CAS and access were not within the law. The CAS can make their own argument in superior court which is the accountability level that our children everywhere deserve! Why should their care be entrusted to only a “selected few” who are not accountable to anyone? Hennessy’s decisions have been questioned before by others. Many have resulted in sub-standard social policies for this community. Her removal of the conference briefs from the public record in Superior court today and putting your “argument” on the endorsement sheet for herself later this week is no surprise to me or others. I think its clear why Justice Hennessy insisted on being the judge to hear the motion. She had NO intention of bringing any accountability to Ontario’s Children’s Aid Societys
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Her decision released Nov11/07 is why she insisted hearing this months before and Brouillette is just another willing participatant
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
ccc2
GOVERNMENT KIDNAPPING OUR CHILDREN! (HOW THEY DO IT)
JANUARY 5/05 IN REPLY, PLEASE REFER TO: JEAN JACQUES PAQUETTE
Dear XXXXXX Re: CAS and XXXXX
.
The Society has received an opinion from the child’s mental health service provider, Dr. Milne, that access is detrimental to the child. The child has now, during the visit, threatened a worker,
Jean Jacgue Paquette
cc Jean O’Connor
Candice Poulin
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL NOTE :Milne’s opinion was from information provided by CAS and by an estranged parent. She will not consider alternatives to Ritalin. Who is advocating for the use of these drugs CAS,Milne,Government. http://www.ritalindeath.com/Adderall-Pulled-in-Canada.htm
A list of the most common symptoms of emotional discomfiture of children; those which bother teachers and parents most, and in a stroke that could not be more devoid of science or Hippocratic motive–termed them a ‘disease.’ Twenty five years of research, not deserving of the term ‘research., has failed to validate ADD/ADHD as a disease. Tragically–the “epidemic” having grown from 500 thousand in 1985 to between 5 and 7 million today–this remains the state of the ’science’ of ADHD.”). The governments newly created board to deal with com-plaints from parents who’s children have been kidnapped and drugged is much like the governments newly created CAS complaints board. All members are carefully selected and appointed ensuring that the outcome always favors the government and their service providers! This is not independent accountability!
Premier ,Ontario
Legislative Building Queen’s Park Toronto, Ontario M7A 1A1
December 2, 2005
Dear Mr. XXXX
Thank you for writing to me. Your concerns are important to me.
I value your views and appreciate the issues you raised. However, I am unable to specifically address the concerns you highlighted in your correspondence, as it would be inappropriate for me, as Premier, to comment.
I note that you have also written to my colleague, the Honourable Michael Bryant, Attorney General. He or ministry staff will respond to you. _
Dalton McGuinty Premier
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL NOTE : More Liberal Hypocrisy. They will use any means necessary to achieve their ends, legal or illegal. They have no morals, ethics, or conscience. They form “ghost boards” to self investigate “themselves”. All in an attempt to continue their no accountability governing ways. They are not beneath kidnapping young children, whether it be by cutting their biological parent from the child’s life or by drugging them with Ritalin so they become more compliant.
The Liberal Government fully protects the CAS, drug company’s and Doctors with no accountability to anyone.They form review boards, appeal boards etc that do no more than make dust..all in an attempt to give the allusion that they actually are accountable and are doing anything. These “Boards” don’t have the authority to even sweep the floor without first getting the Liberal “nod”.
Our children are being used to generate more make work projects. seems our children had less problems mentally,physically and emotionally before these people took control.
FEB.2/06
The Law Society of Upper Canada
Osgoode Hall 130 Queen Street West Toronto, Ontario M5H 2N6
tel 416-947-3300 February 2, 2006
Dear Mr. XXXXX
Re: Our File Number XXXX
I am writing in response to your letters dated December 13, 2005, and January 30, 2006, and your email dated January 14, 2006.
The Law Society has no jurisdiction to intervene in this matter.
You told us that Mr. Paquette represents the Children’s Aid Society (”CAS”) and that it was not in his interest to settle the matter. You had concerns about the positions he took on behalf of his client Kinsley, Poulin, Beavais, O’Conner, Cullain etc./
Your concerns fall outside-of our jurisdiction. The Judge encouraged Mr.Paquette to record the supervised access visits, but he did not. The Judge encouraged Mr. Paquette to arrange a visit through someone other than the CAS, but he did not.
Many of your concerns relate to the CAS and the social workers employed by the CAS, and as we have no jurisdiction over the CAS or their employees, I will not comment on those issues.
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL NOTE : (no accountability)
Jan.7/07
Ontario
Ministry of the
Attorney General
Office of the
Children’s Lawyer
04 January 2007
VIA MAIL:
DearXXXX
Re: File No: XXXXX
I am writing in response to your telephone call of January 3, 2007 to the Deputy Minister’s Office. My review of your file shows that your complaint has been thoroughly dealt with and we are refusing your request to remove your son’s current legal representative.
Clare E. Burns
The Children’s Lawyer, Ministry of the Attorney General, M. Bryant
Please be advised that we will not communicate further with you concerning this complaint.
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL NOTE : (kidnapping)
PATRICIA L. MEEHAN CHILDREN’S LAWYER 293 Elm Street West, Sudbury, Ontario P3C 1V6
Mr.XXX
Dear Sirs:
Re: CAS AND XXXX
I will no longer accept letter, packages, gifts, etc… for XXXX as of April 30,2007.
In the future, we will no longer return to you items forwarded. Rather they will be thrown out, regretfully.
DO NOT SEND OR BRING ANYTHING TO MY OFFICE FOR XXXX
Yours very truly,
for_, PATRICIA L. MEEHAN
Ministry of Community and Social Services
Ministry of Children
and Youth Services
Tel: (416)325-6340
Mr. XXXX Novemeber 23, 2007
Dear Mr. XXXX
Thank you for your letter requesting a meeting with the Honourable Deb Matthews, Minister of Children and Youth Services, regarding your situation.
As you know, the Minister is unable to discuss matters related to an individual case, particularly those currently before the courts. Therefore, no meeting can be scheduled at this time. I regret that the ministry cannot be of further assistance to you in this matter.
Sincerely,Josh Vandezande for Minister Mathews
Manager, Correspondence Unit
Ministry of Children and Youth Services
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL NOTE (Mr.Vandezande has been the so-called spokesman for this miserable ministry and for 3 former miserable ministers under the miserable McGuinty government including Buttriogaanni,Chambers and now minister Mathews.. These new ministers (businessmen) don’t have the authority to even sweep the floor without first getting the Liberal “nod” of approval.
Our children are being used to generate more make work projects and profits for drug companies. seems our children had less problems mentally,physically and emotionally before these people took control.
WAKE up to new government social policy.
All Children’s Aid Societies, politicians and lawyers thrive without accountability by creating confusion, Or when that is impossible, they profit by the confusion. In either case, confusion is their stock and trade. The wider the gap/conflict the CAS, lawyer or politician can create between accountability and justice the more they profit. Our children pay the price.
This lucrative monopoly and lack of acoountability gives them an incentive to create obstacles to the smooth functioning of the life of ordinary people. Through their dominance of politics,the bureaucracy,and their monopoly over litigation, Children’s Aid Societies,lawyers have insinuated themselves into every human relationship. Lawyers such as JJ Paquette (1kelopaq) and Patricia Meehan are no more than rapist of Society bleeding this government dry with their never ending self righteous,non accountable demands on unsuspecting parents. Any parent that would knowingly subject their children to this team of “Lawyers” may just as well give their children drugs and send them to an orgy. Family Court is Broken,corrupt and completely biased. Judge Hennessy instistance to hear the claims against CAS even though just months earlier she overturned and earlier finding of default for no clear reason other than there is no claim.
They are all about the Money,power and Ego’s and not about our children.
It is not in the Best Interest of the children, it is all about best interest of the lawyers,CAS, and the easiest solution for judges driven by decades of sexual prejudice and Money. They willing stake their reputation backing which ever parent they foresee as being the biggest “meal ticket” (usually the parent with CAS backing) . Nothing more than Society’s “puppy mill” of generating more profit for themselves. In a court of morals lawyers and politicians,police, CAS workers such as these would be stripped of their power and be made to endure the injustice they have so willingly subjected on others.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Ritalin is a stimulant that produces pharmacological effects similar to those of cocaine and amphetamines. Unlike other stimulants, however, MPH (its shortened chemical name) has not been produced by drug dealers in homemade labs, probably because it is an inexpensive, available medication with a prescription, even though it is a controlled substance. Some users dissolve the tablets with water and inject the mixture. The drug has been named with the street name of: “Vitamin R”, “R-Ball” and the “Smart Drug”. It is inexpensive to purchase from friends or dealers for anywhere from 5 dollars to 10 dollars per pill and up to 20 dollars per pill.
The dramatic increase in the consumption of this drug in recent years can largely be attributed to its increased number of incidents of drug abuse that have been associated with adolescents, young adults and college students who are using the drug for its stimulant effects. It is being used for appetite suppression in many teenagers with eating disorders who have gotten the pills from friends. In college students it is being used as a stimulant to help them stayed focused and awake (for long nights of studying) and for parents of children prescribed the drug for alleged ADHD, it is often being used as a stimulant and appetite suppressant.. Complications from injection are common since the fillers that used in MPH are not soluble in water and when injected they can block small blood vessels causing damage to the lungs and retina! lol , Ritalin is abused among adults as well. The Drug Enforcement Administration has received reports of Ritalin abuse among diverse segments of the population–including healthcare professionals, doctors, CAS, parents and street addicts.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
F A M I L Y
I ran into a stranger as he passed by,
“Oh excuse me please” was my reply.
He said, “Please excuse me too;
I wasn’t watching for you.”
We were very polite, this stranger and I.
We went on our way and we said goodbye.
But at home a different story is told,
How we treat our loved ones, young and old.
Later that day, cooking the evening meal,
My girl friend stood beside me very still.
When I turned, I nearly knocked her down.
“Move out of the way,” I said with a frown.
She walked away, her little heart broken.
I didn’t realize how harshly I’d spoken.
While I lay awake in bed,
God’s still small voice came to me and said,
“While dealing with a stranger,
common courtesy you use,
but the family you love, you seem to abuse.
Go and look on the kitchen floor,
You’ll find some flowers there by the door.
Those are the flowers She brought for you.
She picked them herself: pink, yellow and blue.
She stood very quietly not to spoil the surprise,
you never saw the tears that filled her little eyes.”
By this time, I felt very small,
And now my tears began to fall.
I quietly went and knelt by her bed;
“Wake up, little one, wake up,” I said.
“Are these the flowers you picked for me?”
She smiled, “I found ‘em, out by the tree.
I picked ‘em because they’re pretty like you.
I knew you’d like ‘em, especially the blue.”
I said, “Babe, I’m very sorry for the way I acted today;
I shouldn’t have yelled at you that way.”
She said, “Oh, Babe, that’s okay.
I love you anyway.”
I said, “Dear, I love you too,
and I do like the flowers, especially the blue.”
FAMILY
Are you aware that if we died tomorrow, the company
that we are working for could easily replace us in
a matter of days.
But the family we left behind will feel the loss
for the rest of their lives.
And come to think of it, we pour ourselves more
into work than into our own family,
an unwise investment indeed,
don’t you think?
So what is behind the story?
Do you know what the word FAMILY means?
FAMILY = (F)ATHER (A)ND (M)OTHER (I) (L)OVE (Y)OU
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
God created life and therefore it is precious. It should not be taken away without just cause. It should not be endangered in a careless manner nor should children be separated unjustly from their parents. Children should be nurtured and protected to the fullest extent of the law. All too often, though, children exploited and treated as expendable by governments and average citizens alike. Corruption, power, politics, get a higher priority than our children. Due to those kinds of attitudes, the moral fabric of our society is eroded.
(1) Abortion. If abortion is not a deplorable waste of human life, there aren’t any. Obviously, there are exceptions like cases of rape, non-consensual incest, and situations in which the life or health of the mother is at stake. Abortion for any other reason is nothing but legalized murder. No, convenience is not a justifiable reason for snuffing out the lives of unborn children before they get a chance to take their first breath.
Feminists, Planned Parenthood, N.O.W., Liberals, and those who are too spineless to speak up for what is right can call it a “woman’s choice” issue all they want, but it doesn’t change the sad reality. Yes, I do believe women should have control over their own bodies, including reproductive rights, but that’s not the issue here. In fact, that whole argument is a red herring. Women can choose to not get pregnant. Whether through abstaining from sex or using reliable methods of birth control, it’s their choice. Taking another human life, on the other hand, should not be a choice that’s available to any individual in a civilized society.
(2) Unnecessary wars. There’s nothing sadder than reading or hearing the names of young, vital, and talented young men and women who have been cut in down in the prime of their lives in a war that did not have to be fought.
Sometimes wars are unavoidable. Often, there are evil aggressors in the world who won’t respond to anything but brute force. In those cases, not fighting a war could ultimately cost more lives than actually fighting it.
However, many times there are viable alternatives to war, such as diplomatic maneuvers and containment. No war should ever be fought until all of those options have been exhausted. Unfortunately, there are leaders all over the world who are, at times, determined to go to war, regardless of the other available options. Political ambition or the drive to enhance their popularity at home often prompts leaders to send their young citizens off to war. Greed and the drive to seize more territory are motivating factors for other heads of state. Others are driven by bogus intelligence and unsubstantiated fear into fighting preemptive wars. Still others are well-intentioned individuals who honestly believe their war efforts are making the world a safer place. They seem to forget that “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.”
(3) Executions of non-violent offenders. Many countries around world impose the ultimate sanction on those found guilty of crimes that range from drug possession to adultery. Even many countries that have never been guilty of this practice sometimes appear to condone it.
I can understand any country wanting to show its displeasure with certain types of crimes, even though they may not involve violence. I can also appreciate the fact that even some types of non-violent crimes are particularly heinous and that there are requirements for strong deterrents to them.
However, committing any act of violence (execution, torture, etc.) against a non-violent offender is completely unethical and immoral and never justified. Non-violent offenders, unlike many of their violent counterparts, can usually be rehabilitated. If justice, not rehabilitation, is the goal, then they can be sufficiently punished with prison time.
(4) HIV/AIDS. Deaths from this disease are so regrettable because they are so preventable. The extremely sad part is that there are innocent victims like children and those receiving blood transfusions, who contract this pernicious disease through no fault of their own.
While those who get it as a result of their own risky behavior deserve our sympathy, they are not innocent victims, despite what the liberal media might have us think. No one has to get HIV/AIDS. The spread of the disease could be completely halted if people would only start making the correct decisions, i.e., to not do illegal drugs and to postpone sexual activity until marriage. Yes, for those who cannot control their own desires, “safe sex” should be emphasized. However, it is never as foolproof as abstinence.
Now, granted, in some third world countries, many people lack the education required to make these decisions. We should be willing to spend the necessary money to make sure they get that education, if it will help abolish the scourge of this disease from our world. However, I can’t help believing that most people know better, but just don’t care. The fleeting pleasure of immoral sexual activity and illicit drugs is more important to them than their own health and the health of the world community.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
A lawyer is a person who thrives by creating confusion, Or when that is impossible, they profit by the confusion. In either case,confusion is their stock and trade. The wider the gap a lawyer can create between accountability and justice the more they profit.
The lawyer’s lucrative monopoly gives him an incentive to create obstacles to the smooth functioning of the life of ordinary people. Through their dominance of politics,the bureaucracy,and their monopoly over litigation, lawyers have insinuated themselves into every human relationship. Lawyers such as JJ Paquette (1kelopaq) and Patricia Meehan are no more than rapist of Society bleeding this government dry with their never ending self righteous,non accountable demands on unsuspecting parents. Any parent that would knowingly subject their children to this team of “Lawyers” may just as well give their children drugs and send them to an orgy. Family Court is Broken,corrupt and completely biased.
They are all about the Money,power and Ego’s and not about our children.
It is not in the Best Interest of the children, it is all about best interest of the lawyers and the easiest solution for judges driven by decades of sexual prejudice and Money. They willing stake their reputation backing which ever parent they foresee as being the biggest “meal ticket” . Nothing more than Society’s “puppy mill” of generating more profit for themselves. In a court of morals lawyers such as these would be stripped of their power and be made to endure the injustice they have so willingly subjected on others.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Countries that are members of the United Nations Association, our governments, elected officials and Justice system are sworn to uphold the principles of cooperation and respect for law among nations concerning children , and encourage the development of a more humane and peacefull world. This applies to leaders at all levels of government. We ask that all who honor these principles consider signing our Petition, and making known to your friends, relations, co-workers and elected officials your demand for principled and accountable behavior on the part of our government.
The following text quotes from the Preamble to the Charter of the United Nations,.
WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED; to save succeeding generations from corruption the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind; and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small; and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom;
AND FOR THESE ENDS;
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors, and unite our strength to maintain international peace and security; and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used save in the common interest; and to employ international resources for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all (including children)
PM Harper’s first speech at the United Nations (UN) was quite the performance. Not once did he mention civil rights, global arming or the rights of children He claimed that the future of the world body depends on the success of the USA’s Afghan mission. How can this be possible? Over the UN’s history the US has sought to use the world body to its own ends with varying degrees of success. Where the UN is the worlds most effective force for multilateralism-the US is the worlds most belligerent unilateralist.
With Afghanistan the UN gives, what is really Americas war, an attempted respectability. How can Canadians or other NATO members have confidence in the integrity or outcome of the Afghanistan mission when we see the atrocity of Iraq? Reckless militarism has utterly destroyed that country, Yet we are seeing the same in Afghanistan and we are supposed to believe in a positive outcome? Who’s war are we fighting? One of the explicit dangers of serial warfare is the first war had better be successful if you want to sell the second. Should there should be an all out attack, possibly nuclear, on Iran? Iran has a very real ability to retaliate and the economic consequences of such an attack would be global and devastating.
Could it be that our war with Iran, like Iraq, is because it is sitting on one of the worlds last great oil reserves- and Iran is selling it to Russia and China?
One of the most compelling reasons for a more peace-driven solution to the Afghanistan problem is the citizens of that country whether they are Taliban or not have no reason to trust the West.. For the past several decades it has been ripped over, manipulated and abused. When it did establish a progressive stable government back in the 1970s that wasn’nt Western freindly was overthrown by the CIA. As Afghanistan is considered a failed state, imperial powers have been major contributors to the failure.
Still another issue begs to be addressed. Major countries, especially the UN Security Council, must challenge the US and not allow the effectiveness and integrity of the world body to be affected because of Western Policy.
Earlier this summer the British polling firm YouGov found that 75% of those polled flatly rejected the US current reason for being there. 39% had little confidence in the US ability to deal with present world problems, followed by another 28% who had very little confidence and 16% had none at all.
One reason, no doubt, Britons and most likely Canadians express such strong sentiments is they are tired of their government lacking leadership, accountability and being led like a puppy. Blair is now under heavy pressure from his party to take an early retirement for this very reason. It seems though Stephen Harper is determined to be a puppy.
We have all heard the horrific causualities in Afganistan, Iraq, and other areas on the news day after . Is war ever justified in a civil society?
Terrorists kill the innocents non-combatants with no hesitation or regret. How can someone have no respect for human life? Many, if not all terrorists seek power and control regardless of means. They use violence as a means to that end. This is instrumental violence. It does not differ from criminal violence anywhere in the world and likely has the same roots.
Often criminal violence has it beginning in the abuse, neglect, loss of parents, and exposure to violence in early childhood resulting in disruptions in attachments. Those with disrupted attachments fail to reach pro-social maturity interpersonally, in affect regulation and self control, and in moral development. They may not understand human reciprocity. Relationships are superficial. They may have little or no empathy or remorse. To them the world is not safe and they must always be on the offensive in order to be safe. Generations of war and violence in the Middle East continues to produce more terrorists. Children are not safe and they become orphaned. They are exposed to violence daily during times of open conflict in war and divorce and always have the fear for lack of security. The effect of this environment on everyone, especially young children can be psychologically devastating.
How do we defend ourselves against these governments and Justice systems that do not value life as we do without creating more terrorists, exploiting children ? The answer is we cannot unless we change our system and make govetrnments more accountable. Children and their families must be safe and well cared for so that they will not become cold, heartless and violent. Street children, one of the ripest recruiting grounds for terrorist organizations and governments CAS, must be accountable to the people.
Terrorism will not end of its own accord. People must protect and defend themselves, as terrorists will not stop. Additionally, terrorism will not end by humanitarian aid alone. Everyone knows that a long term solution is needed. However, a permanent end to war, humanitarian aid and services for those who have lost loved ones, those with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and children with attachments disrupted by war may have a chance of reducing terrorism in the Middle Eastern Region in the future.
Leadership lies at the heart of achieving victory and saving our children.. You only have to look to history to understand that when people needed to accomplish great things, whether in war or peace, great leaders had to rise to the occasion.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
There is no difference between judicial or provincial authority, the provincial government’s policy of no accountability is alive and well in cities in Ontario. Like a cult, they create the “standards” for our society. Committing crimes against humanity, children that are perpetrated in our justice system. Politics lack values, morality and independent accountability.
Nearly half (forty-one percent) of the discussions or decisions took place behind closed doors. Those concerned about secrecy at any municipality should file a complaint to the ombudsman. Municipalities that make secret decisions can now be held accountable. Without investigating the Children’s Aid Society the community or municipality can still be influenced by this unaccountable and publicly funded agency!
CITY TRIES TO AVOID INDEPENDENT AUDITOR- AGAIN! JAN.1, 2008
Mayor John Rodriguez political ally Paul Marleau is not an independent candidate to conduct a city audit. He was supported Mayor Rodriquez in his election campaign. When Mr. Rodriguez said that he wants the best qualified person to do the audit, does he mean his old political ally Mr. Marleau? The few tax payers that actually support the independency of Marleau are just that…a few. They either benefit from unaccountable government or they don’t pay taxes. Its obvious Mr. Rodriquez DOES NOT want to change the direction of the so-called bus he self-admittedly is driving. He even tried to get Mr. Marleau a position on the board at Greater Sudbury Utilities! Can we believe him that he won’t support Mr. Marleau or ensure that the tax payer is not insulted and demand an independent audit as per definition? The mayor and the majority of of city councilors want to avoid an independent audit at all costs. The media in this city is pathetic and bought and paid for. Mr. Rodriguez and a few others support non-accountable government!
For weeks there were announcements that millions of dollars were given to the city by MPP Rick Bartolucci. Mr. Bartolucci was also known as the Wizard of Cash. Why is the City of Greater Sudbury in the red? Where is this money going? Where is the Provincial gas-tax credit the city received from the provincial government? John Rodriquez doesn’t consider Ottawa or Queen’s Park as senior levels of government, does he means that the Children’s Aid Society is the senior level of government? During these same weeks of Bartollucci’s fountain of cash, Rodriquez was mimicking a concern for the lack of infrastructure money that is supposed to flow down from these senior governments. In fact during his campaign he said he’ld march with Bartolucci and Marleau to Queen’s Park. In reality,the moneys been flowing for years hence the opposition of an independent audit by a select few (city council). John is not a mayor for the people as he promised in his campaign but a mayor for his friends who support a Mickey Mouse Audit and no accountability!.
John Rodriguez elected mayor “strong and vocal leader in the mayor’s chair, and he’s going to give them what they want. He said “I’ve been there and I know the landscape” of how to exert influence with the provincial and federal governments to bring programs and funding (money for the homeless) to Greater Sudbury”, said Rodriguez, however its become clear he is willing to continue the tradition and culture of abuse and no accountability.
He says “I believe I’ve been given a great mandate by the citizens…I put my platform before the people and barely 50 percent agreed with what I had to say,” he said. “I’ve been there and I know the landscape” (culture).
He also supports building modern performing arts centre (paid $250,000 to decide whether or not to build it) and will continue to work to reduce problems with homelessness. Money well spent! Where will he spend the gas tax credit received from the province?
Another Liberal blunder? Who is driving the “Political Bus in Sudbury” Is John Rodriguez still driving the bus or is he under it? Seems there may be a touch of noticeable Dementia in Rodriguez’s remarks concerning what is said and what is NOT said… When asked if he could be helped in his capacity as Mayor, Rodriguez replied that “he could use someone to help him raise the gay rights flag at City hall during Gay Pride Day, and they could lead the gay Pride Parade in a pink, leather thong” Mayor Rodriguez who served as NDP MP for the Nickel Belt riding for 18 years now says he was misquoted.
SUDBURY CITY COUNCIL OPPOSED AUDIT
The quality of Sudbury’s roads and drinking water is deteriorating. However the mayor and council are raising our taxes to raise flags and build a theater center rather than help fund recreation centers for children and parents. Neither the mayor or city council welcomed a complete audit of the cities finances. Its clear that an audit may potentially permit a wealthy councilor some sort of unfair advantage or expose some sort of corruption. No one volunteered to drive the bus that day. It seems that for years our elected officials down at city hall have been avoiding an audit of the city’s finances. However in 2004 council did approve an independent audit to examine the city’s finances for potential abuse and waste of funds; but top administrators and senior municipal bureaucrats convinced council that an independent audit was ill-advised for no apparent reason. It becomes clear that no one at city hall including our elected provincial representatives (Bartollucci and Marleau) has demonstrated the understanding for accountability and fiscal responsibility. Instead city council, mayor, and top bureaucrats decided to audit one department at a time which would conveniently take years to complete. The mayor and council do not take the issue of fiscal responsibility seriously. The mayor and most of the council members were not concerned with what was happening with the audit file. An independent audit won’t happen with the same faces in city hall. The mayor, city council and bureaucrats will continue to avoid the issue of fiscal responsibility. The Children’s Aid Society of Sudbury and Manitoulin continue to avoid accountability. Our city faces real challenges and problems with regards to accountability. We do not have a city council, mayor, or Children’s Aid Society in Sudbury that is responsible and mature enough to solve these problems. Lack of leadership and accountability is rampant in city hall and the Liberal party of Ontario. As more time passes it becomes clearer who really is driving the bus and where its going.
Wednesday, December 06, 2006 – 11:00
Local News – Nickel Belt MPP Shelley Martel is demanding better protection for children after the release of a scathing auditor general’s report Tuesday.
The New Democrat MPP said the report shows the Liberal government allowed spending abuses at Children’s Aid Societies, while at-risk children didn’t get the protection they needed.
The report confirms her worst fears, said Martel in a written statement – money wasted by executives on sport utility vehicles, high-priced meals and $150 car washes.
The provincial government is supposed to oversee spending for Children’s Aid Societies, but the auditor said the McGuinty Liberals ignored quarterly reports on CAS activities.
It also cancelled important reviews of non-Crown ward and child protection files, as well as reviews of service levels and financial data.
Martel questioned how Ontarians can be certain vulnerable children are receiving “appropriate care and protection if Dalton McGuinty is ignoring reports, cutting reviews and failing to uphold his duty to oversee the spending practices of Children’s Aid Societies.”
Ward 11 candidate Janet Gasparini is the executive director of the Social Planning Council of Sudbury “There are many complex issues at stake-not the least of which involves social policy, CAS, or accountable government.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
JULY 16, 2007
Attention: Ashely Thompson, President Children’s Aid Society
and Jean J. Paquette, Council Children’s Aid Society of Sudbury and Manitoulin
In your letter dated June 13,2007, while acting as the President of the Board of Directors of the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin you stated that you and the Board of Directors of the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin denied my application for membership with the Society based on the Board members’ perception that I do not accept the authority or role of the Children’s Aid Society as conferred by statute, nor that of the Society’s Social Workers.
It is my understanding from your letter that the Society does not grant memberships to anyone who disagrees with how the Society operates in any way.
Could you please clarify this for me. Does the Society deny memberships to people who do not agree with how the Society operates and who wish to apply for a membership so that they can affect change that benefits our children?
Respectfully,
Affidavit Province of Ontario, City of Sudbury In the matter of The Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin
City of Greater Sudbury in the Province of Ontario, make oath and say.
I hereby apply for a list of the shareholders (or members) of the above-named corporation
I require the list of shareholders (or members) only for purposes connected with the above-named corporation. The list of shareholders (or members) and the information contained therein will be used only for purposes connected with the above-named corporation.
Sworn Before me at the City of Greater Sudburyin the Province of Ontario this day of May, 2007. XXXXXXX
David B. Rivard, Executive Director
David B. Rivard, M.S.S., T.S.I. Directeur general
Fax/telecopieur
(705)521-7372 (705) 521-7371
Legal/legal (705)521-7370
June 13, 2007
Dear Sir,
We are in receipt of your correspondence dated May 22, 2007 seeking to become a member of the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin and, failing that, requesting a list of the members belonging to our Corporation. We have reviewed your request to become a member and with respect to your request for a list of CAS members, the Corporations Act stipulates that, by necessity, only members who have submitted an affidavit form will have access to this information. Considering your request to become a member has been denied, we hereby deny your request for a list of CAS members.
We are returning your cheque in the amount of $5.00 made payable to the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin.
Sincerely, Sudbury Childrens Aid Society
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
An issue of grave concern to all caring people exists in our “democracy”. As a caring individuals it should be our obligation to bring this issue to the awareness of tas many people as we can to initiate or force the much needed changes.
Deliberate and systematic destruction of families, apprehension and seemingly intentional abuse of children. There is much eveidence that this abuse of power and children is being perpetuated for financial gains at tax payers expense and possibly also for the perversed satisfaction of having such power and be able to perpetrate serious abuse of that power, without ANY accountability. The legitimate need for removing children from abusive homes is being used as an excuse by childrens aid agencies (CAS ) and (CCAS) with “Gestapo” like powers, to apprehend children for any or no reason.
The unspeakable and systematic abuse of native children in the boarding school system has reemerged in a form that would preclude expensive settlements by the organized churches in class action law suits. The horrific abuse and death of five year old Geoffrey Baldwin, as documented by CBC, has brought no positive change to the system or the agency responsible, CCAS, ( Catholic Childrens Aid Society ), neither have any of its case workers have been held accountable. He was placed in foster care with a couple that had a long history of serious child abuse.
Such actions by the agency can hardly be unintentional. A mountain of evidence is accumulating that this case is only a small tip of a very large ice berg. The June 23, 2006 issue of the Toronto Sun contains a statement by Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin regarding CAS ( Children’s Aid Society ), …. “the perverse application of judgement by bureaucrats”. A college certificate and a job with a CAS agency will give a CAS worker more power than a Police officer in Ontario. Some parents have reported to “Court Watch” that some CAS workers have told parents that they have “more power than God.”
Those “children’s aid” agencies and their mostly unqualified and ruthless case workers, are seemingly operating “above the law” as even the Ontario Ombudsman is prevented by law to probe their activities and the Police are severely restricted in their efforts to investigate, because of complete lack of cooperation by the CAS agencies. This can only mean that protection from the highest political levels are being provided for those agencies for their destructive and criminal activities. Who are the high level elected, or unelected officials that have created this “Gestapo” of CAS and CCAS agencies perpetuating this criminal activity without ANY accountability? It is time to name names, prosecute and convict those criminals. Initial investigation has revealed that parents, caring case workers, Doctors and Lawyers are being silenced from speaking up under Gestapo like threats of severe harassments and repercussions. Once children are apprehended, parents are silenced from exposing abuse of their children with threats of no visitations, or to never get them back again. Most or all promises given to parents to get their children back are apparently false. Perhaps by following the money trail the truth becomes even more clear, as there are financial incentives to those “child protection agencies” to keep moving children around from foster home to foster home.
When law suits are being brought against the agencies and their case workers, they have unlimited access to tax payer funded defense. However, the outrage by the people that know about this monstrous criminal activity is growing so strong, that it is uniting people in a grass roots movement to stamp out this crime and…………
SAVE THE CHILDREN. To ALL caring people everywhere the call is going forth to UNITE for our childrens sake, so that those that have been apprehended may have their God given right to have the most Loving parenting possible, restored CHILDREN are God’s most precious gift and the future of ours and any country.
If you have been victimized by a CAS or CCAS agency, please contact us. To all parents and children whom have been the victim of these agencies , Know many of the tatics they have used against you are an infringement of Human Rights and violations of the charter under the UN .
km
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
2The Treasonous Acts Against Canadians
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
Article II: That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them.
Article III: That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation or community; of all the various modes and forms of government that is best, which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and that, whenever any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.
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.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Conclusion drawn from the above quote:
1. We, the People are creations of God – NOT creations of government.
2. The RIGHTS of LIFE, LIBERTY, PROPERTY and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS are bestowed upon us by our Creator – NOT by government.
3. We, the People create government and install kings, queens, prime ministers or presidents as our servant.
4. As creator of government, we are the “MAJESTY”, and government is our servant.
5. When the men and women, acting as members of a SERVANT government, scheme to overthrow the “MAJESTY” of the MASTER and subjugate or destroy the SOVEREIGN PEOPLE, there exists the crime of HIGH TREASON.
6. The Canadian People have NOT had one iota of opportunity to participate in deciding whether we will have the Monarch of Great Britain as the Crown of Canada, what form of government we will have in Canada, or any opportunity to write or ratify a constitution.
From the 1893 Dictionary of Law:
Treason. Betrayal, treachery, breach of faith or allegiance.
Treason may exist only as between allies: it is a general appellation to denote not only offenses against the king and government, but also accumulation of guilt which arises whenever a superior reposes a confidence in a subject or inferior, between whom and himself there subsists a natural, a civil, or even a spiritual relation, and the inferior so abuses that confidence, so forgets the obligations of duty, subjugation, and allegiance, as to destroy the life of the superior.
When disloyalty attacks majesty itself it is called, by way of distinction, high treason, equivalent to the ‘crimen loesoe majestatis’ of the Romans.
High treason is the most heinous civil crime a man can commit. If indeterminate, this alone is sufficient to make a government degenerate into arbitrary power.
The Treasonous Acts Against Canadians
The Canadian Governments, at all levels, by use of a “STRAWMAN”, a sound alike name of the name by which you have been called all your life, but usually spelled in all capital letters or family name first, and called a “PERSON”. The deceit is in the government’s (Crown) making the family name as the paramount name, a “surname”, where the root word “sur” means over, above, primary, and the given name(s) as a reference name. This is opposite to the intentions of one’s parents, and opposite of the origin and status of a “family” name – that being a reference name for the primary, or given names. That fraudulent name is then inscribed on a government money value instrument called a ‘birth certificate’. In one’s using/acknowledging the birth certificate name as being “one and the same” as oneself, that fraud intended name, it carries with its use, the status of ‘plantation slave’.
The ‘all caps’ spelling is a code signifying that the slave has been pledged as a debtor in the bankruptcy of the Crown. All western nations were declared bankrupt in 1930. The deceit by government in teaching people to use the birth certificate name through the educational system makes all Canadians SUBJECT to the CROWN by changing our status to that of a FEUDAL SERF of the MIDDLE AGES. For several hundred years, the British Monarchy bestowed ‘privileges’ (falsely called rights) on ’subjects’ (sometimes called ‘citizens’), but this ceased with the 1930 bankruptcy.
Since that time, these ‘privileges’, including ‘due process of law’ has been slowly removed, and the ’slaves’ have been subjected to increased forced extraction of their labour and life (life is time spent) by way of taxation and inflation of fiat counterfeit money. This is how people have been deprived of the protections of such documents as the Magna Carta 1225, the Habeas Corpus Act, the Bill of Rights, The Petition of Rights, and more recently, Diefenbaker’s Canadian Bill of Rights.
The Romans had an expression for disobedient slaves, called “homo sacer”, where the disobedient slave was deprived of all rights of due process of law. The disobedient slave could be murdered at will by “officers of Caesar” without any reprisal, just as modern police can murder people with their guns or tasers without fear of criminal justice, based upon their own testimony of right.
This is a deliberate act of HIGH TREASON against the People of Canada, as it results in the loss of the Creator bestowed rights of LIFE, LIBERTY and PROPERTY, and the right to a common law court (due process of law).
Queen Elizabeth II has allowed her name to be prostituted to this evil scheme in direct violation of her oath of office as Monarch of the British Commonwealth of Nations. In her oath, she swore on the Holy Bible that she would uphold and defend the rights of the People over which she reigns as Monarch.
There is a question as to whether the Monarch of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland has any right to be called the Monarch or the Crown of Canada, as the right to succession in the BNA Act (section 2) granted to the successors and heirs of Queen Victoria was struck by the British Imperial Parliament in 1893.
Any claim of absolute sovereignty rights by the English Monarchy was shown to be non-existent in the Magna Carta of 1215. [Actually 1225, as the 1215 Magna Carta was voided by the Pope.] Yet, over PERSONS, be they natural persons (man under contract of servitude with the Crown, and without right of free will – except for obedience) or artificial corporate bodies, as created by the Crown, there is absolute rights of the MASTER over the servant exhibited by the Crown over the People.
The Crown, whether it be in so-called right of Canada or of a province, by deviously changing our status before their corrupt courts as being corporate members created by the Crown, has deprived us of our lawful courts and plundered our lives which have been expended in labour to obtain the very necessities of life.
In ALL cases in a court in Canada, where Canadians are taken to court for disobedience to a statute, or regulation therein, they are considered a ‘CORPORATE ENTITY/NATURAL PERSON/MEMBER’. This fact is an unknown to most Canadians. People believe that they are dealing directly with the Canadian Justice system as a full liability man or woman with full rights.
England has been under the Roman system since King John signed over England FOREVER as a vassal state to the Holy Roman Empire/Pontiff/Vatican in 1213. All human institutions are make-believe ships/incorporations in the Roman system. Thus, All corporations and corporate (crew)members are a legal fiction, and are SUBJECTS of the Crown. The British Crown is subject to, or under the Crown of the City of London, the Vatican owned financial, legal and professional controls capitol of the Holy Roman Empire. So, the Crown referred to in Canada is most likely the 6 pointed City of London Crown (a corporation), not the British Crown. The Canadian people have a basic RIGHT to Common Law , and as such, are NOT SUBJECTS of the Crown for the imposition of corporate ADMINISTRATIVE Law – the ONLY type of law which is found in the Canadian Court system. This subterfuge is totally in the realm of legal sleaze and trickery for the purpose of denying your God Given RIGHTS.
In using the term “Common Law”, I refer to the Anglo-Saxon Common Law. The English Monarchy began the defrauding of the English people of their individual rights protecting Anglo-Saxon Common Law in a concerted effort by King Edward I in conspiracy with the Pope of Rome sometime around 1300 AD. The term “common law” and “English common law” was concocted as a fraud; and, is in fact, a system derived directly from Roman civil law – commonly called “dictator’s law”. As Roman Municipal Law, it points to Mercantile Law used against debtors, as ‘municipal’ means a debtor territory. Considering that Anglo-Saxon Common Law period of England preceded the Norman Conquest of England by some 500 years, we have evidence of this fraud posted on the Canadian Federal Justice website:
“The common law, which developed in Great Britain after the Norman Conquest, was based on the decisions of judges in the royal courts. It is called judge-made law because it is a system of rules based on “precedent”. Whenever a judge makes a decision that is to be legally enforced, this decision becomes a precedent: a rule that will guide judges in making subsequent decisions in similar cases. The common law is unique in the world because it cannot be found in any “code” or “legislation”; it exists only in past decisions. However, this also makes it flexible and adaptable to changing circumstances.”
The primary feature of Roman Municipal Law, a variation of Roman Civil Law, [derived from Maritime Law], used by the deceitful English Monarchy, and it’s so-called justice system, was/is the “notwithstanding clause”. The Monarchy called this ‘Equity’. This clause derives from the fact that Roman Law is based upon all commercial and political organizations, in fact all human institutions, being make-believe ships.
All ’ship’s orders’ – laws, rules and regulations concerning the ship, have within them the necessary right and duty of the captain to disregard any such rules or regulations when he deems it necessary for the ‘good’ of the ship. The complete “flexible and adaptable” feature of so-called English or British common law is nothing more than the common usage of the notwithstanding clause to insure that the Crown’s pleasures, prerogatives and privileges come before the individual rights of the people.
–
Few will have the greatness to bend history; however, each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope… and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.
- Robert F. Kennedy
Cherish The Children. Lets be The Change We Wish To See In The World
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
CRIMINAL HARASSMENT:
A HANDBOOK FOR POLICE AND CROWN PROSECUTORS
CANADA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
INTRODUCTION Criminal harassment consists of repeated conduct that is carried out over a period of time and that causes victims to reasonably fear for their safety.
264. (1) Criminal harassment – No person shall, without lawful authority and knowing that another person is harassed or recklessly as to whether the other person is harassed, engage in conduct referred to in subsection (2) that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them.
(2) Prohibited conduct – The conduct mentioned in subsection (1) consists of
(a) repeatedly following from place to place the other person or anyone known to them;
(b) repeatedly communicating with, either directly or indirectly, the other person or anyone known to them;
(c) besetting or watching the dwelling-house, or place where the other person, or anyone known to them, resides, works, carries on business or happens to be; or
(d) engaging in threatening conduct directed at the other person or any member of their family.
These guidelines support a commitment by Federal/Provincial/Territorial Ministers Responsible for Justice to strengthen the criminal justice system’s response to criminal harassment.
1.1 Purpose The purpose is to provide police and Crown prosecutors with guidelines for the investigation and prosecution of criminal harassment cases.
1.2 Legislative History of Criminal Harassment
On August 1, 1993, the Criminal Code was amended to create the new offence of criminal harassment. It was introduced as a specific response to violence against women, particularly to domestic violence against women. However, the offence is not restricted to domestic violence and applies equally to all victims of criminal harassment.
1.3 What do we Know About Criminal Harassment in Canada?
The most current Statistics Canada police and court data relating to criminal harassment1 reveal the following facts for 2002.
• In total, 9,080 criminal harassment incidents were reported to a sample of 123 police forces in Canada in 2002.
• Of those 9,080 incidents, 4 in 10 (45%) were cleared by charge and the complainant declined to lay charges in 1 in 6 (16%
The cumulative effect of harassing behaviour and actions causes victims to experience intimidation, as well as psychological and emotional distress. How many parents and children alike are intimiated by police and CAS?
Criminal harassment or “stalking,” as it is commonly called, is not a psychiatric diagnosis
MENTAL HEALTH ACT OF ONTARIO
Introduction (used at the discretion of police)
The Mental Health Act in Ontario is a law that governs how people are admitted to psychiatric facilities.
Admission
Under the Mental Health Act, “psychiatric facilities” have the right to refuse admission to a person if their problem is “not urgent or necessary” (Section 11). But someone with a “mental disorder” ["any disease or disability of the mind"; Sec. 1. (1)] may be admitted as a voluntary patient if they are “believed to be in need of observation, care or treatment” (Sec. 12). (CAS’s or police’s opinion)
Anyone can bring sworn evidence before a justice of the peace to have someone else “examined” in a psychiatric facility [Sec. 16(1)]. A justice of the peace can do this by signing a Form 2 if they find the person:
• “apparently” has a mental disorder “of a nature or quality” that will likely result in: a) serious bodily harm to self, or b) to others; or c) serious physical impairment of the person, and the person:
• threatens or has threatened to cause bodily harm to self
• attempts or has attempted to cause bodily harm to self
• behaves or has behaved violently towards someone else
• causes or has caused someone to fear bodily harm,
Under Section 17 of the Act, a police officer can bring someone to a facility for an examination if the officer has “reasonable and probable grounds” to believe a person has acted in a “disorderly manner” (meaning irrational such as trying to make CAS accountable) but not necessarily illegal) as long as the person “apparently” has a mental disorder and has threatened or attempted to harm themselves, or has behaved violently or caused someone to fear bodily harm, or has shown a lack of competence to care for themselves. Note that police cannot use the new criteria involving treatment issues. Police must stay with the person until the facility decides whether to admit them.
Under Section 21, a judge (not a justice of the peace) can order an examination for someone who appears in court and is charged with or convicted of an offense, but seems to have a mental disorder (Form 6). Or a judge can remand such a person for admission to a psychiatric facility for up to 2 months (Form 8).
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
How social services are paid bonuses to snatch babies for adoption
SUE REID
The number of babies under one month old being taken into care for adoption is now running at almost four a day (a 300 per cent increase over a decade).
In total, 75 children of all ages are being removed from their parents every week before being handed over to new families.
Some of these may have been willingly given up for adoption, but critics of the Government’s policy are convinced that the vast majority are taken by force.
Time and again, the mothers say they are innocent of any wrongdoing.
Of course, there are people who are not fit to be parents and it is the duty of any responsible State to protect their children.
But over the five years since I began investigating the scandal of forced adoptions, I have found a deeply secretive system which is too often biased against basically decent families.
I have been told of routine dishonesty by social workers and questionable evidence given by doctors which has wrongly condemned mothers.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Pure Evil is running CAS. Select individuals have been purposely placed in positions of authority, including CAS, the courts, adminsistration, and it doesn’t stop there. There is a Network of evil doers in many different sectors, both private and public; business, court systems and government; all who are connected to CAS to ensure the devious plans are successful.They have devised a “fail safe” method to be able to legally steal helpless children away from loving parents. There is no coincidence or mistakes, families are targeted, systematically broken down and destroyed. Children are pawns, used to have complete control of the parents.It is a multi-million dollar child abuse industry that makes them rich and powerful.
One CAS team works on the parents, making sure they are being emotionally tortured; parental right termination hearings to keep them terrified of what will happen, wondering where their child is and begging and pleading with CAS for mercy. Meanwhile another team works on brainwashing the already traumatized child, coaching the child to say their parents had done something bad to them, just so they would quit badgering them for hours at a time. They have been known to tell children their parents don’t want them, they are dead, or have left the province.After the CAS henchmen are finished breaking down the child’s spirit, they have psychologists and psychiatristrists evaluate the children and the parents mental health. It’s a set up from the beginning to end, perfectly orchestrated to get the results that CAS is directed to get by the leaders of the Network. Drug addicts, sex offenders, hardened criminals, Satanic cult worshippers and child hating misfits are among the hundreds who foster and keep abusing the children CAS alleges are in need of protection from loving parents. It’s not just the money that is the driving force behind the greed and corruption, it is the power to destroy that feeds the evil monster Satan and the Network that serves him…but we can fight back, and win!
corruptioncentral.com
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
This criminal enterprise seems to leave children at high risk in homes .that seem to have a very tragic ending ..Its a psychological strategy so the public can see without their intervention ,,how some children are subject to severe abuse even to death. However they do this by design to ensure they create this impact with the public to keep their tax dollars rolling in and keep their jobs and luxury SUVs .
I know of a few cases where children should be removed open case files for years however they do NOT remove these children there must be a reason and I solely believe that is why,,
The public needs to wake up and realise this evil empire of child snatchers only has one care to trick the public and receive more Tax Dollars ..
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/new_world_order/news.php?q=1203875495
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
way back when Canada banished native languages, even before they OUTLAWED potlatch (to further war effort in the Great WAr- protect it from economic abuses) there was a history involving canada, orphans and alcoholic, sadistic, satanic freaks. Most recently ONTARIO’S CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETIES. The freaks were commonly retired military or “retired” priests or unaccountable publically funded assholes.. They were retired into positions of overseeing the orphanages and Children Aid Societies. In the beginning it was mostly aboriginals. Latter lower classes, deviants’ offspring etcetcetc were added to the pool of victims and now children of innocent hard working parents.
Graves? try ditches.
Records? why?
Public Trials? too embarasing.
Same old same old. Governments amd CAS merely recognized a good resource.
And its not slowing down one!
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Karen Dickson, Barrister and Solicitor karen.dickson@hotmail.com link
Who amoung the French in Quebec who were formallya part of experimenting on children in your province have decided to move operations to Ontario?. Who amoung you French at CSIS is a part of apprehend and experimenting on my child?
I am not a joke. I am a ten year lawyer and former drug prosecutor at the Department of Justice whose child is caught up in some Children’s Aid racquet, apprehended for the purposes of experimentation. Why do know there is some jealous French bitch behind this who decided to fuck my kid up. I will find you.
Karen Dickson, yes
Barrister and Solicitor
905 824 -4822
3485 Nutcracker Drive, Mississuaga, Ontario L5N 6G2
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
CANADA WILL PAY 50’s TEST VICTIMS
By CLYDE H. FARNSWORTH,
Published: November 19, 1992
In a footnote to an unusual chapter of the cold war, Canada has agreed to compensate victims of psychiatric experiments carried out mainly in the 1950’s and financed in part by the Central Intelligence Agency.
The experiments began after some prisoners returned from the Korean War brainwashed, and Western intelligence agencies began studies and experiments on the nature and possibility of mind control.
An institute at McGill University in Montreal, headed by Dr. D. Ewen Cameron, a psychiatrist who died in 1977, was one of the centers where such experiments were carried out.
Now, the Canadian Government says the 80 or so patients who underwent the so-called “psychic driving” treatment in Montreal, intended to wipe the brain clear of all trauma, can receive almost $80,000 each.
The decision, which was announced on Tuesday, represents an about-face for the Government of Prime Minister Brian Mulroney. Seven years ago, when the matter came up after a number of suits were filed by victims, Ottawa refused to pay compensation. U.S. Already Made Payments
“I believe that this financial assistance responds in a way that expresses the fairness and compassion Canadians expect from their Government,” Justice Minister Kim Campbell said in announcing the decision.
One reason for the change was that the United States has already settled with some of the Canadian victims. Another, lawyers said, was that many of the suits filed early in the 1980’s were still open and promised evidence that could embarrass a Government gearing up for elections.
The patients at the Allan Memorial Institute at McGill were put into a drugged sleep for weeks or months, subjected to electroshock therapy until they were “de-patterned,” knowing neither who or where they were, and forced to listen repeatedly to recorded messages broadcast from speakers on the wall or under their pillows.
Linda Macdonald, 55 years old, an employment counselor now in Vancouver, is one of those who sued for compensation. “I walked through those doors with a husband on one arm and a guitar on the other and was a healthy person and coherent,” she said.
Diagnosed as an acute schizophrenic — she had gone to Dr. Cameron for treatment — she spent 86 days in the “sleep room” and was subjected to 109 shock treatments and megadoses of barbiturates and other drugs. Reduced to a Blank Slate
When she got out of the experiment, she could not read or write, had to be toilet-trained and could not remember her husband, her five children or any part of the first 26 years of her life.
Reached in Los Angeles, where she is discussing a film on her life, she said the compensation “is minimal and won’t go very far, but that wasn’t my purpose in my suit against the Government.”
“It was to make sure that Canadians understood that such a thing happened in their country and to get the Government to take responsibility so that it won’t happen again,” she said.
David Orlikow, a retired member of Parliament, whose now-deceased wife, Velma, was another subject, said she emerged from the treatment “really a disabled person, not physically but emotionally.”
“There were days when she would do nothing and then be subject to unexplainable rages,” Mr. Orlikow recalled. “She was a very intelligent person, but her ability to read was destroyed.”
Mr. Orlikow initiated litigation in the United States against the C.I.A., recruiting the civil liberties lawyer Joseph L. Rauh to take his wife’s case.
In October, 1988, the Justice Department announced an out-of-court settlement with Velma Orlikow and eight other victims, a total of $750,000. Ms. Macdonald was not among the nine. The C.I.A. had cut off financing of the program at the time of her treatment.
John Hedley, a C.I.A. spokesman, commented: “It’s a sad episode that happened more than 30 years ago, and the case is closed.” Noting the 1988 settlement, he said the agency had “nothing to add concerning the decision in Canada.” American Author’s Testimony
John Marks, a former State Department official whose 1979 book, “The Search For the Manchurian Candidate,” called attention to the experiments, said that a C.I.A. front called the Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology, funneled more than $60,000 to Dr. Cameron for the studies. Ottawa gave him more than $200,000.
Despite the decision to pay compensation, the Canadian Government has not acknowledged legal responsibility for the experiments. Justice Minister Campbell said the money was being awarded purely “on compassionate and humanitarian grounds.”
At the time of the experiments, Dr. Cameron was trying to find a cure for schizophrenia and other mental illnesses. In the early 1950’s, he theorized that people with neurotic thoughts or behavior could be changed by listening to repeated taped messages. He called the technique “psychic driving” and published an account in the American Journal of Psychiatry.
The C.I.A. was attracted to his comparison of psychic driving with techniques of coerced interrogation and brainwashing.
Patients went to see Dr. Cameron voluntarily and didn’t realize until much later that they were being used in experiments.
Correction: November 20, 1992, Friday
Because of an editing error, an article yesterday about an agreement by Canada to compensate victims of psychiatric experiments misstated the year of the death of Dr. D. Ewen Cameron, a psychiatrist at McGill University in Montreal. He died in 1967, not 1977.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
SUDBURY – CITY OF SECRECY
Openness, transparency, and accountability are non-existent at Sudbury’s city council and the Children’s Aid Society of Sudbury. The current politicians in the City of Greater Sudbury and its administrators are uncommitted to any kind change with respect to accountability. The city’s leaders complained and rejected about any criticism. Instead they are fighting tooth and nail to protect their secret abuse of everything associated with running the city. Who are these clowns that hire lawyers at the tax payers expense to cover-up their crimes and refuse an independent audit? Perhaps the members at city council would serve the city better curled up in one of the many potholes in the city’s roads. .Without new faces, new ideals and a new standard of morals in city hall; the citizens here will continue to be short changed. Hence, Rodriquez’s’ endorsement of Boitanno so early in his term (2007) in an effort to maintain the “status quo” at city hall. Janet Gasperinni bought the most tickets (22). The mayor and the city councilors all lack truthfulness, credibility and integrity. Remember this the next time you hear Rodriquez cry about the homeless problem in Sudbury and the $12,000 dollars he spent and measures he and council took to hide the truth from the citizens of Sudbury. The city also admitted to spending well over 1 million annually on legal fees however refused to disclose the name of the law firm.
Mark Meito Sudbury’s chief administrator officer vows to develop a policy on concert ticket next month, but refuses to have an independent audit since this would undoubtedly embarrass everyone at city hall. It seems everything connected the city including the Sudbury Arena, Sudbury Hydro, Sudbury Children’s Aid Society, etc Meito says “ the city has developed a practice of moving business units to private corporations including city airports, hydro utility and housing and therefore all matters would be private and the public will no longer have access to any information. It would seem city hall employs the same tactics as Sudbury’s Children’s Aid societies. What is even more disturbing is Mark Meito failing to provide the public with the facts as requested by local newspapers. Does he as an employee think he is above the truth? Certainly when our own mayor refers to himself as “royalty” we in Sudbury are surely privileged to have a royal subject as mayor. He doesn’t see anything wrong with his staff misrepresenting the facts as long as no actions are taken using the information. How are we to know which information is true and which is misrepresentation? Certainly the citizens of Sudbury deserve a mayor that would demand much more from his staff, councilors and the city’s service providers. We already know the mayor, his councilors and Sudbury’s MPP R. Bartolucci support the current non accountable and publicly funded Children’s Aid Society of Sudbury; who much like city hall also operate in secrecy and are ripping off the tax payer as well as destroying families for profit.
If our elected officials and hired staff cannot be trusted to handle the purchase of concert tickets in an honest and open manner, how can we feel confident to trust them in how they handle the complex business of running our city? Election 2010 can’t come soon enough.
Why has the cost of doubling hwy 69 doubled? Sudbury MPP Rick Bartolucci said this would be complete in 10 years and now he says it will take 17 years. Has the cost of labor and material double? Then on the other hand we have “king Rodriquez” who has proclaimed he will march hand in hand with Marleau and Bartolucci to Queens Park for money and he cant even maintain the 40 kilometers of roads in Sudbury. It seems maintaining the few kilometers of roads in the city has proved most challenging for our mayor and city councilors and completely ignored by MMP Bartolucci much like the they all ignore the crimes committed by Sudbury’s Children’s Aid Society.
Write the Ontario Ombudsman and demand an audit of Sudbury’s municipal government. As of New Year’s Day, 2008, the Municipal Act requires all meetings of municipal councils, boards and committees to be held in public, with a few exceptions. use the general online complaint form (simply specify you are complaining about a closed meeting). Or call us at 1-800-263-1830. http://www.ombudsman.on.ca/welcome.aspx?langID=1
Its about time we throw all the snakes in the Pit together , it will be rather entertaining to watch the feeeding frenzy as they all turn on each other and begin consuming each other , the rats in the bag is next yekkkkk what a mess that will be you throw them in one bag wait only 2 hours open the bag and out falls body parts heads little claws arms legs ,,its a well known fact you cant place rats in one bag tied up together , they soon go crazy and chew off each others heads literally. Oh well leave the children and families of Ontario in peace and stop legally kidnapping the children and drugging them . or one by one there will be rat catchers with bags waiting ..and pits dug deep for the snakes .. Its coming snakes and rodents your days done ..
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Exposing deadbeat judges
Barbara Kay, bkay@videotron.ca
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=594721
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
http://canadacourtwatch.com/#Recent_Postings_(click_on_the_links_below)_
Disgusting videotaped interview of Barrie, Ontario child by the CAS
(July 3, 2008) A recently released video reveals disgusting work done by CAS workers to a child from Barrie, Ontario in which one of the workers made a young girl take her clothes off including her underwear so that the CAS worker who has no medical credentials could do a vaginal examination. Absolutely disgusting does not even begin to describe the intrusive exam done on this child! The child even tells the worker that mommy told her to tell the worker that daddy touches her but the worker quickly diverts the child away from this disclosure about her mom.
On top of this, the incompetent and stupid worker asks a bunch of leading and totally inappropriate questions clearly intended to get the child to say bad things about dad and to avoid all things that mom has done. Shame on you, CAS!!!!!! This video brings your agency to the pinnacle of child abuse! Who is watching these workers with the CAS? Obviously some of these CAS workers haven’t the foggiest idea of how to conduct an interview with a child. Shame as well, on the judges in the Barrie, Ontario court such as Justice Olah and Justice Perkins who seem to believe these CAS workers without question. If Justice Olah or Justice Perkins would like to have a copy of this tape to see for themselves how CAS workers interview children and take their little panties down, then please contact Court Watch and we will arrange to have a copy of the video delivered to you for your private viewing. While Justice Olah and Justice Perkins criticize Court Watch for its efforts to expose the truth and to help children, it’s the CAS who are making fools of everyone at the court and making a mockery of justice! Court Watch has another video of a boy telling how a male CAS worker, stopped the CAS van at the side of the highway and then grabbed his penis! Watch for that Court Watch video to be posted soon. It’s a simple case of judges like Justice Olah and Justice Perkins backing the wrong horse in too many cases with tragic results for children. It’s no wonder why CAS agencies fight hard to keep these videos secret – they don’t want to be scrutinized for their lack of professionalism!
RCMP National Investigation unit reports that CAS have acted inappropriately and have wrongly taken children!
(July 3, 2008) Documents recently released were reviewed by Court Watch reporters today which clearly indicate that the RCMP at the highest level, did conduct an investigation involving the CAS in Ontario and did conclude from their investigation that the CAS had acted inappropriately and had wrongfully taken away children from their parents. In addition to this, information has been uncovered which would indicate that police at a local level where this family lives kept this report a secret until the documents were eventually uncovered. Thanks to the honestly of some good officers at the RCMP, the CAS perpetrators of this crime may be brought to justice. A number of good lawyers and police officers are now refusing to support a family court system which even they see is out of control and unaccountable. It’s only a matter of time till many of these CAS workers who engage in criminal activities are going to find themselves and their agencies facing big lawsuits as the truth begins to surface of their wrongdoings.
Reign of terror in Barrie, Ontario as police terrorize girl and her family as part of police goon squad assistance to Children’s Aid to “serve and protect” children and members of the public.
(July 3, 2008) A video posted on Youtube shows graphically how our tax dollars are being spent by police and child protection workers in the Barrie, Ontario region, to supposedly “protect” children from harm by forcing children to return to the care of the Children’s Aid Society. If anyone wonders why a growing number of children and families in the community are beginning to hate the police and the CAS, this video shows graphic reasons why.
This sort of public relations disaster created by police and the CAS is only destroying the public’s faith in the police and the CAS. These organizations need the respect and support of the people of Barrie, not their disrespect and scorn. Another 13-year-old teen from Barrie contacted Court Watch to tell us how police broke down the bathroom door at her friend’s home to take her away to the CAS after forcing her into the back of a smelly police cruiser. She had run back to her loving family after being sexually approached while in foster care with the CAS. CAS workers who often don’t even have the credentials as social workers are in effect telling the police what do do. Police are often listening and taking orders from inexperienced CAS workers who often are not even registered Social Workers. This girl and her sibling you can be sure now hate the Barrie, Ontario police force as well and will be certainly sharing their views with many in the Barrie, Ontario region including other teens. Next time the Barrie, Ontario police have a riot and have kids jeering and making fun of them, they can blame their own policy of acting as the goon patrol for the CAS for turning the kids against them. What the police should be doing is insisting on Court Orders for apprehension rather than to take orders from unregistered CAS workers. Make the CAS workers get a court Order first and get it on the RECORD! Stop taking orders from these incompetent CAS workers who have a long history of messing up kids and their families.
Videos like this are helping to expose the truth of the child protection industry in Canada. You don’t need to go to third world countries like China or South America to see children being terrorized and taken away – we have the police and the CAS doing that right here in Canada. If you think that human rights are being respected in Canada, you had better think again. All this nonsense by the CAS being funded by the taxpayers of the Province of Ontario, of course!
Link to You Tube video
And let’s not forget as well, that it was officers from the Barrie, Ontario police force who bullied and intimidated a 70 year-old senior citizen and would not let her enter the Barrie, Ontario courthouse to use the public washrooms because the elderly woman was wearing a Court Watch T shirt. Read the article at the link below. The police at the Barrie, Ontario courthouse called her a “gang” member for protesting for justice outside of the Barrie, Ontario court.
Link to Barrie Courthouse article in PDF format
Career criminal claims his life in crime began right here in Ontario under the care of the Chatham CAS!
(July 1, 2008) Placing children into the care of the Children’s Aid Society is one way of ensuring that those in the legal and law enforcement industries will be ensured an ongoing supply of criminals to keep their systems running at full tilt. A recent court case in London, Ontario involving former CAS Crown Ward, Mervyn Breaton, supports what a recent study out of British Columbia has shown – that kids placed in foster care are more likely to be involved in a life of crime than they are to go to school. The 87 year-old Breaton appeared before Justice Ross Webster in London, Ontario on charges relating to drugs and breach of probation. Breaton said his history of being involved in crime began after he was placed into the care of Children’s Aid Society in Chatham as a child. Braeton said that since the time he was placed in the care of the CAS that crime and jails is all that he has ever known. “They threw me into Children’s Aid and from then on it was one jail to another,” he said.
Article in Adobe PDF format
For kids in care of child protection agencies, jail a more likely future than graduation!
(June 27, 2008) A study conducted by the provincial government in British Columbia has revealed troubling findings which show that children in care of child protection agencies are more likely to end up in jail than to graduate from school. This article compliments the article published by Canada Court Watch of June 27, 2008 which deals with the issue of kids running wild without supervision in many CAS agencies and that many kids are being corrupted by the influences they face when in care of the CAS. In many cases, the actions of CAS agencies is akin taking kids out of the frying pan and then throwing them into the fire!
Article in Adobe PDF format
Teenage girls turning to prostitution and delinqency while in care of Children’s Aid Society in Ontario
(June 27, 2008) An article published in Canada Court Watch Reports describes the problems of teens running wild while under the care of the CAS. Last week it was revealed during a criminal trial in Brampton that one CAS foster child turned to prostitution at 15 years of age and earned over $360,000 for her pimp. Court Watch has received calls from a number of children who describe wild and crazy things going on inside CAS group and foster homes with out of control kids.
link to article in PDF format
Hamilton MPP introduces Ombudsman oversight bill to make CAS more accountable!
)June 18, 2008) Hamilton NDP MPP Andrea Horwath MPP has re-introduced the CAS Ombudsman Oversight Bill, which, if passed, will grant the Ontario Ombudsman, Andre Marin, the right to finally have the power to investigate the actions of Children’s Aid Societies within the province of Ontario. Officially, that Bill is known as Bill 93, Ombudsman Amendment Act (Children’s Aid Societies), 2008. Most of those in Ontario will recall the Auditor General Report of 2006 in which it was reported that the four Children’s Aid Societies that were investigated had misspent money that should have gone towards protecting our children. The Auditor General found that that all four CAS agencies involved in the investigation were paying for personal vacations and luxury vehicles, etc. with our tax dollars. That was plain wrong. The report also found that the CAS agencies were either unwilling or unable – whichever the case may be – to adhere to child welfare policies, as stated in the Child & Family Services Act, which policies have been made in order to protect the province’s children. Children were dying because of the CAS’ failures in this regard. At the same time, numerous other parents were losing their children unnecessarily to the Crown because of poor record keeping, or sometimes, because of incompetent or vindictive social workers whose management was also either unable or unwilling to prevent these “mistakes”.
The Child & Family Services Review Board was introduced to the general public as what was supposed to be the independent investigative body that would ensure that children were protected from this point on, and that, on the rare occasion when mistakes were made, the CFSRB would be there to “fix” what went wrong. The CFSRB’s role, however, became so watered down during its establishment that the Board really does not now have any investigative powers whatsoever. The only power that the CFSRB actually has – as admitted to by the CFSRB itself – is to compel the complained-about CAS agency to put in writing the reason for their decision on a given matter. There is absolutely no oversight over CAS agencies at all – even with the CFSRB in place – despite Minister of Children & Youth Services Deb Matthews’ false allegations to the contrary. The offending CAS agency can still rob parents of their children – and children of their parents – inappropriately and illegally. The CAS agencies can still destroy lives and lie in affidavits, which they do repeatedly without penalty.
Parents are urged to contact their MPP’s and to request that support Andrea Horwath’s Bill. Parents can also help by obtaining a copy of a petition form from Andrea and collect signatures. We can no longer allow CAS agencies to continue to be unaccountable any longer. All of our children are counting on it.”
Simcoe Children’s Aid Society accepts psychic’s prediction as basis to commence sexual abuse investigation!
(June 17, 2008) If the latest news out of Barrie is any indication of what what CAS agencies have added to their risk assessment tools, CAS agencies should soon be regularly making front page news in the National Enquirer! It seems that the bumbling idiots from the Simcoe Children’s Aid Society (most of whom are unlicensed social workers) commenced an investigation into child abuse based on the reports of a local psychic and card reader. Check today’s top news stories in various newspapers. We can expect that the Simcoe Children’s Aid Society will soon be hiring its own psychics, card readers and witchdoctors. What’s next? Will the Simcoe CAS start a new department to begin investigations of sexual abuse of Aliens from Outer Space? Risk Assessment tools for green children from outer space could very well be the next project coming from the Barrie, Ontario Region if this latest incident is any indication of the thinking that goes on with workers at the CAS. The real tragedy is that the Province of Ontario is taking money away from schools and hospitals in order to fund this CAS nonsense. BEFORE any investigation even commences or a file is even opened up, CAS workers should be verifying the source of the information. In this case with information coming from a psychic as the source, school officials and CAS workers should simply have hung up the phone before taking any further action. The school worker who went to the psychic in the first place should be fired for being mentally unfit to care for children.
Internationally acclaimed Canadian scientist to speak about abuse of children and families by Canada’s family court system!
(June 10, 2008) One of Canada’s highly acclaimed and internationally recognized scientists has contacted Court Watch and has indicated that he is willing to come forth publicly and speak about what he has seen is the systemic abuse of children and families by Canada’s morally corrupt family court system. His testimony will soon be spread throughout the world how the legal profession together with the courts in Canada are helping to destroy their own citizens. Readers should stay tuned for when Court Watch breaks this new story. According to this highly respected scientist, the family court system is creating unnecessary work for lawyers and failing to serve the interest of the Canadian people.
Ontario judge grants recess in court to allows party to purchase recording device and to bring it back into the courtroom!
(June 3, 2008) One Ontario Court judge has demonstrated that he has the fortitude and respect for justice to boldly step where few other judges would dare to tread. In court, the judge acknowledged that a party appearing in court had the right to record his own court hearing. The judge was then so gracious as to grant a recess for the party to leave the courtroom to purchase a recording device at a local electronics shop and to bring back into court. At a previous hearing, the judge admitted that after over 20 years of the bench, he was not familiar with section 136 of the Courts of Justice Act which allows recording and had told the party at the first hearing that recording would not be allowed. At the second hearing, however, the judge did not dig in his heels, but honourably admitted his previous error and to make amends, allowed the party to obtain a recording device at a local store and to bring it back to the court. An article with full details will be published. Hats off to this judge who not only showed that judges are human and that they can make mistakes too, but showed that he was going to put justice and the law above even his own pride! It’s the actions of judges like this who help restore the public’s respect in the administration of Justice. We need more judges like this who understand that they are working to serve the people of Canada in the interests of justice.
It’s too bad that more of our other judges would not follow the example of this judge. Justice Craig Perkins and Justice Lydia Olah are some of these judges who, by their actions, have demonstrated contempt of the law. Justice Lydia Olah had OPP officers from the Collingwood detachment of the OPP physically lock courtroom doors with a lock and key at her court in Collingwood, Ontario and Justice Craig Perkins appears to have made arrangements to have his own court Order violated by certain firms who publish case law. Many argue that the time has come for elections for judges so that the people of Canada can weed out those judges who work against the fundamental principles of justice. Just like a garden needs to be weeded out, Canadians need the ability to weed out those in the judiciary who fail to serve the true interests of justice.
Mother testifies about her family’s horrible ordeal with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer!
(June 3, 2008) A mother has come forth to speak about her horrible experience with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer. This is only yet another in the series of videos intended to expose Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer for failing to live up to it’s mandate to properly protect many children. Hopefully, this will motivate Claire Burns, the Children’s Lawyer, to introduce some much needed changes, such as requiring interviews between children and workers to be videotaped.
Link to Court Watch video index
Child Protection worker caught with drugs in vehicle while transporting foster child
(May 28, 2008) From CBC News – An employee of West Region Child and Family Services is on paid leave and facing criminal charges in connection with drugs found in a vehicle. RCMP said they stopped a car not far from Winnipeg on May 21 and found nearly half a kilogram of marijuana in it. One of two men in the vehicle was an employee of West Region Child and Family Services. A 13-year-old foster child was also in the car. (Maybe this is where some of the workers from the Hamilton CAS get their illegal drugs from. Link to Hamilton CAS article)
Link to CBC news Article
Teen speaks up about how kid’s are being drugged up while in CAS approved foster homes!
(May 25, 2008) A teen speaks up about how kids in foster care were pumped up with drugs until they were zombies and then go downhill after that. She witnessed kids go from good to bad once CAS workers put the kids on prescription drugs. A chilling testimony of just how things are really like in a CAS foster home.
Link to Court Watch video index
Government may compensate foster-home victims!
(May 30, 2008) An article written in the Sun Media regarding how the government of Manitoba is considering a compensation package and apology for the many, many children who were abused while in the care of child protection services in that Province. Seems as if these child protection agencies just cant get it right, not matter how much funding they get.
Article in Adobe PDF format
It would seem that there is a problem in Ontario as well and even more current as the below links from children testify. The links below are very recent situations as well.
Link to CAS abuse video
Link to CAS abuse video
Link to CAS abuse video
Christmas at an Ontario CAS approved foster home!
(May 28 2008) A teen speaks up about her experience at Christmas along with three other foster kids. Locked in a damp and cold basement, this girl along with three other teens was made to stay in the basement while the CAS foster family ate turkey dinner and shared Christmas upstairs. She was also told by CAS workers that she was not allowed to call her mother or her family at Christmas. This video is a just a short clip from an extensive interview in which the girl discloses beatings of kids by CAS providers, psychological abuse and drugs being forced on kids in care. She describes many times, how abuse is reported to CAS workers but workers turn their backs on the kids and do nothing. The more comprehensive video interview will be posted in the near future with high quality DVD copies available from Court Watch. The full length DVD video could be used as a resource by parents to take to their MPP’s and MP’s and also to give as evidence in CAS court cases to show that CAS is not a safe place for children.
Link to Court Watch video index
Teen speaks up about her experience with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer!
(May 25, 2008) A teen speaks up about her experience with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer. Her testimony is typical of the type of feedback that children are reporting about the Office of the Children’s Lawyer.
Link to Court Watch video index
Mother and Daughter claim that they waited for almost a year to get a return call from the Children’s Lawyer and still after more than 1 1/2 years absolutely nothing constructive has resulted!
(May 19, 2008) In response to our call for witnesses, a mother and daughter have come forth to complain about what they say is their “horrible” experience with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer headed by Ms. Claire Burns. In their situation, it took almost a year from when the case was assigned for the children’s lawyer to return their phone calls and even then it was only after the mother sent a complaint letter to head office did the lawyer call them back (in 3 hours after the complaint letter). But even after the lawyer called them back, nothing effective ever got done after that. Both the mother and the daughter say that the Office of the Children’s Lawyer had done absolutely nothing to help them in almost 19 months. The girl even tried to fire her Children’s Lawyer but the Children’s Lawyer’s Office refused the girl’s request. How’s that for service to the children of Ontario!
While Ms. Claire Burns spouts off in court in an effort to denigrate Court Watch and to stop Court Watch from observing her agency in court, she forgets that many of the children who her agency has provided lousy services are voluntarily coming to Court Watch to tell how the agency she heads has failed them. These parents and their children want their stories heard about how the lawyers have miserably failed them. There is an old saying, those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. It is time for Ms. Claire Burns to come out of her glass tower on University Ave, step up to the plate and to do her job as head of the Children’s Lawyer Office by implementing a few simple procedures which would stop these sorts of situations from happening in the first place. Video interviews with this mother and her daughter will be posted soon. Court Watch does not wish to embarrass the Office of the Children’s Lawyer, but sometimes this is the only way to get positive changes implemented. Court Watch only wants the Office of the Children’s Lawyer to work in an accountable, transparent and professional manner in the interest of children and families in Ontario.
In this day and age of inexpensive recording devices, there is no reason whatsoever for children and parents to be contacting Court Watch to report that they have been threatened and abused by their children’s lawyer while in meetings. Court Watch manages to provide videotape service with no money coming from the taxpayers, so why can’t Ms. Burns’s agency do the same with the millions of tax dollars it receives every year from the Ontario government! There should be no reason for children reporting that their Children’s lawyer is lying about what they have said. There should be no reason why children are reporting physical abuse to their lawyer and then have the lawyer do nothing about it! THERE IS NO REASON FOR THIS WHATSOEVER! If Claire Burns, as the Children’s Lawyer of Ontario, does not take steps to fix the problem of selective reporting, then she is part of the problem herself and in the public’s interest, Court Watch will do its part to expose injustices committed against children by her agency. If changes don’t come soon, a public inquiry may be the solution.
The Archbishop Dorian A. Baxter, the National Chairman of Court Watch, stands ready to meet with Ms. Burns to discuss how her agency can begin to make positive changes which will better serve the children of Ontario. One thing we can predict for certain, that unless Claire Burns takes her duty to serve the citizens of Ontario seriously and takes positive steps soon to fix the sorts of problems that Court Watch had uncovered, that it will be only a matter of time until our elected officials will decide to have her replaced with someone who will get the job done with far fewer of these sorts of unnecessary and easily avoidable complaints.
Link to video to be posted here soon
Information wanted from children and parents about their experience with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer!
(May 17, 2008) In a recent court hearing, Ms. Claire Burns, the Children’s Lawyer of Ontario, personally intervened and attempted to discredit Canada Court Watch by claiming that Court Watch should not be allowed to monitor child protection cases in the courts and that Court Watch should not be considered as a media source for getting information out to the public. By her actions, Mr. Burns has only demonstrated that her agency is more worried about protecting the interests of its lawyers than it is interested in promoting accountability and transparency which are some of most basic principles encompassed within the meaning of “the Administration of Justice.” Court Watch has a copy of a video from the Law Society of Upper Canada in which Ms. Burns has stated on the public record that her office has determined that the recording of children by their children’s lawyers can psychologically harm them. Yet, the Supreme Court of Canada has contradicted the position of Ms. Burns and has said that the video recording of children is a reliable source of evidence. (Canada Court Watch supports the position that interviews between children and professionals in any matter which could have a significant impact on a child or family must be recorded using audio or video)
Ms. Burns, representing the Office of the Children’s Lawyer, takes the position that her government funded agency is a reliable source for providing services for children and that organizations such as Canada Court Watch should not be allowed to monitor how the Children’s Lawyer’s Office does its job at the expense of taxpayers. What Ms. Burns failed to mention is that her agency had previously argued this same position in the past and at a court hearing where lawyers with the Office of the Children’s Lawyer were given time by the judge to present their arguments and where Court Watch was given a fair opportunity to present it’s arguments, that the lawyers with the Office of the Children’s Lawyer and the Children’s Aid were defeated in court by a single Canada Court Watch reporter. This is not the first time that the Children’s Lawyer’s office has attempted to pervert the administration of justice and to keep Canada Court Watch from monitoring how its agency represents children in Ontario. It would seem that Claire Burns does not support a fair process when it comes to dealing with those who monitor her agency. There is an old expression in the English language with says, “what is good for the goose is good for the gander” so as a public figure, Ms. Burns must be prepared for what members of the public have to say about how her agency is performing in the public’s interest. Court Watch has received many complaints from children about their distrust of the court appointed Children’s Lawyer. Children have testified that their court appointed children’s lawyer has lied to the court about what they are saying and that they don’t trust their children’s lawyers. This being the case, why is Ms. Claire Burns so opposed to having her worker maintain an accurate record of meetings with children by simply audio recording them? And what about the psychological damage to children as Ms. Burns claims – hogwash say many parents and children!!
A previous report Link to report released by a committee of citizens about the Children’s Lawyer on just one case, provides some evidence as to the poor job this agency has done in the past. This report which was produced by the citizens of Ontario at no cost to the taxpayers, resulted in the Office of the Children’s Lawyer being hauled before the Divisional Court In Toronto and harshly criticized by the court. This is a good example of how the citizens of Ontario can fight back and make a difference! Recent video testimony from a mother gives some more indication of how some children and parents feel about this government funded agency and that problems continue to exist with this agency. Link to video
Canada Court Watch feels that it is time for children and parents of Ontario who have had dealings with Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer, to have their say so that the elected officials of the Province of Ontario can know how the Children’s Lawyer is performing under its mandate. Court Watch would like to gather testimony and other evidence from children and parents who have had dealings with the Office of the Children’s Lawyer for the purpose of producing an investigative report on this agency. We are looking for video interviews with children and parents as well as court documents which will show how the Children’s Lawyer has performed in various Ontario court cases. We want the names of individual lawyers who have worked as children’s lawyers and we want feedback as to how well they performed. Testimony from mature children and teens will be most helpful. Whether a good or bad experience, Court Watch would like to hear from you. If you are interested in providing information or testimony in support of this effort, please contact Canada Court Watch at info@canadacourtwatch.com
Women’s Shelter supervisor reports abuse of tax dollars by women’s shelter!
(May 16, 2008) A women’s shelter supervisor contacted Canada Court Watch to disclose that she has witnessed considerable problems within the women’s shelter where she works and that there are many things that she has seen which she does not feel are right but unable to say anything publicly about due to fear of losing her job at the shelter for abused women. During her interview she disclosed that records were being altered and that the shelter for abused women was taking in many women of questionable background for the sole purpose of maintaining higher levels of government funding from the Province of Ontario. She indicated that violence was occurring in the shelter and that homeless people, people on drugs and
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Two charged with obstruction
Greater Sudbury Police charged two people who attempted to block their search of a 12-year-old ward of Children’s Aid Society.
Officers went to a home in the east end of the city Wednesday looking for the child, who “was considered a child in need of protection under the auspices of the Child and Family Services Act,” police said in a release.
While the child was found and returned to the care of the CAS, “during the course of their investigation, officers were obstructed by a 42-year old female, as well as a 16-year old female.”
As a result, both were charged with obstructing police, while the teen also faces a charge of causing a disturbance.
The woman will appear in court July 9, while the teen appears in court July 10.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
“Obfuscation and Public Deceit for Dummies”
How to destroy Children and Families, use the Taxpayer to do it and then hide behind it all by avoiding the questions and shutting out the Observers.
by Tom Thompson,
Independent Justice Reporter
4th June 2008
Tax dollars and resources meant to help children are being squandered by Ontario’s Children’s Lawyer in efforts which ultimately harm the interests of children and of Justice in Ontario. Under legislation in Ontario, the Office of the Children’s lawyer (OCL) is the taxpayer-funded agency which is appointed to represent the interests of children in many family court proceedings.
While most taxpayers would expect this government agency, with its lawyers and social workers, to spend tax resources in a manner which would best help children and promote justice in an open and accountable manner, evidence would reasonably indicate that this agency is often failing in these objectives.
The person assigned the responsibility of managing this taxpayer-funded agency is Ms. Claire E. Burns, a lawyer who also serves as the Vice-Chancellor of the Anglican Diocese of Toronto.
Analysis of documents and testimony from the very children and families which the OCL is supposed to be helping, reveal that significant problems continue to plague this agency and that significant changes are required to repair the serious flaws in the way in which this government agency operates under the direction of Ms. Burns.
Of significant concern is that a number of children and parents who have had dealings with the OCL state that their experience has not been a good one.
Many say that they do not trust the OCL or its workers and report that they have been harmed by the agency.
Some children report that OCL workers showed clear signs of bias against one of their parents and that they did not think this fair while some others reported that they wished they had a recording of their meeting with the OCL worker so that the workers could be exposed for lying.
While Ms. Burns has been questioned as to why she does not support the concept of having OCL workers simply employ the use of audio recording devices to maintain accurate records, Ms. Burns has stated on the record that the recording of meetings with children by her staff will cause the children harm.
Yet the Supreme Court of Canada has disagreed with Ms. Burns and has stated that the recording of children’s testimony for court purposes is a most reliable form of record keeping. Police routinely record children’s testimony as well, especially when interviewing them during investigations involving sexual assault or domestic violence.
Yet even when children say they wish to have their meetings with OCL workers recorded they are refused this option.
One 13-year-old from the Barrie, Ontario area told the Canada Court Watch group during a videotaped interview that she caught the OCL lawyer attempting to record her but that the lawyer lied to her about this when she asked.
By far, the most common and alarming complaint voiced by child clients of OCL is that their lawyers fail to make their wishes properly known to the court and that OCL workers use leading questions and coercive questioning techniques during meetings. Children have reported being completely ignored by their lawyers and their wishes and opinions are never heard by the court at all.
One child informed her mother that she had not seen her lawyer in over a year and that during a subsequent telephone call to an administrative assistant at the OCL, the parent was told that the file had been closed some time before. Yet, according to the parents, in spite of the child being told that she no longer had a lawyer, the lawyer continued to attend court appearances afterwards and to “speak to the child’s wishes” in court.
Given that this lawyer had no contact with the child it is difficult to imagine how the lawyer in question was able to determine the child’s wishes without actually speaking to the child. It would be reasonable to assume that the taxpayers of Ontario were paying for this lawyer when she did go to court as it is unlikely that she went to for free. Last month, one parent from Halton, Ontario reported that he was concerned that the OCL lawyer for his daughter had billed the Ontario government for services which his daughter had not received.
The 15-year-old girl involved testified in a videotaped interview that she did not trust her OCL lawyer and that she felt that he had been “useless.”
Currently, there appears to be no reliable method which would allow clients to verify the billable hours charged to the taxpayers for services provided to children being represented by the OCL with some saying that the OCL billing process lacks transparency and could be easily abused.
The Office of the Children’s Lawyer also employs clinical investigators that that are assigned to conduct assessments and provide reports during high conflict custody and access cases. In some cases, OCL workers are refusing to provide any written documentation as to work they have done and in some cases where reports are provided, serious flaws can be found with the manner that evidence is gathered and with its accuracy.
A report from a clinical investigator from the OCL was submitted as evidence in a recent high profile case in Newmarket, Ontario which related to the health and welfare of two morbidly obese children.
When the OCL investigator was cross examined at trial on the content of the report, it was admitted that this OCL worker had failed to interview any of the collateral contacts provided by the father and had refused to review crucial medical evidence provided by the father relating to the weight of the children.
Simply, the OCL worker had failed to exercise due diligence in the gathering and reporting of the facts.
Significant tax dollars are being paid out to so called, “clinical investigators” from the OCL to produce what many parents and even professionals say are highly flawed and unprofessional reports with many of these reports costing thousands of dollars in each case. In another case, OCL workers demanded that a videotape of an 11-year old disclosing that he was being coerced by his children’s lawyer child be destroyed.
Just last week in a Hamilton courtroom packed with media representatives from all over the Province, Ms. Burns singled out the media representative from Canada Court Watch and immediately asked the court to exclude Court Watch from observing the proceedings, involving a young leukemia patient apprehended from his parents by the Children’s Aid Society in Hamilton.
Ms. Burns wasted the court’s valuable time and that of many other people to exclude Canada Court Watch in spite of the fact that this individual held valid press credentials and despite the fact that a court had ruled against the OCL in a previous court on this identical issue. Most believe that the real intentions of Ms. Burns were to silence those who dare to criticize her agency.
Ms. Burn’s efforts to muzzle Canada Court Watch would indicate that she has more interest in keeping her agency unaccountable and that she holds little respect for the fundamental role that the media play in protecting the public’s interest in the administration of justice. The entire court was forced to sit and listen to arguments that had absolutely nothing to do with the best interests of the child and everything to do with Ms. Burns own personal agenda to stifle those who dare expose the failures of her agency.
Already distraught at having their seriously ill child apprehended these poor parents were forced to watch as Ms. Burns turned their child protection hearing into a personal attack against Canada Court Watch.
It was a good example of Ms. Burns wasting tax dollars to lessen transparency and accountability.
Ms. Burns and her agency are supposed to be focusing their energies on providing legal services to vulnerable children and to do this job in a most efficient and transparent manner, not squandering tax dollars for the purpose of muzzling criticism of their agency.
As a government funded agency, the OCL should be placing the interests of children and families first, not the interests of its lawyers and social workers.
Disturbing complaints which continue to arise about the OCL raise serious questions as to the ability and willingness of its director, Ms. Claire Burns, to find solutions to these repetitive problems.
The Auditor General of Ontario, Mr. McCarter who delivered a scathing report after conducting his value for dollars audit on the spending habits of CAS agencies might be well advised to review the financial records of the OCL sooner than later before more children are adversely affected by the actions of the Office of the Children’s Lawyer
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Credibility and Accountability
The Ontario Liberal government has lost it’s credibility over and over again and this is continuing into their second term. McGuinty’s ministries provincial agencies (Children’s Aid Society) and the court system have ignored the public and a report prepared by the Ontario Ombudsman Electoral Reform: Provincial Ombudsman says Ontario Can Do Better. Instead these ministries and agencies boasted about their strong performances when in fact every government service under the Liberal government has deteriorated such as health care and education, auto sector jobs and healthcare (Canada rated the worst out of seven countries for wait times and access to care facilities). There is still no independent oversight for Ontario’s Children’s Aid Societies. Accountability is non-existent and services continue to deteriorate. When governments or their service providers are described by the public they serve as being corrupted or incompetent; their reaction is to either sideline the issue or promote that particular ministry or agency as a world class or international leader. The Liberals allowed property tax increases in Ontario ignoring cries from Ontario homeowners (OMPAC). The ombudsman called this agency ” an arrogant cut-throat agency will little regard for homeowners” at the same time this agency was promoting itself a “global leader”. Similar “delusions” existed with Ontario’s Children’s Aid Societies, Family Responsibility Office, Ontario Lottery Corp., etc. All presented a proud face but in reality they were ignoring corruption and any accountability to they people they serve. The Liberal government spent 2.4 million dollars and battled in court for 8 years with Ontario parents to try and conceal how much it spends defending lawsuits from parents who’s children receive services from the CAS.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Unlocking The Logic.
To fully understand why our “system” is structured in the way it is,we need to understand the structure it is built on.
There is reason and purpose for every illogical rule written.
Since Prohibition the Government has made illegal numerous products until it found a way to capitalized from it themselves. Alcohol and marijuana which are now both Government regulated but which have numerous spin-off liabilities against the user.
We have Courts that are logical law and we have courts that are assimilated to resemble logic. Mainly family Court.
You may wonder why a Government would put in place and embrace laws that put children in the custody of the parent that is less capable of supporting the child? It is yet another way the Government has seen in profiting from humans weakness and sense of accountability.
When a parent is supported financially by the government, it has proven most likely that they will be awarded custody of their children. The benefit to this tactic generates more revenue than the balance of support the government pays each month.
Revenue from “kidnapping” training for Children’s Aid Workers.
It spins off and generates jobs for Court officials,Judges,lawyers and most time correctional facilities.Schools,mental health professionals,Doctors, Prescriptions to help children forget their alienated parent.
Is the time nearing that Fathers will be striped of their ability to father children. Does this government have fathers so tightly by the balls that we will one day see Government funded sperm banks to ensure that the next generation has no family values?
The Key.
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
Social Policy Sudbury Style!
We here at http://www.corruptioncentral.com are here to stay and take great offence to have our code of ethics and morals likened to those of current Social Policy administraters. Namely overzealous Social Workers,Police, Lawyers, Judges and Politicians. Their interpretation of Social Policy “Sudbury Style” affords all involved a very comfortable standard of living but at who’s expense and at what cost to tax payers and society? All these people would not have jobs without kids being kidnapped, creating false cases against innocent people, and wasting valuable court time at the tax payers expense.
Why is this abuse unacknowledged by community leaders and elected government officials? They sacrifice our youth for good paying jobs. Paid for by the tax payer!
All willingly exploit children and support each other ensuring each others workload which translates into more government funding and jobs in their community contained industry.
What the C.A.S., Politicians, Community Leaders and heads of other government funded agencies and institutions have done and continue to do is unregulated or regulated in a way with NO effective safegaurds for abuse of powers. Therefore they have the power to create future generations that are dependant on these government services by destroying our youth, ie. generations of those dependant on welfare, criminals for jails, and doctors creating drug addicts for drug companies. There is no shortage of kids to kidnapp or citizens that willingly collect welfare and are more than happy to accept the FREE drugs available from our government “service” providers! Some doctors willingly and freely support indiscriminately writing prescriptions at anyones request.
False flimsey cases are created against good hard working parents in the corrupted industry that is masked as government services!
Help stop this culture of corruption in our society!
corruptioncentral.com
corruptioncentral, children’s aid society, accountability
16 Aug. 08
Dear Mr Judge Troman
I quite clearly said to you in court on 13 August , that I was sick of your corrupt courts, and that I knew exactly what you were doing , in that you were playing for time, waiting for the summer school holidays to be over, so that you would not have to deal with this issue, and once again pander to the mother and her wishes.
I now hold you personally responsible for the latest abuse of my daughter, as you have done exactly what I have said, something I have learnt to accept as normal behaviour, over the last 7 years, in these corrupt, devious and evil courts, that you do what the mother wants, at the cost and abuse of innocent children and
there fathers.
I also understand you have played a part in the corruption and abuse of Mark Harris, and his innocent, defenceless daughters. Once being labelled as unlawful and unfair by another judge. Thankfully now, no thanks to you or your corrupt associates, they live with their father who loves them, not a revengeful mother, using the children as a weapon, backed by you.
You could have quite easily made an order, going along with the recommendations of cafcass. You could have quite easily put an end to 7 years of abuse, torture, persecution and corruption. You could have quite easily made an order, to give my daughter the chance of a balanced, secure upbringing. You could of quite easily, halved the rest of this holiday, and then dealt with term time arrangements at a later date.
But no, you stall it, with only one intention to do what the mother wants.
Going against, the recommendation of cafcass, going against the request of my daughter and going against me doing, what my daughter would like, and needs, and what is clearly in my daughter’s best interest.
Lacking any backbone, integrity or conscience, working your corruption behind closed doors, under the secrecy shroud of the secret family courts.
How you sleep at night I will never know.
If somebody, had tortured and persecuted you and your children, would you just sit back, and let it destroy you and your children, or would you try to do something about it.
I will let you decide the answer to the question, as to what you think I will do.
Jolly Stanesby
DADS MATTER: Fathers 4 Justice wants to raise awareness about equal
shared parenting after separation or divorce and is calling for an end to the
removal of either parent from children’s lives by family courts. (Photos.com)
Driving across the country in a large purple “Barney Mobile,” a group of parents dressed up as the Hulk, Spiderman and other superheroes are hoping to spur change in Canada’s family court system.
Through its Cross Country Crusade, which will make 30 stops between Vancouver and St. John’s, Fathers 4 Justice Canada aims to promote the concept of equal parenting after divorce.
Legislated equal parenting, says F4J, would do away with the current “adversarial system” in place in family court in which one parent usually gets sole custody while the other — most often the father — has to make do with seeing the child only during designated times.
In equal shared parenting, both parents remain as custodial parents and children are spared being embroiled in the conflict over who’s going to win custody.
F4J and other father’s rights groups say that with the mother being granted sole custody in about 85 per cent of disputed custody cases, the family court system is unfairly stacked against them.
Gender bias, they allege, is rampant in the system and they want change. “I think when these laws were drafted, the will of Parliament was meant to be maximum contact for both parents,” says Kris Titus, national coordinator for F4J.
“Unfortunately the language was too loose and too open for interpretation at the court level. We want to see that sewn up so it is very clear to the courts and the parents what is expected when the family breaks down.”
After her own divorce 10 years ago, Titus’ ex-husband was allowed to have the children only every other weekend. When both parents saw the negative effect this arrangement was having on their two sons, they decided to go back to court to request equal custody.
It took two tries, but the court eventually saw it their way and the difference in the kids’ demeanor was almost immediate, says Titus.
Fathers 4 Justice “superheroes” travel across Canada in their
Barney Mobile.
F4J is calling for an end to the removal of either parent from children’s lives by family courts and advocates the dismantling of Canada’s family law system to be replaced by a “fair, balanced and transparent rules-based environment.”
Department of Justice (DOJ) spokesperson Carole Saindon says that because family circumstances can vary greatly, the Divorce Act does not dictate or favour any particular type of parenting arrangement.
“All decisions must be based solely on the best interests of the children, given the particular circumstances of each case,” she says. “Courts currently have the discretion to order that custody be shared equally if they feel that it would be in a child’s best interests based on the facts presented to them and the input from both parents.”
However, University of British Columbia sociology professor Edward Kruk, Canada’s foremost expert on custody, says the removal of one parent from the life of the child is widespread. He calls the family court system “a national shame.” “I don’t actually see this issue as one that only affects fathers because there are increasing numbers of mothers who are losing their children and children who are losing their mothers,” says Kruk. “I like to see it more from the child’s perspective because it is a form of child abuse to have a fit and loving parent forcefully removed by a court in the absence of any child protection concerns or issues.”
Numerous studies show that equal parenting is best for children and is actually desired by children themselves. Growing up fatherless can result in a host of problems, including depression, teenage pregnancy, delinquency, bullying, drug abuse and suicide. Non-custodial fathers, too, are “a very at-risk group,” says Kruk, with homicides and suicides disproportionate to the rest of the population.
And while a 2007 survey by SES research found that 80 per cent of Canadians support equal parenting, Kruk says Canada currently has one of the highest removal rates in the world. The divorce industry is booming in many western countries including Canada, where a contested divorce costs an average of $25,000, according to F4J. This is why, says Kruk, “there’s a very strong vested interest in maintaining the status quo on the part of the legal professionals.” “It almost guarantees that the conflict will be ongoing and protracted if one parent gets sole custody, then the other one is always fighting for more access, so it drags on. Parents can lose their life savings over a custody battle and it’s set up that way to benefit the legal profession.” he says.
Saindon says that while many parents prefer to retain the services of a lawyer, that’s not a requirement. DOJ provides funding to develop and implement family justice services that assist families in resolving their issues “in the least adversarial manner possible,” she adds.
Perceived unfairness in the family court system is also an issue in the United States, where dozens of father’s rights groups are pushing for equal parenting and custody laws like those already in place in Maine and Iowa. In Britain, the U.K. chapter of F4J has staged several high-profile stunts to raise awareness about custody rights.
Australia has gone further than other countries in that it now has a law stipulating that when parents divorce and can’t agree on custody arrangements, joint custody will automatically be implemented.
“In most jurisdictions that put forth some sort of shared parenting norm, the overall divorce rates have dropped and the number of parents entering the court system has dropped,” says Titus. “You really remove the incentive to even go to court in the first place.”
Equal parenting also reduces false allegations of assault or sexual abuse, which is a common occurrence and monopolizes the court system, says Titus.
Steven Howitt, a house builder in Calgary, says his wife falsely accused him of assaulting her after he refused to sign authorization allowing her to take their two-year-old daughter out of the country. Although the charges were eventually dropped, he lost everything.
“After 10 days in the women’s shelter…she decides to go to court with a story that gives her the house, gives her custody of the children, she already had my car, she cleaned out my bank account so she had my money, yet I still had to pay for the mortgage, food and everything else,” says Howitt.
Howitt believes the “ex parte” system is unfair. In ex parte proceedings, designed to protect women in emergency situations, one party can appear in court without the other party’s knowledge and without having to provide any evidence.
“That’s a really good weapon for women to wield because 10 minutes in court she gets everything and the man is basically kicked out.”
Howitt’s wife took him to court seven times using legal aid although she is not a Canadian citizen. She now lives in Germany and is attempting to use the courts there to have Howitt pay her $5,000 per month in living expenses and child support.
Howitt is fighting on this end to have his daughter, who he says was illegally taken out of the country, returned to Canada and have the courts here decide who should have custody.
Equal parenting is also being championed by MP Maurice Vellacott, who introduced a private member’s motion in April seeking “more equity” in the way Canadian courts decide on custodial and access questions.
With an estimated 40 per cent of Canadian courts’ legal time taken up with custody and access disputes, maybe it’s not surprising that Vellacott’s motion, which comes up for debate in the fall, has received some backing.
The Legislature of the Northwest Territories unanimously passed a supportive motion for Vellacott’s initiative, and it also has the support of some Conservative and Liberal MPs.
“I think we have to fundamentally challenge that whole notion that the court has that authority to remove custody from a fit and loving parent in the absence of any kind of proven abuse,” says Kruk.
Last Updated
Aug 27, 2008
A Message to our Canadian Brothers?
A message to Canadian Men and Women Brothers and Sisters in the struggle against the tyranny of “Family Law” and for Justice and Equality
Although it sometimes seems to be an impossible struggle, Fathers and Men and their supporters really can make a difference. But they have to at least try to make that difference. One of the biggest ‘negatives’ in the fight for equality rights in parenting and in law is apathy and indifference. Don’t let apathy infect you. Don’t pass it to others if it does. Its bad enough that the public at large and the media don’t really have a clue as to what you are fighting about and why. But yet look at what our brothers in F4J have achieved in less than 2 weeks of hard-core direct action activity. Imagine what more they could do with more support from you and others? It makes absolute sense what they are doing and remember they are doing it and paying a heavy personal price for YOU and your children.
As they have shown if you really think that the system needs to change and improve then you really have to actually do something about it. You have to get involved and you have to ‘join the battle’. You can’t afford to be a spectator and expect someone else to fight the battle for you all the time. You have to join a group and support them in every way. You don’t have to wear a super hero suit but you can turn out to cheer and applaud them-at least. And there are many groups around. Support and join one of them. or more.
Write to your local media. Call in to a radio show. Make your position know and make it clear. Write to the Justice Ministers. Write to your MP and MPP. Write to anyone involved. And keep writing until someone pays attention. Talk to everyone you know about what is happening. Spread the word around at work and among your relatives about the absurdity and distinct inequality of ‘family law’. Make it clear that for Fathers and Men mostly the law is biased, discriminatory and destructive and that you and others in many groups are fighting to correct it. Tell them we are rational and well adjusted and that we are not ‘crazy kooks’ but are simply reacting to what is real and evident. More than anything tell them we are only agitating for that which is guaranteed to us under the Charter,
Come out to meetings and rallies. Make an effort. Get yourself into the movement for change and stay with it until things do change. Don’t give up until you change ‘family law’ and restore sanity to the legal system forever. If not for you then at least for your children-and their children. What is happening to Fathers and their children, not only in Canada but around the “Western” world is nothing short of a disgraceful unchecked and destructive social evil of the highest magnitude. it has to be countered and it has to be fought.
Remember that not so long ago in our own history in 1837 in the Upper Canada rebellion (look it up) brave men took to the streets to oppose another social evil in another time. They were violently put down-in fact shot down and beaten and even killed-by troops in the streets but the message was clear and social change followed. We don’t “do” the violence and forceful thing anymore even though in those old days our forefathers would have poured into the streets in response to what we are forced to endure today. Ask yourself what they would have said to what in any century amounts to the legal kidnapping and ransom of our children and the destruction of the family. The people of that time without email, cell phones and even telephones ‘voted’ with their physical presence and sacrifice. They made the difference. So must you. And it does not require violence. It simply requires engagement, commitment and tangible action.. As they say in North America “Ya gotta get out there man”
Change will come in time and every time someone gets out there and demonstrates or even writes a letter they are adding to the building of the ‘front’ against this disgusting system ironically called “family law” . It can be done. But it starts with you. Make a difference. Get involved. Listen to your leaders. Support them. Go to the courthouse with your brothers. . Attend a rally. Join a group. Donate money, resources and your time. Make sure you and your voice and those of the people you support are heard. its all about self-help and support. And solidarity. You have right on your side
Jeremy Swanson FathersCan FRA
Ottawa, Canada
“A Goodbye to my Son”
By …..
Wednesday 3rd September 2008
After four years of battle to gain access to my son I have to let go and say goodbye…
Please always now that I love you and that this is no decision on my part But it is a decision that your mother has made (in keeping you from me using the CAS) and I hope that she can live with the consequences of the decisions that she has Made. I know deep in my heart that she has influenced you because I have not recieved any letters or phone calls from you. It must be hard when your mother and the CAS tell you that you will get in trouble if you called me. It doesnt make sense does it?
I need you to understand that I left your mother due to her constant threat Of violence that I could no longer endure. You witnessed this first hand in 2007.
I also know that your mother is keeping me from you as a last resort to supplement her social assistance and to have access to Ritalin.
Yes, You have become strangers to me too, but I have tried so hard to see you.. I have kept a detailed file of all the events so when you are older You will understand and you can make up your own mind as to what the events Where since 2004.
I have decided and told your mother that I will no longer make any attempts to speak with her and your mother should in return not contact me or manipulate you. Please know that you will be in my mind and hart every second of the day and That I love you.
Until we meet again
Love Dad
To M … , my ex:
You know that it is through your doing that I have not had access to my son and that they see me as a stranger. You know that I have in the past 4 years tried to contact you to make arrangements to see my son, but you would lie to cas, have an excuse, put the phone down on me, call the cops, or not take my calls at all. I have a file with all the proof that I can show the our son one day when he decides to come looking for me.
I am tired of being accused and treated like a criminal when I am doing what is right and I am not the one that is in the wrong.
Just remember that what you are doing to our son is not right,but you are going to have to live with the consequences of the decisions that you have made. One day he will know the truth and if then they resent you, I will know that I did try and do what is best for them.
Proof CPS and CAS nees to legally kidnap the kids to make their budget
Parents of Ontario, HIDE YOUR CHILDREN!
Hastings CAS will be on the lookout to legally snatch your children to get their “Funding”. Executive Director Len Kennedy says “If more children come into care over the course of the year, the CAS would be eligible for more funding”
Lack of Provincial support blamed.
Hastings CAS projects $2.1 Million deficit (wonder what CAS Sudbury projects). The Hastings Children’s Aid Society is projecting a $2.1 million deficit by the end of this fiscal year. A fact it attributes to a continued lack of provincial support.
While the shortfall won’t stop the agency from delivering essential services, (That part made me laugh) executive Director Len Kennedy said it will put MORE pressure on STAFF who oversee hundreds of kids in care.
“On a couple of occasions this year we’ve not replaced a person or delayed the replacement to save a few months of salary,” he said.
“We’ll continue to exercise all diligent measure to try and reduce the deficit, but there isn’t a whole lot we can go after because we are delivering mandatory services”
At a board meeting Thursday, finance director Mark Stevens presented a report showing that the agency’s projected expenditures for the 2008-09 fiscal year are $32.5 million (Sudbury’s is 45 million). Yet based on the number of children it cares for, the agency is only eligible for $31.1 Million in provincial funding-resulting in a $1.4 million deficit for the year.
However, the CAS is still carrying deficits from the previous 2 years -nearly $266,000 from 2006-07 and nearly$468,000 from 2007-08. It adds up to $2.1 million, a number that is significant, but not surprising Kennedy said, given the provinces flawed funding formula.
Kennedy said the Province provides CAS with $87 a day for each child in its care. But additional money is needed to pay for such things as therapy and counselling for children who often come into care following reports of abuse.
(See how Mr. Kennedy only stated “reports of abuse”, He doesn’t mention the 100’s of children that that kidnap legally based on false allegations and the lies twisted by the CAS workers in court documentation)
During the meeting Kennedy noted to the board members that 38 other Ontario Children’s Aid Societies sent first-quarter financial reports to the province. Together those agency’s were expecting an accumulated deficit of about $38 million.
“Our scenario is in keeping with what other agencies are reporting at this time”, hesaid
Last March, the province provided an extra $800,000 to the Hastings CAS to reduce a previously anticipated $1.3 million deficit, just before the fiscal year ended.
Kennedy does notknow whether a similar rollout will be offered this spring, but he said the Agency is talking with the province about raising these funds.
“We’re hoping that there will be some relief again”, he said. “Our position is these are the costs of delivering the mandatory service of child welfare in Hastings County. Those costs continue to be above the level of funding we receive, but we dont have any choice about the service that must be delivered”
He stressed however, that the $2.1 million figure is only a projection.
“IF MORE KIDS COME INTO CARE OVER THE COURSE OF THE YEAR, THE CAS WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR MORE FUNDING” Kennedy said,”but the money wont be enough to erase a deficit”
HIDE YOUR CHILDREN PARENTS OF ONTARIO!
SUDBURY CAS IS LOOKING TO STEAL YOUR KIDS AND GET RICHER!
This Paquette guy even looks like Adolf Hitler…my sympathies to the poor children and parents of Sudbury and Manitoulin.
jc
< <"I am a parent with a job to do -- raising my child properly. And it's his right to have his father in his life, not my right to make his father's life hell because I'm unhappy.">>
“This is from a Mother But certainly not yours”
” To my Children, I can’t imagine how much better your lives would have been had your mother not dragged us through the Court of hell for 6-years??
We will never know, but please, as you each strive to find your places in this world and when you are facing the choice of using a child as a weapon, remember that your weapon will always show the signs of battle. A battle that could have been avoided. With Love from your Dad “.
Courts need overhaul
The Edmonton Journal
Open Up The Courts – Social Workers To Be Held Accountable. Justice in the family courts will be better served, and professionals held properly to account, if the courts are open to scrutiny from the press.
The Times
October 20, 2008
Sir Mark Potter, President of the Family Division, makes an important call in today’s Times for greater openness in the family courts. The interview ranges more widely than this topic alone and he believes that many criticisms of the family justice system, including some made by this newspaper, have been unfair and misleading. But Sir Mark is quite clear: the balance has now come down in favour of greater openness. It seems likely that the Justice Secretary, Jack Straw, is set to act to allow the public to see what is being done in their name. It will be a salutary change.
Since launching our campaign to open up the family courts and make social workers properly accountable for their actions, The Times has received many phone calls and letters from parents who feel that they and their children have been the victims of injustice. Many of those parents fear that the professionals are amplifying problems which should be solved by supporting, rather than by accusing, families. Some have been denied access to their own case papers by local authorities which seem to be interpreting the Data Protection Act in surprising ways. Many are afraid to speak out for fear of being in contempt of court. The lack of openness distorts the natural course of justice. As a result, the sheer number of parents who feel the system is stacked against them is alarming.
The 1989 Children’s Act enshrined the principle of minimum state intervention in family life. But recent reports by the watchdog Ofsted into Cafcass, the Children and Family Court Advisory Service, suggest that some local authorities are wilfully disregarding this principle. The Times campaign stems from the belief that some social workers are too quick to jump to conclusions about parents, and that grievous miscarriages of justice are occurring because professionals can operate without scrutiny in closed courts. Gagging orders and reporting restrictions mean that cases do not come to light unless judges choose to make their judgments public.
It should be quite possible, as Sir Mark Potter argues, to hold professionals to account while also preserving the anonymity of children. There is no reason to increase the suffering of innocent children by dragging their names into the public domain. Rape cases are a useful analogy. The police give evidence in open court in rape cases. The media can report that evidence in full. But we do not name the victim. That process works perfectly well and in the interests of open justice.
Sir Mark argues that family courts should be open to the press, but not the general public. This also makes sense. Most family cases are deeply personal and involve intimate details which relatives are understandably keen to protect. The press is subject to codes, which means that it can be trusted to protect certain details which nosey neighbours could use to spread misery. Experience in Canada, where the family courts are open, suggests that many cases are of no interest whatever to the press in practice. Open courts would change the experience of families in only a minority of cases, usually where the family wanted the press to see what was going on.
Child protection is fraught with difficulty. Judges and social workers operate in a minefield of emotion and complexity. Many do an excellent job. It is clear that some children are at risk from family members and they need protection. But the removal of children from their parents has consequences for all of society. The statistics on children taken into care – their life chances – make grim reading.
The public which funds the child protection system has a right to expect it to be accountable, and transparent. Sir Mark’s words are an important step in this direction.
The government is running a 500 million dollar deficit. I have a solution for the Ontario government that could save them some if not all that amount.
Withhold some of the 1.5 billion they pay to the CAS agencies and they won’t be in the hole anymore. We all know that the majority of that money they give the CAS agencies is for the workers and head guys wages and their lawyers wages. Without money to pay lawyers then there would be less children being taken into care, less workers employed, less lawyers needed, less overloaded family courts and maybe more actual working to keep the families together and the children in their real homes and less drain on the tax payers.
From Edmonton Sun
The controversy engulfing Alberta’s child welfare system has unearthed valuable ammunition for a lawyer spearheading a class-action suit on behalf of foster kids.
Robert Lee told Sun Media that the provincial child advocate’s internal quarterly reports, which detail a litany of complaints against the foster-care system, are “evidence” in his lawsuit involving 400 former foster kids.
“I didn’t know they existed,” Lee told Sun Media.
“They’re going to be very helpful for me, but whether they create enough pressure for the government to fix the system remains to be seen.”
The reports were released to the public this week by NDP MLA Rachel Notley after she acquired several years’ worth of them through an access to information request.
They reveal complaints of illegal restraint techniques used on kids in care, kids sexually assaulting other kids, and children being placed in inappropriate or even dangerous homes because nothing better was available.
Yesterday, opposition politicians called on Children’s Services Minister Janis Tarchuk to resign, charging she had no control over her department.
But Premier Ed Stelmach stood by his minister, saying that there are few people in Alberta who have as much compassion for children as Tarchuk does.
Lee represents 400 former foster kids who claim they were abused in a system that leaves child welfare workers overworked and ill-prepared to ensure the well-being of kids in the state’s care.
He commissioned a study of the system that determined it “fails to meet the most basic safety, permanency and well-being needs of children in foster care.”
Last month, Lee got his class-action suit certified, but government lawyers have appealed the certification.
At the time, Lee said the government appears to prefer fighting hundreds of lawsuits individually.
One of his clients said this week’s release of the reports show little has changed since he was a ward of the Crown in the early 1980s.
The man, now 33, said he lived in 16 or 17 foster homes and group homes throughout his childhood, and suffered physical and emotional abuse at the hands of his caregivers.
In 2000, the man said, he was diagnosed with childhood post-traumatic stress disorder.
He says he’s unable to hold a job, suffers from debilitating nightmares and can only sleep for about three hours a night.
“This is obviously a generational thing,” the man said.
“If they don’t step up to the plate and change things, a whole new generation is going to go through what I went through.”
He looks normal ..but looks are deceiving !
Withold all of the billions to CASs until they clean up their act !
Former CAS head unaware of pregnancies at group home
By TREVOR PRITCHARD, STANDARD-FREEHOLDER
The former head of the local Children’s Aid Society told the Cornwall Public Inquiry he couldn’t recall learning that two teenage girls assigned to a Martintown group home in the 1970s had been impregnated by the sons of the foster parents.
Thomas O’Brien testified that had he known that first Larry Lapensee, and then his brother Brian, had children with the two girls, the home would have been closed long before allegations of sexual abuse against Brian Lapensee came to light in December 1982.
“It might have been the end of the home after we knew about Larry, never mind the two boys,” said O’Brien, who was the executive director of the CAS from 1966 until 1990.
Yesterday was O’Brien’s second and final day at the inquiry, which is probing historical sexual abuse allegations in the Cornwall area.
In 1982, girls staying at the home told the CAS they were being abused by Brian Lapensee, who would allegedly grope them and shove his hands down their shirts.
The Lapensee home stayed open until 1983, when one of the family’s former foster children, Roberta Archambault, told the agency Brian Lapensee had made sexual advances toward her while she stayed there over the Easter holidays.
Shortly after that holiday visit, Archambault attempted suicide. When she testified at the inquiry in 2006, she alleged that Brian Lapensee had previously molested her and forced her to perform oral sex.
Dallas Lee, a lawyer for The Victims Group and for Archambault, took O’Brien to last week’s testimony from the home’s supervisor, Ian MacLean.
MacLean, Lee said, had “no idea until the Cornwall Public Inquiry came about” that there had been two pregnancies at the home.
The caseworker for the first impregnated girl made a note in her file, but that information never made it into the file for the Lapensee home – something Lee described Thursday as “a major error.”
He further suggested a 1983 letter sent by O’Brien to the Crown attorney’s office, outlining the facts of Archambault’s allegation, should have included the entire history of Brian Lapensee’s involvement with CAS wards.
Would you agree with me that the CAS failed the girls it was putting into that home?” asked Lee.
“Knowing what I know now, I think we should have been much more thorough in our investigations and, if necessary, taken action to close the home,” said O’Brien.
Brian Lapensee was never charged in connection with the sexual abuse allegations. The inquiry resumes this morning with the testimony of another former executive director, Richard Abell.
COMMENT
CAS failed to do anything correct it appears and nothing but excuses, it seems that they only heard the sounds of there own brain which seems to be that of. No that would be an insult to someone we would refer to as brainless, ya they would qualify it that order,see know evil, hear know evil, speak know evil. Don,t want to hear about it not on my shift.
This kind of thing is still happening all over Ontario today and in fact all of Canada and still it is swept under the rug and kept hidden from the public. All the government parties both provincial and federal are aware this is still happening to the children of this country but they chose to do nothing, hoping it will go away. Ontario cas’s especially need to be put under investigation for wrong doings like what is beginning to happen in Alberta and held accountable for their lack of action and compassion for the children in this country.
You would think that the motto of the CAS is “WE DON’T KNOW NOTHIN!” about any stinkin abuses! Yah, yah, and “the cow jumped over the moon”! And I also see this rag has doubled up on the stories again today, eh? What is it, “tech glitch” or what? Good job y’all, good job! And I say that with tongue firmly planted in cheek!!!!
FURTHER TO THAT, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT BETWEEN THE CAS AND THE CCAS, THE TWO OF THOSE SOCIETIES WOULD MANAGE TO PHUCK UP A WET DREAM.
CAS Office Location:
214 Main st,
Atikokan Ontario
P0T1C0
PH 807-597-2700
FAX 807-597-6646
( In charge at Atikokan is Geneva (Jenny) Billings and her husband Garry Billings.)
WHAT WOULD CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY DO WITH BABY JESUS?
HE WAS BORN IN A BARN WITH DIRTY FARM ANIMALS. CAS WITHOUT A WARRANT OR PROBABLE CAUSE BROKE DOWN THEIR DOOR EVEN THOUGH CAMPING IS NOT ABUSE OR NEGLECT. THE TWO OF THEM WERE ONLY SUPPOSE TO STAY THERE, THE BIRTH CAME ALL OF A SUDDEN. THEY WERE ONLY THERE TO REGISTER AS THE LAW REQUIRED, THEY LIVED OUTSIDE THEIR JURISDICTION. RISK OF HARM IS NOT PROBABLE CAUSE AS THE HIGH COURT HAS RULED.
THE BIOLOGICAL FATHER WAS IN QUESTION. CAS WOULD TRY TO FORCE DNA TESTING ON THE FATHER IN ORDER TO GET JOSEPH OUT OF THE WAY SO THEY COULD THREATEN AND ATTACK THE MOTHER.
THE FATHER’S MENTAL HEALTH WAS IN QUESTION BECAUSE HE STATES HE SPOKE WITH ANGELS. HE HAD TO TELL OTHERS THAT MARY WAS PREGNANT BUT NOT BY ANY HUMAN. CAS WOULD TRY TO FORCE THE FATHER FOR MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION AND DRUG SCREEN.
MOTHER’S MENTAL HEALTH WAS IN QUESTION ALSO BECAUSE AN ANGEL TOLD HER THAT HER SON WAS THE SON OF GOD. MOTHER ALSO NEEDED A MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION AND MAY EVEN BE ADMITTED FOR OBSERVATION WITH DRUG SCREEN.
SHE HAD TO TELL OTHERS THAT JOSEPH WAS NOT THE FATHER. IN FACT, NO HUMAN WAS THE FATHER, SHE BECAME PREGNANT BY GOD.
MARY WAS PROBABLY GETTING WELFARE BECAUSE SHE KEPT ON PUTTING ON THE FORM, “FATHER UNKNOWN”. CAS WOULD INTERPRET THIS AS THE MOTHER SLEPT AROUND.
HE WAS BORN TO A YOUNG UNWED COUPLE AND ON THE RUN.
THEY DIDN’T HAVE MUCH MONEY BECAUSE FATHER WAS A CARPENTER.
THE GOVERNMENT WANTED TO KILL THEIR FIRST BORN AND HAD TO FLEE DURING THE NIGHT. WHY DOES THIS SOUND SO FAMILIAR?
THERE IS NO RECORD OF JESUS FROM A YOUNG BOY UNTIL HE TURNED 30 YEARS OLD.
CAS would probably destroy the family and place the child in an abusive fostercare system even though the baby was not in imminent physical danger.
I’m reading this article and I am in shock!!! Why is it? Because, I too was a victim of rape by Larry Lapensée who is Brian’s brother. I was not a resident of the Lapensée foster home, I was a friend. There was only one incident and I ended up pregnant, at 16. My parents were, strict, prominent figures in a small community at the time. I hid my condition for 7 months and when they found out I was sent out to an Ottawa Home for unwed mothers. When my daughter was born, I was coerced in giving her up by my parents and the local CAS. This event was life altering, as I’m sure it was for the other victims. One has to wonder if maybe the CAS decided to turn a blind eye to this situation because we were supplying them with healthy babies. 35 years later and this situation still haunts me. I realize now that I should have spoken out about the rape, but when you’re 16 and scared to death and made to feel like you are a bad, worthless person by the people who should be protecting you it becomes difficult to trust in the system. It was easier to remain quiet and pretend it was all going to go away; besides who would have believed me. I also remember contemplating suicide back then. I sincerely hope that justice prevails and that these two men suffer the consequence of their actions. Larry Lapensée should be reported to the (OASW) Ontario Association of Social Workers, as he is a social worker and:
‘’SOCIAL WORKERS BELIEVE IN THE VALUE AND WORTH OF ALL PEOPLE. THEY BELIEVE THAT ALL MEMBERS OF SOCIETY REGARDLESS OF AGE, RACE, PLACE OF ORIGIN, LANGUAGE, RELIGION, GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION OR ABILITIES DESERVE THE SAME BASIC RIGHTS, PROTECTIONS, OPPORTUNITIES, OBLIGATIONS AND SOCIAL BENEFITS.’’
DEEP THINKER
The following letter was sent twice (2007 and 2008) to Sudbury C.A.S. President Ashley Thompson. There has been NO reply or explanation to date. Area Director Collette Prevost, who claims not to receive a salary or any compensation from C.A.S. (therefore not an employee) also had no reply. Its clear the current “regeme”of C.A.S. “bandits” are determined to prevent positive change . By denying memberships, and operating without accountability, they are able to continue abuseing our children, parents, and tax dollars.
JULY 16, 2007, 2008
Attention: Ashely Thompson, President Children’s Aid Society Sudbury, Ontario
and
Jean J. Paquette, Children’s Aid Society of Sudbury and Manitoulin
In your letter dated June 13,2007, while acting as the President of the Board of Directors of the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin you stated that you and the Board of Directors of the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin denied my application for membership with the Society based on the Board members’ perception that I do not accept the authority or role of the Children’s Aid Society as conferred by statute, nor that of the Society’s Social Workers.
It is my understanding from your letter that the Society does not grant memberships to anyone who disagrees with how the Society operates in any way.
Could you please clarify this for me. Does the Society deny memberships to people who do not agree with how the Society operates and who wish to apply for a membership so that they can affect change that benefits our children?
Respectfully,
XXXXXXXXX
Mother guilty of feeding cocaine to toddler Apr 02, 2009
Peter Small, Courts Bureau
http://www.thestar.com/article/612249
A 26-year-old mother has been convicted of steadily giving her toddler cocaine over 14 months, finally administering a near-lethal dose that left him brain-damaged.
“It’s difficult to see what would motivate her to give him cocaine, possibly to stop his crying, or to get him to sleep, or to control him. Was it to punish him or to get back at the father?” Justice Tamarin Dunnet said yesterday. The Scarborough woman, who cannot be named to protect the identity of her son, also intentionally fractured a number of her son’s ribs over time and failed to take him to hospital for a broken forearm, the judge said.
Cocaine levels discovered in the 2-year-old in testing at Hospital for Sick Children were so high that if he were an adult, he would be in the top 5 per cent of users, an expert testified. Now aged 6 and living with his father and grandmother in Scarborough, the boy is happy but has permanent brain impairment, family members said outside court.Yesterday Dunnet convicted the mother of assault causing bodily harm, aggravated assault, failing to provide the necessities of life and administering a noxious substance. In September 2004, the woman split up with the boy’s father – then a drug dealer – and became the sole caregiver.
In early 2005, she limited the father’s access, and he became concerned when he noticed the boy had an arm injury and black marks under his eyes, court heard.
In the early hours of Aug. 1, 2005, the mother took the boy to Scarborough General Hospital, claiming that he had an unexplained seizure. But she had actually given him a cocaine overdose that night and delayed getting help until “she realized he was dying in front of her eyes,” the judge said. She phoned the father from the hospital and said she feared the boy might die from ingesting cocaine she claimed he likely had picked up somewhere in her Midland Ave. apartment building.
Yet she never told doctors about the cocaine – knowledge that would have helped them treat her boy, who was transferred in a coma to the Hospital for Sick Children. Doctors had to cut open his skull to relieve the swelling.
When a doctor told the mother at 10 that morning that her son had cocaine in her system, she expressed surprise, Dunnet said. A children’s aid worker who accompanied the mother to the hospital heard her say she hoped her son would be okay “because he is so cute. He’s bad but he’s cute.” In a police interview she covered her face as if crying, but shed no tears; next minute she was laughing, the judge said. “She expressed no concern about the child.”
After the judgment, the mother brushed past reporters without comment. She remains on bail, at least until her sentencing hearing on May 8.
Her lawyer, Terry Kirichenko, said she is disappointed.
The father, 26, it said it hurts to think what his son went through. “I wasn’t able to protect him.” He said he believes that his former girlfriend is a psychopath, and that the only emotion she can express is anger.
***probably a crackhead too AND associate to Sudbury CAS and Dr. Sheila Milne***
THE GLOBE AND MAIL – WORLD PRESS FREEDOM DAY\
Public scrutiny in family courts
May 2, 2009
If Canadians could cram en masse into the bitter courtrooms where child-custody disputes play out, there might be fewer nasty divorces. Since they can’t, they should be allowed to read about them, which is why an Ontario judge was right to reject a request from the provincial Office of the Children’s Lawyer for a gag order on the lawyers and family members in a notorious case of “parental alienation syndrome.” A cautionary tale that no one can hear is not much good to anyone.
Would a gag order have benefited the children involved? Only if one believes that family law always protects children, that all the players have only the children’s interests at heart and would arrange for the best possible resolution, without any public scrutiny. Such paternalism should have died out a long time ago. The OCL’s request shows why World Press Freedom Day tomorrow remains important: Even in Canada in 2009, the openness of the courts is not guaranteed. Last month, a Quebec judge suggested that journalists could publish only information that people were authorized to give them.
Parental alienation syndrome is a label given to the brainwashing of children by their divorced spouses. No doubt such brainwashing happens, and is extremely harmful; but increasingly the courts have been ordering the Draconian solution of forced “deprogramming” at a clinic in the United States. This use of coercion, to the point of virtually kidnapping children, needs more public debate, not less.
Everything about the case before Ontario Court Judge Steven Clark this week cries out for debate. Why does the legal system tolerate a 10-year slugfest between parents? What can be done to protect children when parents use the courts as a boxing ring? What evidence made a previous judge in the case think that forcing a 12- and 14-year-old to submit to deprogramming would help, rather than traumatize them?
What the courts couldn’t fix, the siblings’ 19-year-old brother appeared, heroically, to have managed. He brokered a deal among the warring parents in which the children would be reunited with the mother they had been alienated from, without the younger boys being forced to take deprogramming. A local therapist would be retained. “We emancipated ourselves from these professionals that have been breathing down our necks the whole time,” the 19-year-old said outside court. Those words are well worth hearing.
And who could object to the deal? The Office of the Children’s Lawyer, which insisted on the deprogramming while asking for the gag order.
Judge Clark, to his credit, accepted the arrangement worked out by the young man, while rejecting the publication ban. “The principle of openness is deeply entrenched in our system.”
While people in democracies may associate World Press Freedom Day with the need to expand free speech in places such as China and Zimbabwe, there is no shortage of cases in Canada where limits are requested – or imposed – on free speech. Every time a judge gives in to a requested publication ban, more requests quickly follow.
All Canadians have an interest in making sure that the children of high-conflict divorce are protected, and that those charged with protecting them, including the courts and the Office of the Children’s Lawyer, do good, and not harm. That is why the courts are open. The freedom of the press belongs not only to the media, but to all Canadians.
__._,_.___
Perhaps we have an explanation for the war on Fathers. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56494 Liberals clinically mad, concludes top psychiatrist Eminent doctor makes case leftist ideology is a mental disorder Posted: November 12, 2008 WASHINGTON – Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifyingthemselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making thecase that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder. “Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberalsrelentlessly undermine the most important principles on which ourfreedoms were founded,” says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book,”The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness.” “Likespoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilitiesof adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs fromcradle to grave.” While political activists on the other side of the spectrum have madesimilar observations, Rossiter boasts professional credentials and alife virtually free of activism and links to “the vast right-wingconspiracy.” For more than 35 years he has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined morethan 2,700 civil and criminal cases as a board-certified forensicpsychiatrist. He received his medical and psychiatric training at theUniversity of Chicago. Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by both BarackObama and his Democratic primary opponent Hillary Clinton can only beunderstood as a psychological disorder. “A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss thevital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity -as liberals do,” he says. “A political leader who understands humannature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personalappeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and socialequality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator whounderstands human nature will not create an environment of rules whichover-regulates and over-taxes the nation’s citizens, corrupts theircharacter and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do.” Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings ofinferiority in the population by: a.. creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization; b.. satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence andcompensation; c.. augmenting primitive feelings of envy; d.. rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him tothe will of the government. “The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearlyidentified by understanding how children develop from infancy toadulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefsof the liberal mind,” he says. “When the modern liberal mind whinesabout imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeksabove all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their ownlives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious.”
Vellacott recognizes Parental Alienation Awareness Day
April 25, 2009
OTTAWA – “Parental Alienation is a serious problem in Canada because too many children do not benefit from the active involvement of both parents in their lives,” said Conservative MP Maurice Vellacott (Saskatoon-Wanuskewin), speaking in recognition of Parental Alienation Awareness Day.
April 25th is Parental Alienation Awareness Day and much more awareness needs to take place around the impact of parental alienation today.
Canada’s high levels of divorce and non-traditional family arrangements often result in situations where children are no longer able to benefit from the consistent nurture and guidance and love of one of their parents. In most cases, though not all, it is the father who is missing from the home. Canada’s family law system often makes matters worse, which is why I have been working on a Private Member’s Bill that would require Equal Shared Parenting to be treated as the presumptive approach for resolving custodial arrangements among divorcing parents.
A new study has been released by Prof. Edward Kruk of the University of British Columbia using Canadian data. His research confirms conclusions that have already been well-established from much research around the world. Kruks’ report notes that 90 percent of runaways grew up in father-absent homes, as did 71% of dropouts and a majority of those identified as depressed, suicidal, addicted and pregnant teens. “Barring cases of abuse and neglect, the best interests of the child include the active involvement of both parents in their nurture and upbringing,” said Vellacott.
A very important symposium on Parental Alienation took place in Toronto in March. I commend all those involved in organizing this successful and important event.
One of the many speakers at the symposium was Dr. Terence Campbell, Ph.D., a clinical and forensic psychologist. He said that all separations must begin with the premise that joint physical custody is better than sole custody.
Many of the speakers at the conference were women, including Dr. Marty McKay, also an advocate of equal parenting. She expressed distress at the way many professionals contribute to Parental Alienation among children in broken homes. She listed the whole spectrum of professionals involved in divorce and custodial situations: judges, lawyers, assessors, psychologists, mediators, child welfare agencies and domestic violence agencies.
“I wish every success to those involved in raising awareness of the trauma of parental alienation,” said Vellacott. “I hope my Private Member’s Bill will move Canada in a direction that reduces parental alienation and advances our country’s support for the best interests of our children.”
- 30 -
For further comment, call (613) 992-1966 or (613) 297-2249
Debate Over Drugs For ADHD Reignites; Long-Term Benefit For Children at Issue
March 27, 2009
New data from a large federal study have reignited a debate over the effectiveness of long-term drug treatment of children with hyperactivity or attention-deficit disorder, and have drawn accusations that some members of the research team have sought to play down evidence that medications do little good beyond 24 months.
The study also indicated that long-term use of the drugs can stunt children’s growth.
The latest data paint a very different picture than the study’s positive initial results, reported in 1999.
One principal scientist in the study, psychologist William Pelham, said that the most obvious interpretation of the data is that the medications are useful in the short term but ineffective over longer periods but added that his colleagues had repeatedly sought to explain away evidence that challenged the long-term usefulness of medication. When their explanations failed to hold up, they reached for new ones, Pelham said.
“The stance the group took in the first paper was so strong that the people are embarrassed to say they were wrong and we led the whole field astray,” said Pelham, of the State University of New York at Buffalo. Pelham said the drugs, including Adderall and Concerta, are among the medications most frequently prescribed for American children, adding: “If 5 percent of families in the country are giving a medication to their children, and they don’t realize it does not have long-term benefits but might have long-term risks, why should they not be told?”
The disagreement has produced a range of views among the researchers about how to accurately present the results to the public. One e-mail noted that an academic review of the group’s work, called the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With ADHD (MTA), asked why the researchers were “bending over backward” to play down negative implications for drug therapy.
Peter Jensen, one of Pelham’s fellow researchers, responded that Pelham was biased against the use of drugs and was substituting his personal opinion for science.
Jensen said Pelham was the only member of the team of researchers who took away “the silly message” that the study raised questions about the long-term utility of drugs, but interviews and e-mails show that Pelham was not alone.
The MTA was designed to test whether children diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, do better when treated with drugs, with drugs plus talk therapy, with talk therapy alone or with routine medical care alone. Children with the disorder have trouble paying attention, are restless and hyperactive, and are sometimes disruptive in school.
The initial 14-month analysis published in 1999 randomly assigned children to one of four treatment options and showed clearly that those treated with medication did much better than those who got only talk therapy or routine care. The drugs’ manufacturers distributed thousands of reprints of the article to physicians at a time when diagnoses of ADHD were spiraling upward. Because children given drugs alone appeared to do about as well as those treated with both drugs and talk therapy, the study skewed treatment in the direction of medication.
In a second phase of the study, the researchers followed the children and compared how they fared, but researchers no longer randomly assigned them to the various treatment options, making this phase less scientifically rigorous.
In August 2007, the MTA researchers reported the first follow-up data, which by then no longer showed differences in behavior between children who were medicated and those who were not. But the data did show that children who took the drugs for 36 months were about an inch shorter and six pounds lighter than those who did not.
A news release issued by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) at the time, however, presented the results in a more favorable light. The release, dated July 20, 2007, was titled “Improvement Following ADHD Treatment Sustained in Most Children.” The release noted that the initial advantages of drug treatment were no longer evident, but it quoted Jensen as saying this did not mean that long-term drug therapy was ineffective.
Jensen said, “We were struck by the remarkable improvement in symptoms and functioning across all treatment groups.” And rather than saying the growth of children on medication was stunted, the release said children who were not on medication “grew somewhat larger.”
As the MTA study continued to find smaller and smaller behavioral differences between children who were medicated and those who were not, use of the drugs soared. Pelham said most parents and doctors took away the message that the study had found drug therapy effective over the long run. In 2004, physicians wrote 28.3 million prescriptions for ADHD drugs; last year, they wrote 39.5 million, according to data provided by IMS Health.
With the MTA having followed the children for eight years, the latest data have confirmed that there are no long-term differences between children who were continuously medicated and those who were never medicated. Some of the data were published online yesterday in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.
In a telephone interview, Jensen denied that the researchers had misled the public, pointing out that some children getting the drugs did do better over the long term. Looking at overall results was not as useful as studying how particular groups of children fared, he said.
Jensen and another co-author, L. Eugene Arnold at Ohio State University, who are both psychiatrists, emphasized the importance of individualizing treatment — and warned parents against abruptly terminating drug therapy.
The subgroup analysis found that children in homes that were socially and economically stable did the same in the long term with or without medication. Children from troubled or deprived backgrounds slid backward as soon as the intensive therapy stopped and they went back to their communities. About one-third — those with the least impairment to begin with — continued to improve over the long term.
Jensen and co-author Benedetto Vitiello at the NIMH said drugs may not have shown an overall long-term benefit because the quality of routine care that children received may have been inferior to the care they got during the initial part of the study. Jensen said the take-home message is that community care needs improvement.
Brooke Molina, also a co-author and a University of Pittsburgh associate professor of psychology and psychiatry, argued in an e-mail that if the researchers wanted to draw attention to subgroups that might be helped by medication over the long run, they also should acknowledge that “long-term treatment with medication may not be efficacious” for others.
In an interview, Molina said the data do not “support that children who stay on medication longer than two years have better outcomes than children who don’t.” In an e-mail she shared with Pelham, she noted that academic “reviewers thought we were bending over backward (inappropriately) to dismiss the failure to find medication effects at 8 years.”
James Swanson, another MTA co-author and a psychologist at the University of California at Irvine, said he believes that the researchers have been open about the diminishing benefits of medication therapy. He cited a variety of scientific publications in which he and others reported data showing that medications lost effectiveness over time and stunted growth.
“If you want something for tomorrow, medication is the best, but if you want something three years from now, it does not matter,” he said. “If you take medication long-term beyond three years, I don’t think there is any evidence that medication is better than no medication.”
Pelham, who has conducted many drug therapy studies, said the drugs have a valuable role: They buy parents and clinicians time to teach youngsters behavioral strategies to combat inattention and hyperactivity. Over the long term, he said, parents need to rely on those skills.
A yet-to-be-published study, Pelham added, found that 95 percent of parents who were told by clinicians to first try behavioral interventions for ADHD did so. When parents were given a prescription for a drug and then told to enroll their children in behavioral intervention programs, 75 percent did not seek out the behavioral approaches
Ontario’s Top 10 Exports 2008 (HS4 Equivalent)
——————————————————————————–
Autos 20.61%
Motor vehicle parts 5.81%
Gold – unwrought 4.96%
Medications – packaged for retail use 2.67%
Goods transport vehicles 1.91%
Telephone equipment (Includes modems) 1.52%
Engines 1.45%
Non-crude petroleum oil 1.36%
Nickel mattes 2.05% Furniture 1.09%
Source: Statistics Canada, International Trade Division, April 2009 (4/2009)
Export numbers are for domestic exports only.
Produced by Trade & Marketing Division, Ministry of International Trade and Investment
Ontario DRUG CAPITAL of the world?? Medications ranks # 4 as Ontario’s most exported commodity. If the Liberal govt had its way…99.9% of Ontarioans would be medicated…maybe thats the problem with our politicians and judges?
did you hear about the new “behind closed doors, domestic violence courts and mental health courts?????they operate like c.a.s. closed courts, and with the c.a.s. now mental helth proffesional, submitting their affidavits to the closed mental health courts, i sure you know how that going to work.but then chris bentley has put in the papers how hes opened the courts to the public for accountability,B.S. lip service, then theirs dalton mc guuity refuse ombudsman any powers to act.
Sudbury MPP Rick Bartoluuci, the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury Manitoulin the entire Sudbury City Council has been secretive for generations. They usually try and block new ideas or calls for accountability. We the pheasants and abused are supposed to remain silent and be expected to be grateful for the “trickle down” effect of their lavaish lifestyle and spending? All this a result of “billions” of tax dollars and funding to agencies and institutions that do not have any accountability.
The Sudbury Children’s Aid Society has been known to use the Sudbury Regional Police in an effort to promote the agenda of the CAS. Conspiracy etc…Sudbury CAS has denied members of corruptionalcentral.com membership to CAS, list of members and access to board minutes. They also refused to reply when asked if they refuse membership to citizens seeking to improve CAS.
Ms Horwath’s Bill 41 is a step in the right direction, however does as much as the Judicial Council and Law Society to address corruption in the court room; or the Child and Family Review Board to address complaints against CAS. Whether it addresses the corruption and abuse committed by CAS remains to be seen. If all unsatisfied parents were to attend meetings as proposed, surely police will be needed to keep the peace as some would be unable to contain themselves at the abuse committed by CAS against their children. The public’s participation as proposed by Bill 41 would be better applied allowing for the public to attend complaint hearings against CAS and police. I wonder why this Bill can’t pass as fast their 30% raise last year? Too many good paying jobs in this child protection industry. Any major reform would have devastating effects in the economy of any city. Suddenly billions of tax dollars would become available for use in other areas…healthcare, education, green energy, etc…The institution known as “no government accountability and abuse” is long entrenched. The small change (if any) proposed by Bill 41 is better than no change at all. Maybe the Ombudsman or Child Advocate will be attending on behalf of parents? McGuinty would have to hire many more…not that he actually listens to the Advocate or Ombudsman now anyway!
New powers would allow police to snoop on web
Conservatives to table controversial bill today
By Janice Tibbetts, Canwest News Service
June 18, 2009
Police will be given new powers to eavesdrop on Internet-based communications as part of a contentious government bill, to be announced today, which Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan has said is needed to modernize surveillance laws crafted during “the era of the rotary phone.”
The proposed legislation would force Internet service providers to allow law enforcement to tap into their systems to obtain information about users and their digital conversations.
Police have lobbied for a new law for almost 10 years, saying that they need to access “Internet safe havens” for gangsters, sexual predators and terrorists. “This is really not about the warrantless tracking of Canadians’ Internet use,” said Clayton Pecknold, of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police.
Privacy advocates and civil libertarians, however, have vocally opposed the prospect of giving police “lawful access” to the digital conversations of Canadians by being able to access such things as their text messages, e-mails, web surfing habits and Internet phone lines.
“It is an issue that has proven to be very, very controversial,” said Michael Geist, a law professor at University of Ottawa and public commentator on Internet legal issues.
“The consistent criticism and concern that has been expressed is that there has to be some evidence that there is a real problem here and in the past we haven’t seen that,” he said. “Why is the status quo not good enough? What investigations have been impeded?”
Federal Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddard recently warned that forcing ISPs to surrender information “is a serious step forward toward mass surveillance” that violates the rights of Canadians.
When he was public safety minister, Day also promised that any federal initiative would require police to obtain a warrant to access personal information of users, such as names and addresses.
Pecknold said it is “an ongoing frequent occurrence” that police want to act to stop a crime, but they are blocked at the technological door at a time when criminals have shifted increasingly to online communications.
“Terrorist groups, pornographers and pedophile networks, illegal traffickers in weapons, drugs and human beings, money launderers and cyber criminals, Internet and telemarketing fraudsters all use technology to develop activities, perpetrate crimes and avoid detection,” the police chiefs said in a November 2008 position paper supporting a new law.
Police and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service already have the power to wiretap private communications, provided they have judicial authorization, but the law does not require ISPs to grant them access.
Tom Copeland, chairman of the Canadian Association of Internet Providers, said it will be a hardship for some of the country’s smaller providers to upgrade their systems to facilitate interception.
“There’s a very real and significant cost,” he said.
Copeland said a previous bill on Internet-based interception, introduced by the former Liberal government just before it fell in November 2005, contained an exemption for small ISPs.
Pecknold said it makes no sense to make exceptions because criminals will flock to the smaller providers.
Van Loan’s bill has been posted on a notice paper of pending government legislation and it is expected to be tabled in the House of Commons before MPs break for their summer recess on Friday. He has scheduled a news conference for today with Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.
Earlier this year, Van Loan publicly stated his intentions to pursue legislation, which had been promised for years, but relegated to a back burner by his predecessor, Stockwell Day.
National Post on CAS- “…. time to rein in child-welfare agencies”
They are charged with the most essential of duties: protecting vulnerable children from abuse and neglect. They will intervene in the lives of roughly 200,000 Canadian children this year.
By : Kevin Libin, National Post June 13, 2009
For most of us, they are generally unseen, save for occasional mentions in news reports, when they rescue children from misery. Or, as sometimes happens, deliver it.
Canada’s child-welfare agencies, says University of Manitoba social work professor Brad McKenzie, have among the broadest intervention powers in the Western world.
Caseworkers come armed with vaster powers than any police officer investigating crime. It is an immense authority easily abused, without vigilant restraint.
It is time, critics say, they were reined in.
“The social worker system, as it applies to children, is out of control, seriously out of control,” says Katherine McNeil, a children’s advocate who has worked with families in Nova Scotia and B.C. “And nobody’s doing anything about it.”
Child-welfare agencies step in when kids are homeless, exploited, hungry or abused. They do not stop there. As the highly publicized neo-Nazi case in Winnipeg demonstrates, they might seize children from parents for teaching racist views, or for “emotional neglect.” They have taken newborns from parents considered insufficiently intelligent; from religious families believing the Bible commands them to discipline kids with a rod. They order home schooling parents to enrol children in public school, deeming them inadequately socialized.
“They violate all kinds of privacy and rights,” says Chris Klicka, senior counsel for the Home School Defense League, which represents Canadian and American parents.
Whether we wanted it or not, knew it or not, over time, the work of child-welfare organizations has become “parenting by the state and the imposition of their value system on other people,” says Marty McKay, a clinical psychologist who has worked on abuse cases in the U.S and Canada. Provincial agencies have the power to intervene when children are considered “at risk” of abuse or neglect – even if none has actually occurred. Or, where spousal abuse happens, but kids are untouched. And what they do with the children they take can sometimes be worse than what they suffered at home.
When journalist J.J. Kelso founded Canada’s first Children’s Aid Society in 1891, it was from revulsion at what he had witnessed working in Toronto’s slums: the filthy, homeless urchins begging on the street, the school-aged girls whored out by parents for whiskey money; children needing “rescue,” Kelso exhorted, “from the environments of vice, cruelty or mendicancy.”
Courts could imprison parents for cruelty, but not revoke custody. Backed by the 1893 Act for the Prevention of Cruelty to and Better Protection of Children, the society had unique authority to directly interfere in affairs of parents and children: Anyone under 14 found begging, receiving alms, out late, homeless, orphaned, imprisoned, thieving, or associating with thieves, drunkards or vagrants, would be appropriated by the province.
Since then, as child-welfare agencies multiplied across Canada, their authority expanded, too.
One Calgary mother said her kids were recently pulled from class and questioned by a caseworker after she kept them home from school for a week, fearing they might be exposed to Swine Flu. When the mother protested, the worker threatened to seize all six children in her house, including two toddlers.
“All because I was overtly concerned about my children’s health,” says an incredulous Ms. K, who, as is the case with all investigations, cannot be identified. Nor can she ever know who lodged the complaint against her.
The worker later visited the house. There, Ms. K reports (and witnesses confirm), when she further protested the interference – at one point calling police – the agent hollered at her, physically accosted her, and threatened to report her for abuse, of which, the caseworker later relented, there was no evidence.
The secrecy that envelops these cases makes it nearly impossible to fully investigate Ms. K’s remarkable claims: caseworkers do not permit “clients,” as they’re called, to record meetings, and agencies cannot comment on any case. But the account doesn’t shock those who work closely with the authorities.
“I’m certainly not surprised, and hear over and over again of workers … threatening [parents] with apprehension. They’ll never admit it in court, of course, but I hear it all the time,” says Bradley Spier, a Calgary family lawyer. “Most of the time they’re above board. … They all have an attitude, but they’ll do their investigation and, if they can’t substantiate it, they’re generally pretty honest about that, and won’t take any action. But until then, they’re god-like creatures, for lack of a better word. Or they think they are.”
The government’s role in protecting vulnerable children treads an impossibly fine line. Without anonymous complaints, and the power to interview and apprehend, some children would undoubtedly suffer terribly. Accordingly, legislators grant workers astounding licence: a social work graduate, fresh from college, can enter a home without warrant; apprehend children without due process; and commandeer police officers to enforce his or her efforts. A caseworker can order children dressed, fed, medicated, and educated any way they consider appropriate. Parents who do not submit risk losing custody, even visitation of their kids. Or have them taken away permanently.
It is an authority that is sometimes severely misused. When that happens, Ms. McKay says, families can be traumatized in a perversion of the very system designed to prevent abuse.
The anonymous process, for example, invites bogus tips – commonly from divorcing parents, for instance, since agencies can unilaterally alter custody arrangements. Most complaints prove “unsubstantiated”: 55% according to the most recent Health Canada study.
“Children’s Aid, even when they don’t start an investigation [themselves], they can be manipulated by people,” says Ms. McKay.
Prof. McKenzie says child-welfare agencies typically do good work under difficult circumstances. Overstretched caseworkers, with general training, can be unequipped to specialize in interventions and the complexities each case brings. What some, middle-class agents might consider neglect, for example, is often a matter of poverty, not necessarily cruelty.
And some child-welfare workers also exploit their tremendous clout to behave unethically, prejudicially or illegally.
“Some of them get a real power complex because they have a bachelor of social work, or a masters, and they suddenly have this power [to] apprehend,” says Ms. McKay. “They throw their weight around.” She sees in some workers a “police mentality.” It may be a coincidence, but in the largest English-speaking provinces, Alberta, B.C. and Ontario (Quebec data are incomplete), the number of children taken into care by provincial agencies between 1993 and 2001, rose a remarkable 97%, 63% and 72% respectively.
Prof. McKenzie is encouraged by a nascent trend in Canadian agencies away from historic, heavier-handed investigative and apprehension focus, and toward working more co-operatively with families to improve home conditions.
Studies show that under the current system, he says, “generally we find that the majority of children that are served [by welfare agencies] do well” – meaning they thrive at school, seem generally well-adjusted, are free from abuse and neglect. About 15% to 20%, he says, do not.
That is not a trifling number. But the stories behind it – let alone the validity of the initial apprehensions – can prove impenetrable. Cases are shrouded in silence, media blocked from reporting details, or questioning workers, in the legitimate name of protecting children involved (even in the high-profile Winnipeg neo-Nazi case, most details were concealed). But such limits thwart public scrutiny into an arm of government as capable of error as any other, yet, in determining how much or even whether families stay together, working with some of the highest stakes imaginable.
Last year, Ontario MPP Andrea Horwath tabled a private member’s bill to make Children’s Aid Societies answerable to the provincial ombudsman, something Ontario’s Children and Youth Services has repeatedly resisted (ombudsmen in some other provinces, such as Alberta, have that authority). Ontario’s CAS typically refuses to share files with its Child Advocate; in his annual report released earlier this year – which found 90 children in provincial care died in 2008 – Irwin Elman called it “almost impossible” to get information necessary to investigate potential agency wrongdoing. In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled parents could not sue child-welfare agencies; provinces, it ruled, owed no “duty of care” to families. The lack of oversight, says Ms. McNeil, creates departments accountable only to themselves.
And there are numerous instances of caseworkers acting improperly. Two years ago, a Nova Scotia judge ruled that workers intervening in a divorce custody dispute were so biased against the mother, and in favour of the father – who lived with a woman previously the subject of interventions for violence and neglect – that they took “intentional and deliberate” steps to “mislead the court” by concealing evidence against him. A few years earlier, the CAS of Prescott and Russell, near Ottawa, and one worker, were convicted of contempt of court for refusing to return a two-year-old boy to his parents, defying a judge’s instructions to do so. Agents insisted they were acting in the boy’s “best interests.” In 2001, two judges in Simcoe, Ont., criticized the CAS there for “arbitrary use of government power” and unreasonableness “verging on blind obstinacy” in fighting to keep children from being adopted by certain foster parents. Several parents interviewed for this story claim to have faced false accusations and bullying from caseworkers harbouring apparent agendas.
A report this year from Saskatchewan’s Children’s Advocate, Marvin Bernstein, found children suffering serious, ongoing abuse and neglect in the care of the province amidst a “culture of non-compliance with policy” among social services staff.
Even when acting with utmost professionalism, whether agents are able to provide children a better, safer environment than where they came from is not certain.
Mr. Bernstein’s report found staff knowingly placing children with histories of committing sexual abuse into crowded foster homes where they preyed on other kids, without alerting foster parents to the problem (one reported that a caseworker assured her “a certain amount of sexual abuse is to be expected in a foster home”). A quarter of children were placed in overcrowded homes, he found, as staff routinely used “manipulative methods” to “trick” foster parents into taking more kids than they were approved for. Two Saskatchewan caseworkers were suspended in February after being discovered shuffling children between foster homes to hide overcrowding conditions from investigators.
“Children’s Aid has no business placing into care a child that they can foresee is going to come out worse the other end than when they went in,” Ms. McKay says. “If that’s the best they can do, just leave them.”
Two teens charged in connection with the recent double murder near Edmonton were in care of a ministry-licensed group home – a place neighbours say they warned the government for years was poorly monitored. In March, a 15-month-old baby in care of Alberta’s Children and Youth Services suffered critical head injuries in a foster home; in the past four years, two Alberta children have been killed by foster parents. A 2008 report found Alberta caseworkers regularly placing kids in unsafe conditions, including abusive situations.
Last year, seven-year-old Katelynn Sampson was killed in Toronto in care of a foster parent with a record of violent crimes, and in Vancouver, police discovered minors in provincial care working as prostitutes. In 2002, Jeffrey Baldwin was abused and neglected to death by a couple with a known history of child abuse but were nonetheless granted custody of the five-year-old by the Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Toronto. A 2006 CBC investigation uncovered Ontario caseworkers drugging a seven-year-old Ontario boy into a stupor with massive doses of psychotropic medications, which a psychiatrist would later find had “no actual treatment value,” except making him more compliant in his group home. While in his drugged state, he was sexually abused by fellow residents.
Those who believe in the good intentions of child-welfare agencies argue they lack the resources to deal properly with each case; with some workers handling more than 30 clients simultaneously, it is impossible to act perfectly. One problem, believes Ms. McKay, is caseworkers spread too thin, drifting far from the original vision of the state’s role in family matters: protecting kids from verifiable and authentic abuse, cruelty and neglect.
“They need to go back to the basics,” she says. “Do the children look well-nourished? Do they have bruises on them? Are they molested? Is the house crawling with cockroaches? If not, they’re not being abused or neglected.”
But with powerful, generally unaccountable agencies, dependent on justifying their place in a world far improved from the cruelties of J.J. Kelso’s Victorian Toronto, the need to intervene in more cases, for more reasons, may make such discipline difficult. “I would love to just demolish the system and start from scratch again,” she says. “Because it’s gone very far awry here.”
klibin@nationalpost.com © 2009 The National Post Company. All rights reserved.
FIU lab investigates the state of fatherhood
By Sissi Aguila
Family roles have changed substantially since the 1950s. Mom now works outside the home. And dad is expected to be more involved in raising the kids. But as parental roles and responsibilities become less defined, psychologists question: Are there essential characteristics of fathering versus mothering?
FIU’s Fatherhood Lab explores these issues and Psychology Professor Gordon Finley, who runs the lab, focuses specifically on how divorce impacts fathers and the development of their children. Finley has found that a father’s role is unique and far too often neglected by the family court system.
Using questionnaires and a retrospective technique in which he asked 1,989 young adults to think back on their relationship with their fathers, Finley found that children of divorce really miss their fathers. According to Finley, they are denied a relationship with them because of present-day family law and court practices.
“Divorce marginalizes or severs a father’s relationship with his child,” he says. “In reality, the father becomes a visitor in his or her life. He is no longer a father in the very literal sense.”
Risky behaviors
For decades, researchers focused on motherhood when studying parenting. Today more attention is being paid to fathers, and the data is consistently showing that fathers are vital to raising happy, healthy and successful children. “They contribute more than bringing home the bacon,” Finley says.
The statistics are alarming: children from fatherless homes account for 63 percent of youth suicides, 85 percent of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders and 71 percent of all high school dropouts. And 37 percent of fathers have no access or visitation rights to their children.
Finley’s research indicates that fathers are more effective at attenuating high-risk behaviors such as sex, drugs and other criminal activities. These behaviors also involve high social costs.
Yet Finley says that his findings on fatherhood do not match today’s social reality or family policy. In divorce cases, the father rarely gets custody (only in about 15 percent of cases) and shared parenting is not equal. Fathers usually see their children only once a week and two weekends a month.
A girl needs her dad
Finley’s findings also suggest that parent-children relationships are not as much about identification or imitation, as once thought, but about transaction. The way a girl learns to become a woman is through her interaction with her father. That will determine how she will relate to men in her adult life.
His study concluded that girls experience a greater impact by divorce than boys.
“The real cost is actually to the daughters of divorce. They don’t have relationships with their fathers. So when they enter adolescence and start questioning whether to have sex, they don’t have a realistic idea of what men are like.”
When evaluating the consequences of divorce for children, balance is critical, says Finley. Society has a vested interest in balance.
Informing social policy
The take-home message, according to Finley, is simple: “Fathers matter. Children need their fathers and, as it turns out, fathers need their children,” he says.
Divorced fathers are eight to 10 times more likely to commit suicide than divorced mothers. They also are higher on most indices of personal and social distress than divorced mothers.
Social policy, Finley argues, needs to catch up to the research: “Family law should be based on social science research – not ideology.”
Finley is a frequent contributor to journals that influence public policy. His study, “Father Involvement and Long Term Young Adult Outcomes: The Differential Contributions of Divorce and Gender,” was published by Family Court Review, an interdisciplinary communication forum for judges, attorney, mediators and professionals in the mental health and human services.
Earlier this year, Finley’s work provided the background for an article on divorced fathers and their adult offspring written for the American Bar Association’s Family Law Journal by Judith Wallerstein. She is a leading psychologist and researcher who conducted a 25-year study on the effects of divorce on the children involved. Wallerstein has had considerable influence on the California court system.
Says Finley, “Today my goals are to continue research but also to shift the foundation of family policy from outdated ideology to current social science through increased public and governmental awareness.”
June 16, 2009
Mr. Vellacott introduced a Private Member’s Bill this morning that would require a presumption of equal parenting. This is a BILL, not a MOTION. It’s # is C-422. Don’t refer to it as M-483 if contacting others such as politicians or media about this bill because M-483 as an equal parenting measure was terminated with the last election call, as most of you already know, so nobody will know what you are talking about if you refer to it incorrectly. Mr. Vellacott’s introductory statement in introducing this bill this morning was as follows:
Intro Statement – Equal Shared Parenting PMB – June 16, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to be introducing a Private Member’s Bill today which would direct courts in regard to divorce, to make equal shared parenting the presumptive arrangement in the best interests of the child, except in proven cases of abuse or neglect.
Over 10 years ago, a Joint House-Senate committee presented to Parliament a report entitled “For the Sake of the Children.” That report urged Parliament to amend the Divorce Act to make equal shared parenting the normative determination by courts dealing with situations of divorce involving children. This non-partisan recommendation from that Joint House-Senate was based on compelling research made available to the committee members. Over the past ten years, the best research has continued to demonstrate the far superior outcomes for children, in general, when both parents – mom AND dad – are actively involved in their children’s lives, even if the parents divorce or separate.
Polling from the past two years demonstrates overwhelming support from Canadians for equal shared parenting. There is, in fact, slightly more support among women than men for equal parenting. This strong support from almost 80% of Canadians exists across the country, with the strongest regional support coming from Quebec and Atlantic Canada.
Canadians claiming to be Liberal and Bloc supporters, expressed the strongest endorsement for equal shared parenting, at 80.6% among Liberals and 82.9% among Bloc Quebecois supporters.
A variety of countries, such as Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Australia, and various U.S. states, have implemented equal parenting, joint custody or shared parenting presumptive legislation, which has resulted in lowered court costs, less conflict and improved social outcomes for the children of divorce.
This bill is one of the most a-political, non-partisan pieces of legislation introduced in this current Parliament. I look forward to strong support for this important piece of legislation from all Members of Parliament who are committed to the best interests of our Canadian children.
========================================================================================================
You can send a message of thanks and appreciation to Mr Vellacott via email to: VellaM0@parl.gc.ca
A girl’s first hero
How dads inspire and support a daughter’s development
By JOANNE RICHARD
16th June 2009,
http://www.torontosun.com/life/2009/06/16/9809501-sun.html
Hey, dads, what you sow now, your daughters will reap later.
How a woman feels about herself as a woman goes back to how dad treated his little girl, report experts.
“Behind every great woman, you will find her dad” — that’s if he was an engaged, present, involved dad, says Dr. Mary Jo Rapini.
“If dads are able to admire their daughters achievements, character and interests and not their looks, the daughter will grow up to be confident and self assured. She will choose men who treat her with the same admiration and respect as her dad did,” adds Rapini, a psychotherapist and author.
According to Rapini, a dad has so much power over his daughter.
“If he gives her gifts and focuses on her looks he will raise a girl who is more materialistic and thinks love and affection comes in a gift box.
“If he praises her looks all of the time, he will raise someone who loathes herself and is constantly checking to make sure she looks OK in a mirror — we do that enough anyway.
“If he focuses on her abilities and interests he will develop a daughter who is more self assured, confident and understands leadership.”
Studies show that dads give girls 90% of their self-esteem before the age of 12, she says. “What this means is that girls that grow up without a dad in the home, or one who abandoned them, are always going to be a little bit less confident and sure of themselves than peers who grow up with a dad in the home.”
According to Rapini, an involved, engaged dad will be viewed as the first man she ever loved, and someone who loves her unconditionally. “Unlike mom — who many daughters have emotional fights with — dads don’t get into all of the drama and are more accepting of them.
“Dads also have a way of redirecting a girl when she is being overly emotional. He can make her laugh and help her see the situation is not as bad as it appears. The daughter looks at dad as the type of man she wants to someday marry,” adds Rapini, co-author of Start Talking: A Girls Guide for You and Your Mom About Health, Sex or Whatever.
Dads need to be sure not to pull away from daughters during the teenage years, adds Dr. Venus Nicolino. “Many fathers feel uncomfortable with transformation from tween to teen — she’s no longer daddy’s little girl.
“A father needs to be there, emotionally available at all times but especially when he feels himself wanting to pull away during her teenage years. An emotionally available father can be the stabilizing force for a young woman. The little voice inside her that says, ‘I love you no matter what’, ” says Nicolino, a relationship expert.
She adds that the best thing a father can do for his daughter is to love her mother so that she will witness what to expect from the men in her life, and what she should not have to put up with. “Having a father who loves her mother makes her more likely to go on to choose a man who will truly love her.”
—
Do
Dr. Mary Jo Rapini suggests these five dosfor dads to positively impact his daughters:
- Focus on your daughter’s talents and make note of them.
- Focus on times you see her being respectful, confident, compassionate and compliment her.
- Help her/guide her in creating her vision, dreams and interests.
- Tell her she can be or do anything she puts her mind to.
- Talk less, do more with her, listen to her.
Don’t
- Be controlling and tell her you will decide what is best for her.
- Tell her she is pretty and say it all the time so she becomes focused on being pretty.
- Tell her she is getting chubby. Really, if you focus on their body you will create a girl with lots of issues and she may never get over them.
- Fight with her mom and be disrespectful to her in front of your daughter.
- Tell her she is not very smart — “if you do this, I promise she will fulfil it.”
Dr. Mary Jo Rapini
C.A.S. The monstrous institution in existence today.”
Readers detail the rarely-seen and ugly side of child-protection agenciesKevin Libin June 16, 2009 :“My in-depth look at the tremendous power and frequent unaccountability… http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/06/16/kevin-libin-quot-betcha-the-slick-cas-pr-machine-is-busy-writing-a-protest-letter-to-the-np-about-how-unfair-this-was-to-them-quot.aspx
Unlawful abduction of children by school officials
A young boy who is shown in a video interview which details a story of how the principal of his school detained him in his private office to keep him from his father at the request of a CAS worker who was allegedly being told by the worker that the father must sign some form of agreement with him before getting access to his child at school.
View this interview and other abuses here
http://canadacourtwatch.com/#Recent_Postings_(click_on_the_links_below)_
So Its all so destructive and Unjust? Its time to make a stand then….
Jeremy Swanson
June 21st 2009
So. on this Fathers Day do you think your country is in a state of disarray? Have the courts destroyed you and your family? Fathers Day is nothing more than day os pain and anguish? Is it all a mess as far as you are concerned? Then help us to stop the evil of man-hatred for good. Help us to bring the family unit back together so our children can be safe. Help us to restore relationships between men, women and children and make our country stable again.
Look around you. The extreme political left and its feminist-Marxist practices have brought our country to its very knees. The so-called right wing have helped them do it. The politicians ignore us and regard us as angry men who “must have done something wrong”. The courts are biased and set up to make us fail.
The UN is like a huge political vacuum cleaner sucking the democracy out of every country foolish enough to go near it. Canada is just one of many countries being destroyed in this way and this all filters down to influence every aspect of our lives.
This fight has been going on for decades, yet none of our politicians are calling for what we, the people of Canada-the majority-want. Our children are being destroyed emotionally, psychologically, socially and educationally-and some are even dying- because of greed and the insane political ideologies that have targeted the relationships between men and women in the family for profit and control.
‘Politically inspired business’, the courts and politicians created this mess,and it is up to us, the people of Canada, to fix it. its up to us the Fathers and the Men and our partners, friends, family and supporters to do this.
You know that this is true, so stand up and say so. Take action. Be active and positive and take real action for change. Its time to actually DO something. Get involved ! Mobilize. Recruit others. Gather our collective resources.
It is up to us to drive out the corrupt from politics, legal corruption and ‘business’ interests.
It is up to us to restore respect between our children and their parents.
It is up to us to place curbs on ideologically driven greed and power.
It is up to us to save the family.
It is up to us to save our children.
It is up to us to restore sanity to our community
It is up to us to take back our country.
It is up to us to stop the lies and manipulations of the vultures and their funded interest groups which infest and corrupt the political process
It is up to us to restore real democracy and real justice.
Join the fight for what is right. Give everything you can. Give your time, money and prayers and stand up for the family and against totalitarian control. Without support and resources this fight for justice just becomes a merry-go-round of endless useless rhetoric.
Stand up for truth and against corrupt liars in Government and the Courts. Stand up for honesty and fight back against business greed. Stand up for the family and fight back against those that would destroy it. Stand up for the rights and against those who want to prevent you. Stand up for the rights of men and women to live free of hatred and against those who promote hatred between us to divide and rule us. Stand up for YOUR country!
Fight now, or lose your freedom forever.
Join us.
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada
“For The Children”
Jeremy Swanson
Fathers and Men’s Rights Activist
Ottawa, Ontario Canada
Years ago I received? a research article when Ritalin was just being introduced to the public. It was written by a doctor and warned that ADHD was not a real disorder but was created solely as a reason for the particular drug company to mass produce their new drug. In short, which came first the drug or the disease…..the drug. The Pharma Corporation decide…
God help us if people trust blindly that they have your interests at heart? rather than their profit motives or secret corporate agenda.
Social workers are committing some of the worse crimes of our century. ? Google for Camilla Cavendish of The Times. She’s run a massive campaign against social workers and corrupt secret courts.
You have to see what the SS are doing to children in our name. It’s beyond EVIL!!
Social workers are committing some of the worse crimes of our century. ? Google for Camilla Cavendish of The Times. She’s run a massive campaign against social workers and corrupt secret courts.
You have to see what the SS are doing to children in our name. It’s beyond EVIL!!
Twerpy school teachers and twerpy anti-social workers who possessing a bachelors in education or a masters in social work (two non-technical crip course degrees, fit for people with zero mathematical or scientific competence) come forth and make devastating snap psychological and medical judgements. The average person cannot practice medicine without a license, but schools, Juvenile Courts and CAS enable and empower? their quacks to administer drugs.
Dear Ministers July 3, 2009
Mr . Bartolucci MMP Sudbury Ontario
Minister of Community Saftey and Correctional Service rbartolucci.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
Deb Mathews MMP London North Center
Minister of Child, Youth and Women’s Services
dmatthews.mpp@liberal.ola.org
Many people in Ontario have been asking for changes to the way childcare services are adminstered in Ontario. As citizens we are asking our elected representatives (Bartolucci and Mathews) how many signatures is required on the petition in support of Bill 93 PETITION
before the Liberals will proclaim it law.
Respectfully,
The Citizens of Ontario
PS. Can you influence the Sudbury CAS to make public the dates of their monthly board meetings. Thank you
Sept 2008 – FAMILIES AND CHILDREN IN ANGUISH WITHOUT OMBUDSMAN’S CAS OVERSIGHT
Andrea Horwath the former MPP for Hamilton East and before becoming Ontario`s NDP leader in early 2009 called on the McGuinty Liberals to pass Ontario’s Bill 93 2008. Her private members Bill would give the Ombudsman independent oversight over Ontario`s Children`Aid Socieies. Horwath in the past asked the Liberals to fast-track it into law after the release of Ombudsman
André Marin’s annual report. The report condemed Ontario`s Children`s Aid Societies, and called for oversight of child welfare. Please sign this petition and get as many signatures as possible for the benefit of Ontario’s children. Contact us to deliver your signatues.
Contact Provincial MPP in Queen’s Park here!
Contact Sudbury City Council and (C.A.S) here!
Tell our elected officials that our community and all of Ontario’s children deserve no less!
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 14, 2009
Jailed for Being a Dad
Alienated father tells the court, “No Kids, No Money”
An F4J Fathers 4 Justice member has gone to jail for 20 days for his independent protest and refusal to pay child support arrears for children he has, by the courts own admittance, been alienated from.
Richard Coulter, 47, of Cookstown, ON was yesterday sent to Central North Correctional Facility, for telling the court, “No kids, No money.”
Mr. Coulter has seen his children once in 5 years, despite repeated attempts to try to maintain contact.
While Mr. Coulter has fallen behind in child support, moneys owed to him for the division of the matrimonial home are yet to be paid, and his access was never enforced.
In his speech to Justice Mulligan today, Richard said, “Your system allowed this person, not only to dismantle the family, but you also gave her the authority and allowed her to make me homeless, fatherless, childless and jobless.”
In a recent order of April 6th, Justice Guy Ditomaso said, “Further, his children were alienated by _____ in that he was never able to see them and for this reason, his ability to pay child support was also impacted.”
Kris Titus, National Coordinator of F4J Fathers 4 Justice says, “Although we don’t recommend our members to take this type of action, we know how Mr. Coulter and his new spouse feel. This is what happens when the system is just too imbalanced for both parents to survive and thrive after divorce. We hear from a lot of second families and fathers just struggling to feed themselves after support payments.”
The group has concerns for Mr. Coulter’s welfare as the prison is otherwise known as Penetang Super Jail and houses 1500 inmates. The prison has previously been clouded by contraversy and health and safety issues including the death of a prisoner.
F4J Fathers 4 Justice Canada believes the best ‘child support’ is equal parenting. “It is important that parents are allowed to support their children in all ways, physically, spiritually, and emotionally, as well as financially,” says Titus. “People are just plain fed up.”
Studies have shown that those who see their children regularly more frequently keep their child support obligations.
—————————————————————————
CONTACT: Fathers 4 Justice Canada Canada: http://www.f4jcanada.ca
Jul 17, 2009By: Bill Bradley – Sudbury Northern Life
Greater Sudbury Police now have more resources to investigate those who produce and distribute child pornography on the Internet.
The police service will receive $527,440 from the province over the next two years as part of a $5.2 million province-wide strategy to protect children from sexual abuse and exploitation on the Internet.
“Keeping our children safe from Internet predators is a key priority of the McGuinty government,” said Sudbury MPP and Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services Rick Bartolucci, who made the announcement July 16.
“Internet luring is a despicable crime that warrants our full attention.”
The local funding allows a three officer undercover team to continue to monitor websites, chat rooms and newsgroups to identify suspected child predators and victims, and prevent further victimization.”
The announcement came just a day after a 15-year-old Sudbury boy was arrested and charged with possession of child pornography, making available child pornography and accessing child pornography.
The suspect appeared in court and was released Wednesday, said police.
The investigation into the suspect’s activities was conducted by the Greater Sudbury Police’ cyber crime unit, in conjunction with the Sault Ste. Marie Police Service.
Sgt. Tim Burtt, who heads up the cyber crime unit, said he appreciates the new funding.
“It sustains what we are doing now. In 2002, we did not have any support for this work. We investigated these cases by ourselves. We got training where we could. Now we have this unified approach to going out and doing this.”
Deputy police chief Al Lekun, said in the last year alone, the cyber crime unit investigated:
- 130 new cases
- charged 11 individuals
- laid 29 Criminal Code charges
- executed 16 search warrants
- identified three victims
“That work is facilitated through provincial funding.”
Lekun said there are more investigations due to more resources being available for the cyber unit.
The work is timely considering the kind of access youth have to the Internet, said Burtt.
“The Internet is their lives. That means they get exposed to a lot of material that nobody should be even seeing. So there is a chance they will be involved in it or be seeing it. Not every one will be involved in this. But the opportunity is there.”
He said an important message that parents need to hear is they need to know what their children are doing on the Internet.
“We can’t let them go into a room to be on the Internet. We have to know where they are going on the Internet. Yesterday’s case with the alleged 15 year old violator demonstrates what can happen when they are left alone.”
Seeing child pornography can be tough for the officers who are investigating it.
“We are dealing with pretty vile material. We are talking about people who exploit our children. These are not cute pictures. We are talking about prepubescent children in pretty graphic sexual acts. It will have an impact on anyone who sees it.”
The other two officers in the cyber crime unit are Const. Todd Bignucolo, a computer forensic examiner and Det. Const. Dan Zuliani, a victim identification officer.
“Eventually we may be able to have another officer trained to do this work.”
Partnering with other police forces to fight cyber crime is key, said Bartolucci.
“It (the provincial strategy) helps police investigators work with other agencies and jurisdictions to help apprehend offenders and assist victims.”
Since the provincial strategy was first implemented in 2006, nearly 4,800 investigations have been conducted and almost 2,000 charges have been laid against 634 people.
Steve Faz 7/17/2009 3:27:44 PM – Report Abuse
How can this unit, which investigates sex offences, be staffed by a member of the Police force that has been charged with sex offences in the
Re Post #1 “How can this unit, which investigates sex offences, be staffed by a member of the Police force that has been charged with sex offences in the past?
Wouldn’t this be considered a conflict of interest????” This is damage controlmore» or good media relations for Liberal government. This government hushed the names of high profile canadains on major porn bust few years back. Funny this “member” has same name as gaurd at CAS court house. If Liberals were serius about caring for our kids…they would have given Ombudsman oversight of Ontario’s Children’s Aid Societies. Bartilucci’s is funding another special interest group…thats all. Phedophiles!
http://www.corruptioncentral.com
Children and Families in Anguish without Independant Oversight
Posted on July 6th, 2009 by cc | Edit
Sept 2008 – FAMILIES AND CHILDREN IN ANGUISH WITHOUT OMBUDSMAN’S CAS OVERSIGHT
Andrea Horwath the former MPP for Hamilton East and before becoming Ontario`s NDP leader in early 2009 called on the McGuinty Liberals to pass Ontario’s Bill 93 2008. Her private members Bill would give the Ombudsman independent oversight over Ontario`s Children`Aid Socieies. Horwath in the past asked the Liberals to fast-track it into law after the release of Ombudsman
André Marin’s annual report. The report condemed Ontario`s Children`s Aid Societies, and called for oversight of child welfare. Please sign this petition and get as many signatures as possible for the benefit of Ontario’s children. Contact us to deliver your signatues.
Contact Your Provincial MPP here!
Contact Sudbury City Council (C.A.S) here!
Tell our elected officials that our community and all of Ontario’s children deserve no less!
SIGN PETITION NOW!
Filed under: WAR ON DADS!
« MUST SIGN PETITION, Sign it for the kids who can’t! Sudbury CAS Scum Exposed again! We need a public inquiry! »2 Responses to “Children and Families in Anguish without Independant Oversight”
cc, on July 7th, 2009 at 1:43 am Said: Edit Comment
THE GLOBE AND MAIL MARCH 28, 2009
FAMILY LAW
Gender bias evident in parental alienation cases
Mothers are more likely to be the parent behind children’s estrangement, yet fathers more often ordered into counselling, study finds
KIRK MAKIN
March 28, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090328.PARENT28/TPStory/?query=parental+alienation
JUSTICE REPORTER — A study of alienated children has found that mothers were significantly more likely to be the parent who emotionally poisoned their children than were fathers.
Toronto family lawyer Gene Colman told a Toronto symposium yesterday that of 74 court rulings that found parental alienation since 1987, the mother was the alienator in 50 cases. The father was the alienating parent in 24.
“I’m not trying to dump on moms,” Mr. Colman told about 150 psychologists, family lawyers, mediators and activist parents. “I’m just saying, that is what the data reveal.”
In parental alienation syndrome, an estranged parent systematically brainwashes a child into hating the other parent. The profile of the syndrome escalated over the past year, after three Ontario judges ordered that children be removed from an alienating parent and taken to U.S. clinics for deprogramming therapy. Print Edition – Section Front
Section A Front Enlarge Image The Globe and Mail
Mr. Colman said that alienating fathers were twice as likely to be ordered to undergo counselling as were mothers in alienation cases – a finding that raises serious questions about whether judges are exhibiting gender biases.
Twelve of the 50 alienating mothers in his study were ordered into counselling, as compared with 13 of 24 fathers. “As social scientists will tell you, that is a high level of statistical significance in terms of differential treatment by gender,” Mr. Colman said.
“As lawyers and judges, we have to be vigilant to make sure that we … are not influenced by whether the mom is the alienator or the dad is the alienator. There should be no differential in how either gender is dealt with.”
The other findings in Mr. Colman’s study included:
The number of parental alienation cases has shot up from 21 between
1987 and 2000 to 53 between 2000 and 2008.
Fathers who had their alienated children switched from their homes were granted some form of access by the courts in a “much lower” percentage of cases than were mothers.
Fathers who alienate their children are somewhat more likely to have their children removed from their residence and relocated with the mother.
Mr. Colman said that of cases where the father was the alienator, children were ordered to switch to the mother’s residence in 78 per cent of cases. In contrast, 62 per cent of the mothers who alienated their children had them switched to the father’s home.
“It would seem that if you are the dad, you have a greater probability of having the residence changed on you,” said Mr. Colman, founding editor of the Canadian Journal of Family Law and founding member of the Canadian Equal Parenting Council
cc, on July 16th, 2009 at 12:30 pm Said: Edit Comment
Good to get some news in Quebec.
http://www.lavalnews.ca/articles/TLN1714/parentingBill171408.html
Support equal parenting bill C-422
Call & Write:
Your Member of Parliament
Federal Justice Minister, Rob Nicholson
Prime Minister Stephen Harper
and tell them to support MP Maurice Vellacott and this bill.
2008 Sudbury CAS Directors/Trustees and Like Officials
1 Last Name: Bals
First Name: Myriam
Initial:
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
2 Last Name: Callaghan
First Name: Ted
Initial: H.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
3 Last Name: Cote
First Name: Daniel
Initial: D
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
4 Last Name: Gillis
First Name: Frank
Initial: A.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
5 Last Name: Farrell
First Name: Kelly
Initial: C.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
6 Last Name: Jarvis
First Name: Louise
Initial: A.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
7 Last Name: Lacroix
First Name: Vincent
Initial: G.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
8 Last Name: Liboiron
First Name: José
Initial: H.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
9 Last Name: Recollet
First Name: Hazel
Initial: H.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
10 Last Name: Thomson
First Name: George
Initial: A.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Yes
Last Name: Bidal
First Name: Marc
Initial: I.
Position in Charity: Board Member
Director/Trustee at year end? Yes
Arm’s Length Indicator: Y
THREE COURTS AND NO C.A.S. ACCOUNTABILITY!
On January 19, 2009 CAS Paquette was successful in obtaining an order from Justice Renaud which further denied a parent their right to a supervised access visit and denied having a child’s views independently ascertained. As this was a much anticipate decision (holiday season), Renauds secretary “Anne Mare” assured the parent that they will be notified immediately when the decision was finalized. Neither the CAS, courthouse or Judges office (Anne Marie) informed the parent of this decision.
This decision was discovered on March 30, 2009. I’m glad to see the province of Ontario does not discriminate based on sex having been told by the (and I assume) newly hired transvestite at the Cedar St Courthouse who “insisted” she tried calling me. Nobody tried calling me to tell me the decision was ready. This is a stalling tactic to avaid responsibility, delay time and keep kids in system longer, and cover up their actions. Sad to see good faces leave. both at Elm and Cedar St. locations though.
March 31, 2009 Sudbury CAS Paquette will be “at work” taking out an order in another court, the Superior Court which was made by Justice Borque Smith that dismisses the fathers motion for a supervised access visit and CAS accountability as having “no merit”. This motion for a supervised visit was dated 2007.
There is no merit, ignoring 2 assessments, No merit denying a supervised visit. No merit as in causing emotional trauma to children and destroying natural bond of family. Sudbury CAS- Family is disoriented. Candice Poulin has since been promoted to supervisor? Sudbury parents should be warned.about Paquette, Poulin, and others strategically placed.
Corruption CAS Sudbury StyleFebruary, 2009 Justice of the Peace M. Hickler. Quashed charges against C.A.S.
January 2009 Justice Renaud denied 12 year old boy and parents a supervised access visit in Ontario’s Provincial Court.
April 2009 Justice Borque Smith that dismisses the parent’s motion for a supervised access visit and CAS accountability as having “no merit”.
March 30, 2009
In 2008 Sudbury CAS received 39 million of our tax dollars. Over 50% went for wages and “special expenses”. The CAS (Corporation) has a mandate that includes increasing the amount of funding it receives annually from both the Feds and Provincial govt. More funding results in increase wages but also requires more kids and court time. In order to facilitate this, cases are created against parents. And who does this? The CAS lawyer and Social worker. This cannot be accomplished without having selected individuals in place.
In 2004 CAS Donald Kinsley starts Child Protection proceeding which terminated any access that had been awarded in Superior Court. The father was not present to defend himself. Pierre Bradley (duty council for mother) argues for protection order and supports the CAS. Pierre Bradley was also the subject of a complaint the father filed against him in 1999. In 2004, Sudbury CAS interrupted access and demanded the father have “supervised access visits” only and undergo an assessment if further access was to. Also in 2004 the Sudbury CAS was provided with an assessment dated 2002 and formed part of the SOCIAL WORK REPORT OF THE CHILDREN’S LAWYER which awarded generous access for the benefit of children. . Both the report and assessment dated 2004 was ignored by CAS JJ Paquette, Candice Poulin, Justice L. Serre, “court appointed” Children’s Lawyer Patricia Meehan and “self proclaimed” Child Physiologist Dr Sheila Milne all ignored a report that was completed in 2002 titled SOCIAL WORK REPORT OF THE CHILDREN’S LAWYER. The report was completed in 2002 and dealt with the matter of custody and access and awarded generous access for the benefit of children.
There were six supervised visits between 2005 and 2007. The CAS would cancel the visits simply because the father would ask questions such as “ How were things in school today’? or How is everything going at home? According to Sudbury CAS questions of these nature pose a “risk” of emotional harm and therefore there should be access. The CAS campaign of terror court appearance etc begins…keeping in mind these fools are paying themselves with our tax dollars. The Sudbury CAS have contributed to Parental Alienation by telling children they will get punished for wanting to call their own parents! This amounts to government funded terrorism and crimes against the people by the government. I still am not allowed a supervised visit!
In 2006 a second assessment was provided to all “service providers” dated 2005. Again this assessment was ignored. Certification of parenting courses, witnesses that were ignored, etc and I still would not be permitted a supervised visit! Hmmm.
CORRUPT JUDGES OR
Lying in court is so common that judges sometimes thank witnesses for telling the truth. Lawyers suborn perjury and lie to the courts every day.You can tell that you are watching fiction on Law and Order because, unlike most real courts, the judges in Law and Order are awake and Child Protective Services are called when needed. Where, oh where do our tax dollars go? In 2004 Ontario Court judges earned about $216,000.00 a year and cannot ever be fired. Honorable? In fact, many of them are absolutely dishonorable. e. We have even had convicted criminals on the bench. We probably have many convicted criminals on the bench now. If the judiciary is so professional and competent, and the CAS are accountable to the public, then why are so many false convictions emerging? If the CAS is supposed to protect children? Then why so many stories of abuse and corruption? You can believe that there are thousands more. Living proof that power corrupts. Why is the government and CAS so intent in keeping the doors closed on Ontario’s Child Protection Industry? Judges should be appointed for limited terms and subject to review.
A Civic Holiday? How about an Accountability for Politicians Holiday? Jester’s Court Policing Politicians.
Notice persons who’s name appears below are publicly paid employees. Anybody receiving our tax dollars should expect to be scrutinized for corruption and incompetency.
Mayor John Rodriquez leader or just lame? It seems our mayor is aligned with the Children’s Aid Society more than he would like the citizens of Sudbury to know. Having been briefly involved in Sudbury’s most infamous CAS case and partial inspiration for http://www.corruptioncentral.com…He simply shrugged and said on behalf of our community’s children that”They are the CAS…we have to listen to them”. JR makes no secret of his backroom/flipflop politics and only has his own interests at heart…namely helping himself to perks that if undiscovered would have cost the Sudbury tax payer millions. Stuff like the Elton John scandal have been going on for generations. And i’l wager thats just the tip of the iceberg. Hence this select group’s efforts and expense to keep secrets from the public. JR’s own legal costs could have housed the homeless, fed the poor for his 4 year term I’m sure.. His legal fees should not be paid by tax payers. Rather than lick the plate, Step up to it. Since JR is from the old school of politics, his colleagues include the very very old Francis Calderilli (Ward 10 and CAS Treasurer) who has a better chance of getting picked up on Elgin St than being elected to ANY polical party. and Ted Callahagn (CAS Board Director for years) and no stranger to the dime lit dealings at the city council, CAS..and probably on Elgin St too. Its no wonder that Sudbury city council gets away with what it does they must have half the lawyers in town on retainer. Since everyone in Sudbury is basically accountable to their own longtime colleagues, there is no accountability. The City of Sudbury through their Assistant City Solicitor Eric Labelle cost the tax payer thousands of tax dollars to block the release of the protocol that exists between Sudbury Regional Police and the CAS. Sudbury and secrecy go hand in hand it seems. Local attorney Rejean Parise has also received thousands from CAS to prevent the release of the scheduled dates that CAS board meetings are held. Even more tax dollars spent to keep secrets. Not to mention the thousands they spent in court keeping me away from my son from 2004 to present.
The CAS wrote January 2009 “The CAS will continue withholding all access to father until mother is able to receive full custody with no access to father. The father continues to show the inability to be accountable for his continued actions. The mother has yet to take the required steps legal steps to protect the child without state assistance”. I think the mother pretty much has had full custody since 2004, which is the last time I seen my son. Its a scarily thought when certain individuals are considered “the state” who can operate without any fear of accountability namely Jean Jacque Paquette and his harem of unqualified anti social workers…protected by police, judges, and politicians serving our crackhead whores.
…I have no history of mental illness, never abused any children, The mother and CAS wanted me to have an assessment when I discovered the mother abusing drugs with CAS workers and lawyer. I voluntarily went for two 2 assessments. Sudbury CAS didn’t like these assessments which were done by doctors more qualified than can be found in Sudbury. No drug tests ordered for mother either. JR was not joking when he publicily said “lets go smoke some crack”. The assessments didn’t say what CAS wanted them to say. Sudbury Judge Renaud said that the Sudbury CAS has to choose the assessor. (hahah. so they can tell the assessor what to write of course) Well Judge Renaud you can kiss my ass (when you’re not kissing your cleaners). The mother is no stranger to a few judges in Sudbury and CAS lawyer having ‘cleaned their homes” in the past. In fact the mother’s mother would clean for senior judges and our very own MPP Rick Bartolucci! Two generations of working women serving the leaders of our communities in more ways than one. Why Sudbury CAS and judge Renaud denied even a supervised visit to the father is abuse. Ignoring my son for your financial gain is morally corrupt. Why Sudbury CAS denied a local child dental health care plan, then 2 years later Sudbury Credit bureau wants father to pay cash when CAS and the mother would not use the father dental coverage. I wonder who is on the board at the Sudbury Credit Bureua? More of the same familiar names I’m sure. Sudbury hydro anyone? Sudbury is corruptioncentral!
This is an open challenge to CAS Jean Jacques Paquette, Candice Poulin Makic, Jodie Marcotte, Judge Renaud, Judge Serre and any other publicly paid COWARD (CAS Board member, City Councillor) who have in the past refused to engage the public so that their buddies can profit. What is it you are afraid of? The world consists of more than your little bubble. Come join the discussion….We don’t need leaders or public servants of your kind who steal from the public their children, tax dollars and freedoms. In case your paranoid delusion happens to set in, You can make the arrangements for this open discussion. Whoops! Did I say open discussion? Maybe Sudbury Council,CAS, Police would like to discuss this behind closed doors. You know how to reach me. You can run but you can’t hide. 2012 is coming soon.
http://www.corruptioncentral.com
Why did 90 children die?
Posted on July 21st, 2009 by cc | Edit
Ontario’s child advocate was appalled to learn how many in the province’s welfare system die each year and is equally shocked at how difficult it is to get answers
Canada Day is a national day of celebration. We tell our children that we celebrate Canada Day because it’s our country’s birthday and NOTHING more. We don`t tell them of the wars, death and destruction (not necessarily these words) that were involved in the creation and maintenance of our great country . Our country was built on integrity, honesty, values and accountability. Many suffered and died so that these qualities would prevail in our societies that would be governed by accountable governments. None of this qualities exist today in any level of government or the organisations that they control. Until the explosion of the internet that empowered the average citizen, media in general has failed the public miserably. Now the government wants to invade, control and censor the internet further for complete control since it already controls 99.5% of media already. So what is Canada Day all about?! It should be a celebration of family, unity, and freedom. In the home, community, province and country. Freedom from unwarranted intrusions and attacks by unaccountable governments on the on the family unit and abuse of civil liberties. The values and qualities associated with Canada Day have become non-existent. There is a commercial by The Toronto Zoo that plays the Russian National Anthem` The Liberal Government is relating a family outing at the Toronto Zoo with the values of our one time sworn enemy (enemy to government not to me personally). In the last few years The Liberals Dalton McGuinty, Bartolucci, and `blow in the wind` Nim-rott have been under unprecedented pressure from `family law reform activists. Their response to this pressure was to create a new holiday ie Family Day ( celebrated 3rd Monday of February) strictly as a measure of damage control for the 5% of media or activists it doesn’t control. To date they have refused the Ombudsman powers to investigate certain government funded agencies. They created a Child Advocate who is also unable to investigate certain agencies … Locally, Rim- Rod, Ted Callahan and Francis Calderelli. (all affiliated with this agency) passed a bi-law to make it a crime to hand out pamphlets informing Sudbury citizens of government corruption. This on the wake of the Ombudsman critique of Sudbury`s secret city council meetings. Let’s not forget the `get rid of poverty bull”, the cost of fireworks every Canada Day, timing of ego inflating legacy projects, the cost of defending Elton, secret council meetings, tax hike, failed legacy. The three auditors for a predicted score of `2 out of 3 ain`t bad`.etc etc etc
Its really sad when a few `selected` members of the Sudbury Regional Police Service supports such destruction in our community. Its further disheartening to know that few in the Sudbury Crown Attorney office would support such charges. Convictions result in more funding whether guilty or not. Victims of this abuse generate income for the Corporation known as the City of Sudbury and their jail. Local Child Protective Service get more funding by creating false cases against parents. ALL THREE are in receipt of government funding. This funding is only shared by a select few. Namely CAS, Police, City Council and Crown Attorney Office. All 3 responsible for Parental Alienation. Lets make every holiday Parental Awareness Holiday for healthy communities and healthy families! Remember Parental Alienation Awareness «Day April 25.
Next Canada Day 2010..ask yourself just what it is you are really celebrating….
Sign Petition Now!
http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/article/591523
Children’s Aid Society workers should be reined in, critics say
>
> They are charged with the most essential of duties: protecting vulnerable children from abuse and neglect. They will intervene in the lives of roughly 200,000 Canadian children this year.
> For most of us, they are generally unseen, save for occasional mentions in news reports, when they rescue children from misery. Or, as sometimes happens, deliver it.
> Canada’s child-welfare agencies, says University of Manitoba social work professor Brad McKenzie, have among the broadest intervention powers in the Western world.
> Caseworkers come armed with vaster powers than any police officer investigating crime. It is an immense authority easily abused, without vigilant restraint.
> It is time, critics say, they were reined in.
> “The social worker system, as it applies to children, is out of control, seriously out of control,” says Katherine McNeil, a children’s advocate who has worked with families in Nova Scotia and B.C. “And nobody’s doing anything about it.”
> Child-welfare agencies step in when kids are homeless, exploited, hungry or abused. They do not stop there. As the highly publicized neo-Nazi case in Winnipeg demonstrates, they might seize children from parents for teaching racist views, or for “emotional neglect.” They have taken newborns from parents considered insufficiently intelligent; from religious families believing the Bible commands them to discipline kids with a rod. They order homeschooling parents to enroll children in public school, deeming them inadequately socialized.
> “They violate all kinds of privacy and rights,” says Chris Klicka, senior counsel for the Home School Defense League, which represents Canadian and American parents.
> Whether we wanted it or not, knew it or not, over time, the work of child-welfare organizations has become “parenting by the state and the imposition of their value system on other people,” says Marty McKay, a clinical psychologist who has worked on abuse cases in the U.S and Canada. Provincial agencies have the power to intervene when children are considered “at risk” of abuse or neglect – even if none has actually occurred. Or, where spousal abuse happens, but kids are untouched. And what they do with the children they take can sometimes be worse than what they suffered at home.
>
> ***
>
> When journalist J.J. Kelso founded Canada’s first Children’s Aid Society in 1891, it was from revulsion at what he had witnessed working in Toronto’s slums: the filthy, homeless urchins begging on the street, the school-aged girls whored out by parents for whiskey money; children needing “rescue,” Kelso exhorted, “from the environments of vice, cruelty or mendicancy.”
> Courts could imprison parents for cruelty, but not revoke custody. Backed by the 1893 Act for the Prevention of Cruelty to and Better Protection of Children, the society had unique authority to directly interfere in affairs of parents and children: Anyone under 14 found begging, receiving alms, out late, homeless, orphaned, imprisoned, thieving, or associating with thieves, drunkards or vagrants, would be appropriated by the province.
> Since then, as child-welfare agencies multiplied across Canada, their authority expanded, too.
> One Calgary mother said her kids were recently pulled from class and questioned by a caseworker after she kept them home from school for a week, fearing they might be exposed to Swine Flu. When the mother protested, the worker threatened to seize all six children in her house, including two toddlers.
> “All because I was overtly concerned about my children’s health,” says an incredulous Ms. K, who, as is the case with all investigations, cannot be identified. Nor can she ever know who lodged the complaint against her.
> The worker later visited the house. There, Ms. K reports (and witnesses confirm), when she further protested the interference – at one point calling police – the agent hollered at her, physically accosted her, and threatened to report her for abuse, of which, the caseworker later relented, there was no evidence.
> The secrecy that envelops these cases makes it nearly impossible to fully investigate Ms. K’s remarkable claims: caseworkers do not permit “clients,” as they’re called, to record meetings, and agencies cannot comment on any case. But the account doesn’t shock those who work closely with the authorities.
> “I’m certainly not surprised, and hear over and over again of workers … threatening [parents] with apprehension. They’ll never admit it in court, of course, but I hear it all the time,” says Bradley Spier, a Calgary family lawyer. “Most of the time they’re above board. … They all have an attitude, but they’ll do their investigation and, if they can’t substantiate it, they’re generally pretty honest about that, and won’t take any action. But until then, they’re god-like creatures, for lack of a better word. Or they think they are.”
>
> ***
>
> The government’s role in protecting vulnerable children treads an impossibly fine line. Without anonymous complaints, and the power to interview and apprehend, some children would undoubtedly suffer terribly. Accordingly, legislators grant workers astounding licence: a social work graduate, fresh from college, can enter a home without warrant; apprehend children without due process; and commandeer police officers to enforce his or her efforts. A caseworker can order children dressed, fed, medicated, and educated any way they consider appropriate. Parents who do not submit risk losing custody, even visitation of their kids. Or have them taken away permanently.
> It is an authority that is sometimes severely misused. When that happens, Ms. McKay says, families can be traumatized in a perversion of the very system designed to prevent abuse.
> The anonymous process, for example, invites bogus tips – commonly from divorcing parents, for instance, since agencies can unilaterally alter custody arrangements. Most complaints prove “unsubstantiated” : 55% according to the most recent Health Canada study.
> “Children’s Aid, even when they don’t start an investigation [themselves] , they can be manipulated by people,” says Ms. McKay.
> Prof. McKenzie says child-welfare agencies typically do good work under difficult circumstances. Overstretched caseworkers, with general training, can be unequipped to specialize in interventions and the complexities each case brings. What some, middle-class agents might consider neglect, for example, is often a matter of poverty, not necessarily cruelty.
> And some child-welfare workers also exploit their tremendous clout to behave unethically, prejudicially or illegally.
> “Some of them get a real power complex because they have a bachelor of social work, or a masters, and they suddenly have this power [to] apprehend,” says Ms. McKay. “They throw their weight around.” She sees in some workers a “police mentality.” It may be a coincidence, but in the largest English-speaking provinces, Alberta, B.C. and Ontario (Quebec data are incomplete), the number of children taken into care by provincial agencies between 1993 and 2001, rose a remarkable 97%, 63% and 72% respectively.
> Prof. McKenzie is encouraged by a nascent trend in Canadian agencies away from historic, heavier-handed investigative and apprehension focus, and toward working more co-operatively with families to improve home conditions.
> Studies show that under the current system, he says, “generally we find that the majority of children that are served [by welfare agencies] do well” – meaning they thrive at school, seem generally well-adjusted, are free from abuse and neglect. About 15% to 20%, he says, do not.
> That is not a trifling number. But the stories behind it – let alone the validity of the initial apprehensions – can prove impenetrable. Cases are shrouded in silence, media blocked from reporting details, or questioning workers, in the legitimate name of protecting children involved (even in the high-profile Winnipeg neo-Nazi case, most details were concealed). But such limits thwart public scrutiny into an arm of government as capable of error as any other, yet, in determining how much or even whether families stay together, working with some of the highest stakes imaginable.
> Last year, Ontario MPP Andrea Horwath tabled a private member’s bill to make Children’s Aid Societies answerable to the provincial ombudsman, something Ontario’s Children and Youth Services has repeatedly resisted (ombudsmen in some other provinces, such as Alberta, have that authority). Ontario’s CAS typically refuses to share files with its Child Advocate; in his annual report released earlier this year – which found 90 children in provincial care died in 2008 – Irwin Elman called it “almost impossible” to get information necessary to investigate potential agency wrongdoing. In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled parents could not sue child-welfare agencies; provinces, it ruled, owed no “duty of care” to families. The lack of oversight, says Ms. McNeil, creates departments accountable only to themselves.
> And there are numerous instances of caseworkers acting improperly. Two years ago, a Nova Scotia judge ruled that workers intervening in a divorce custody dispute were so biased against the mother, and in favour of the father – who lived with a woman previously the subject of interventions for violence and neglect – that they took “intentional and deliberate” steps to “mislead the court” by concealing evidence against him. A few years earlier, the CAS of Prescott and Russell, near Ottawa, and one worker, were convicted of contempt of court for refusing to return a two-year-old boy to his parents, defying a judge’s instructions to do so. Agents insisted they were acting in the boy’s “best interests.” In 2001, two judges in Simcoe, Ont., criticized the CAS there for “arbitrary use of government power” and unreasonableness “verging on blind obstinacy” in fighting to keep children from being adopted by certain foster parents. Several parents interviewed for this story claim to have faced A report this year from Saskatchewan’ s Children’s Advocate, Marvin Bernstein, found children suffering serious, ongoing abuse and neglect in the care of the province amidst a “culture of non-compliance with policy” among social services staff.
> Even when acting with utmost professionalism, whether agents are able to provide children a better, safer environment than where they came from is not certain.
> Mr. Bernstein’s report found staff knowingly placing children with histories of committing sexual abuse into crowded foster homes where they preyed on other kids, without alerting foster parents to the problem (one reported that a caseworker assured her “a certain amount of sexual abuse is to be expected in a foster home”). A quarter of children were placed in overcrowded homes, he found, as staff routinely used “manipulative methods” to “trick” foster parents into taking more kids than they were approved for. Two Saskatchewan caseworkers were suspended in February after being discovered shuffling children between foster homes to hide overcrowding conditions from investigators.
> “Children’s Aid has no business placing into care a child that they can foresee is going to come out worse the other end than when they went in,” Ms. McKay says. “If that’s the best they can do, just leave them.”
> Two teens charged in connection with the recent double murder near Edmonton were in care of a ministry-licensed group home – a place neighbours say they warned the government for years was poorly monitored. In March, a 15-month-old baby in care of Alberta’s Children and Youth Services suffered critical head injuries in a foster home; in the past four years, two Alberta children have been killed by foster parents. A 2008 report found Alberta caseworkers regularly placing kids in unsafe conditions, including abusive situations.
> Last year, seven-year-old Katelynn Sampson was killed in Toronto in care of a foster parent with a record of violent crimes, and in Vancouver, police discovered minors in provincial care working as prostitutes. In 2002, Jeffrey Baldwin was abused and neglected to death by a couple with a known history of child abuse but were nonetheless granted custody of the five-year-old by the Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Toronto. A 2006 CBC investigation uncovered Ontario caseworkers drugging a seven-year-old Ontario boy into a stupor with massive doses of psychotropic medications, which a psychiatrist would later find had “no actual treatment value,” except making him more compliant in his group home. While in his drugged state, he was sexually abused by fellow residents.
> Those who believe in the good intentions of child-welfare agencies argue they lack the resources to deal properly with each case; with some workers handling more than 30 clients simultaneously, it is impossible to act perfectly. One problem, believes Ms. McKay, is caseworkers spread too thin, drifting far from the original vision of the state’s role in family matters: protecting kids from verifiable and authentic abuse, cruelty and neglect.
> “They need to go back to the basics,” she says. “Do the children look well-nourished? Do they have bruises on them? Are they molested? Is the house crawling with cockroaches? If not, they’re not being abused or neglected.”
> But with powerful, generally unaccountable agencies, dependent on justifying their place in a world far improved from the cruelties of J.J. Kelso’s Victorian Toronto, the need to intervene in more cases, for more reasons, may make such discipline difficult. “I would love to just demolish the system and start from scratch again,” she says. “Because it’s gone very far awry here.”
>
> klibin@nationalpost .com
>
>
« Sudbury CAS Scum Exposed again! We need a public inquiry! BLUE RIBBON AGAINST Child Abuse – Sign Petition and tell a freind. »One Response to “Why did 90 children die?”
An Edmonton lawyer who represents hundreds of one-time foster children says a judge’s scathing comments about Alberta Children’s Services show the department is more focused on protecting itself than protecting children.
“I think that the judge has really seen how the government operates,” said Robert P. Lee, who represents more than 400 former foster children in two class-action lawsuits against the province. “It’s a bunker mentality (in Children’s Services). It’s, ‘Do whatever you can to defend yourself and deny accountability.’ ”
Lee was reacting to a decision released Thursday by Justice Jean Cote of Alberta’s Court of Appeal. In that decision, the senior judge said the department’s organization is “extremely convoluted and puzzling” with an administrative structure that creates opportunities for officials to deny responsibility. Cote also invited the attorney general to investigate the “disturbing” conduct of Children’s Services staff who failed to return a boy to his foster mother despite a court order to do so.
On June 23, Cote convicted director of child services Richard Ouellet of contempt for failing to ensure his staff obeyed the court order to return the boy.
Ouellet wanted the case reopened after his conviction, arguing that he was not directly involved with the file and the court order should have been delivered to those who were. However, Cote ruled that Ouellet was ultimately responsible for doing nothing while his staff ignored the order and tried to “wiggle out” of obeying it.
The judge also indicated that, next time, “those higher up” might have to answer for similar mistakes. Lee said he hopes the recent decision will bolster his efforts to win compensation for former foster children, especially in a class-action lawsuit that was launched in 2002. In that case, Lee is arguing the government did not have the legal right to keep about 600 kids in care, but failed to return them to their parents.
“If you read the (Cote) decision, that judge is really mad at what they’re doing and how negligent the whole system is…And so it’s very similar to our case. I think it’s almost identical. It’s a situation where the government does not have lawful authority over the child,” Lee said.
“In the recent case, they kept the child on the reserve rather than giving him back to the foster parents, and in the 600 kids’ case — in my class action–they kept custody of the kids in foster care rather than giving them back to the parents.”
Muriel Stanley Venne, president of the Institute for the Advancement of Aboriginal Women, said she hopes the recent decision forces more accountability in the department. Stanley Venne, who works with women whose children have been taken into government care, said she sees the damage done to families when decisions are dragged out in the courts.
“These are children, and they don’t stop growing,” she said.
By Andrea Sands,
Edmonton Journal
July 26, 2009
asands@thejournal.canwest.com
Mr. Corruptioncentral It is my understanding that City Councils no longer sit on CAS’s board of directors since the province pay CAS’s directly.
If a councilor does it’s only because of their individual desire and not in an official capacity(this would include Ted Callahagn, Francis Calderelli, and propably a few more).
The Sudbury CAS’ are also in breach of the Child and Family Services Act for not posting the names of their board of directors or informing the public of their monthly meetings.
It is also a breach to their status to their designation as charitable organization. As you are aware they function in part as a private non-profit organization at the same time they are allowed to collect a % of their funds through donations. As a result of their actions they could lose one or both of designations for failing to comply.
Anybody can report them to
The Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA) (formerly Revenue Canada)
http://www.cra- arc.gc.ca/ tx/chrts/ formspubs/ menu-eng. html
This is the government department responsible for granting organizations charitable tax status.
For further information:
http://74.125. 155.132/custom? q=cache:CaqlW3vA 1GIJ:www. afterfostercare. ca/pdf/newslette r/vol1iss1. pdf+Children% 27s+aid+Societie s,+must+make+ public+the+ list+board+ of+directors+ and+members, +ontario+ canada&cd=15&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca&client=pub-16379396 2106952
How we judge judges is an injustice
By Alan Shanoff Email contact
Sun, April 19, 2009
http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/alan_shanoff/2009/04/19/9161746-sun.html
Who judges the judges? We have about 1,000 federally appointed Superior Court judges. They earn a good salary and have unsurpassed job security. Unless they retire early they are almost guaranteed a job until age 75.
That’s a good thing because we want judges to be independent. We want them to dispense justice without fear or favour to any party, including the government.
But what do we do when a judge’s conduct comes under fire? Here’s a sample of judicial conduct that has been the subject of complaints.
In 2007 British Columbia Supreme Court Judge Peter Leask repeatedly used foul language in open court in an exchange with the prosecutor. There were two references to a four-letter word beginning with “f”, a four-letter word beginning with “s” and a seven-letter word beginning with “g.”
Yves Alain, a Quebec Superior Court Justice, was convicted of impaired driving in 2007.
In 2005, Ontario Superior Court Justice Ted Matlow acted as a legal advisor to a neighbourhood group and used “intemperate” language in criticizing a development project.
Justice Mary F. Southin of the British Columbia Court of Appeal was the subject of a complaint for smoking in her office in 2003.
In the late 1990s, Ontario Superior Court Justice Paul Cosgrove presided over a criminal trial and made more than 100 erroneous rulings. He allowed the trial to turn into a “three-ring circus” and abused his contempt powers.
In 1998, Mr. Justice Frank Barakett of the Superior Court of Quebec made comments derogatory to Aboriginal culture.
In 1995, during a sentencing proceeding, Quebec Superior Court Judge Jean Bienvenue made sexist comments and minimized the suffering of Holocaust victims.
Before being appointed a judge, then mayor of Sudbury, Leo Landreville, received a large gift from a company which had business dealings with the city. The gift was discovered after his appointment to the bench.
Another judge sentenced an elderly aboriginal woman to jail on a contempt charge. She was in fragile health and died shortly after the sentencing.
Of all these cases only Cosgrove, Landreville and Bienvenue resigned after their conduct was deemed serious enough to justify termination and be referred to Parliament. The others remain as judges.
The Canadian Judicial Council consists of 39 judges. These are the cream of the cream, chief justices and associate chief justices. They ultimately decide whether a Superior Court judge’s conduct should be brought to Parliament for a vote on dismissal.
The number of complaints made against judges has increased from 145 in 1998-99 to 189 in 2007-08. There have been about 3,000 complaints since 1971. Remarkably, only seven complaints have resulted in public hearings and only four judges were deemed worthy of being brought before Parliament.
The reason so few complaints lead to a public hearing is in part due to the fact that most complaints are misguided.
There is no point in filing a complaint over the specifics of a decision. Judges are allowed to make mistakes. They are allowed to render erroneous decisions. They sometimes misapprehend the law. Sometimes they don’t get the facts right. No judge has perfect insight into whether witnesses are lying or telling the truth.
No dismissal
The general rule is a judge’s decision should be appealed and cannot lead to dismissal, whereas only a judge’s conduct may lead to dismissal. Conduct that can bring the judiciary into disrepute or lead to an irrevocable loss of public confidence in the judge’s abilities may lead to dismissal.
Serious judicial incompetence certainly brings the judiciary into disrepute and can lead to a loss of confidence in a judge’s abilities yet the CJC has never ruled that judicial incompetence can lead to dismissal. While that may one day take place, it is very close to disciplining a judge for an erroneous decision and that is a door judges don’t want to open.
The real issue for me is who should judge our judges.
While I agree with the CJC decisions I’ve read, I am uncomfortable in any situation where members of a group judge other members of the group. We are naturally sceptical about any self-regulating or self-investigating body.
It isn’t enough for the CJC to consult with outside sources. It’s time for some non-judicial members to sit with the CJC
The History and Evolution of the Western Feminist Movement:
The first wave of feminism evolved over the centuries, becoming more active and visible in the late 1800s, generally wanting basic equality in terms of being recognized as a “person”, voting rights, as well as property rights. The second wave pushed again for more complete equality in the 1960s. The main causes focused on employment equity, the family, and related issues. An outcrop of the second wave that developed in the late 1960s were the radical Marxists Socialist Feminist; this strain of ideology took hold and began co-opting the entire feminist movement in the late 1970s (probably around 1978) morphing into the 3rd wave. The second wave saw men more as partners and inviting them to take on more equal roles in the home, childcare, and related domestic issues. The key here is balance and equality.
The third wave feminists arose along side the “shelter movement” and eventually gained a foothold in the 1980s. This Marxist Socialist more radical third wave was like the second wave of the French Revolution in the late 1700s (i.e., executing the revolutionaries and taking over), pushing people like Senator Cools and Erin Pizzey out of the movement as being too moderate and not militant enough. Third wavers began to see men and boys as, at least, potential abusers who were/are the enemy. The main agenda of third wave feminists was a bifurcated effort in both shelters and academe. The shelters were looking for continued financing and creating what is now a “shelter industry”.
Academics in Women’s studies and related disciplines produced domestic violence research, parenting research, and related studies. Gaining power and finances in order to create favourable (to the third wave) definitions of the family, violence, and related issues are important projects for both groups in this wave. The third wave saw the family as their sphere of academic influence in terms of how mothering, fathering, the family, and other related issues should be defined.
The pro-feminist movement (third wave feminist men) facilitated definitions of masculinity, fathering, and related issues, which managed masculinity and created limitations for men as opposed to partnerships. Equality has been removed in terms of the Fatherhood Involvement Movement, which encourages certain men (usually part of intact families) to behave in diminutive parenting roles. This movement does not really promote the inclusion of separated and divorced fathers, especially those in the Fathers’ Rights Movement (FRM).
Instead, this “involvement” movement distances itself from the FRM, leaving fathers (and some mothers) outside the parenting equation, only adding in fathers that are taking what they deem to be their version of an ideologically pro-feminist fathering stance.
Ideologically, the third wave (feminists and pro-feminists) is generally adversarial, seeing men and boys as abusers or potential abusers, fathers as disposable, promoting forms of misandry (in the media), and being more interested in managing masculinity (and femininity), and not really trying to strike an equitable balance that favours children, the family, the common good.
Dr. Robert A. Kenedy
Associate Professor
Department of Sociology
Faculty of Liberal Arts and Professional Studies
138 Founders College
York University
PRIVATE ADOPTION AGENCIES
GUESS WHO WAS SITTING ON SUDBURY CHILDREN’S AID BOARD OF DIRECTORS???
North Bay/Sturgeon Falls
Louise Lacroix Gauthier
278 Salter Street
Sturgeon Falls, ON. P2B 2T6
Tel: 705-753-5678
E-mail: loulacro@personainternet.com Back to Top
Sudbury
Judith Krasuski
349 Albinson Street
Sudbury, ON. P3C 3W4
Tel: 705-673-2942
Fax: 705-675-7091
E-mail: judith.krasuski@gmail.com
William Rowe
108 Roxborough Drive
Sudbury, ON. P3E 1J7
Tel: 705-673-4649
E-mail: b.rowe@persona.ca
This is heart-breaking but it isn’t only happening to soldiers. Men were-and still are-committing suicide because they don’t have access to their kids and/or have too little money left to live with. It’s a huge problem – one that you hardly ever hear about in the media. When I was doing research in 1999 – 2000, two cops, one in Calgary and one in Edmonton, were living in their vehicles because most of their reasonably good salaries were going to child support. I interviewed a lot of men who were paying child support-sometimes exorbitant amounts! – but were not getting access to their kids. With a couple of exceptions, these were honest, decent, hard-working men who loved their kids. Often they were not only paying child support but for court cases to try and get access to their kids. One man had been back to court 32 times ! Few things get solved until the public understands that not only is it a huge problem but it’s one that could hit their own families. If a father – or rarely, a mother – loses access to his/her children, so does the extended family. It’s devastating for children to lose half their total family members, especially when it’s a parent doing it for her/his own usually selfish reasons. This kind of hurt and grief and death will only stop when people demand it end.”
SUDBURY MPP RICK BARTILUCCI AND HIS GANG OF FUNDED TERRORISTS,SRPS AND CAS
Link: PlayMyGame
Link: PlayMyGame
Link: PlayMyGame
Link: PlayMyGame
Link: PlayMyGame
Link: PlayMyGame
Link: PlayMyGame
TRANSCRIPTS FROM TRIAL ON NOVEMBER 23, 2000, THE SAME WEEK OF 3 PARKING TICKETS WHICHWERE PAID AND MYSTERIOUSLY RE-APPEARRED 10 YEARS LATER ON OCTOBER 2009. MOXAM’S PROMOTION ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 IS FROM THE TRAFFIC DIVISION.
http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1755144
SGT. CRAIG MOXAM: SWORN JUNE 4, 2002
EXAMINATION-IN-CHEIF-BY MR.ABBOTT BEFORE JUDGE A.L. GAUY SUDBURY ONTARIO
CROWN. For what purposes do you need to refer to your notes if at all? (notes Moxam took of incindent).
MOXAM. Just to refresh my memory of the events that evening. I do have an independant recollection of the events that night.
VICTIM. (addressing Judge) Sir, I have to say I believe his (Moxam) interest to be more than somewhat normal nthan in other cases. You are aware of the past charges against me that have been dismissed or withdrawn for lack of evidence?
JUDGE. Believe me, I’m not aware of any of that,and even if I’ve heard of them, I have probably forgotten them by this point.
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL (After 14 different charges dismised over 4 years, thought I would have been somewhat known to local judges)
CROWN. I don’t know how Mr. xxx came to that conclusion.
VICTIM. Given the fact, Sir that the Crown’s first witness changed her story SEVEN times while under oath.
JUDGE. At the end of the Crown’s case, sometimes defense brings a motion to dismiss, but not while the evedence is still coming in. Follow me there?
JUDGE. The notes are now qualified.
CROWN. Now, can you tell me what happened that first got you involved in this matter?
MOXAM. That particular evening–I was assigned to Criminal Investigation Division, general assignment, general duties. I observed Constable O’Malley walk away from the vehecle. I believe it was Sergent Maki who was in another postion where he had an observation point of Constable O’Malley.
CROWN. As we approached, you say she was walking away.
MOXAM. Yes.
CROWN. Now when you say “we”, you were with Constable….
MOXAM. I was with Zembrzycki. Constable Zembrzycki approached the driver’s side and I stayed in the car to provide cover. I watched him approach and speak with the accused. I didn.t go right up to the vehicle. I was 15 feet away.
CROWN. Court’s Indulgence. So at any point were you at the vehicle?
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL (COURT’S INDULGENCE = CODE WORD?)
MOXAM. Yes I heard Constable Zembrzycki adise him of his rights and rights to councel. He was turned over to me and I escorted him to the car. He was loud, combative and arguementive. I believed at that point he was under influence of alcohol.
CROWN. As a result of “forming” that belief what did you do.
MOXAM. I demanded a breath sample.
CROWN. Now you told us you had a very difficult time reading demand to the accused? Could you explain why?
MOXAM. The accused was very combative and arguementive…he wasn’t listening to the demand as I was ging it to him.
CROWN. Before we go further Sir, I don’t know if you recall….
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL (Hmmm)
JUDGE. There was a ruling made.
CROWN. I was just planning on eliciting all the statements on the basis of that ruling.
JUDGE. Its in the ruling.
CROWN. You will have heard, Officer, that we’re going to come to the actual things that he was saying to you.
MOXAM. Alright.
CROWN. Before I do that though, I wanted to ask, before I forget, prior to the demand but in the period after the accused was turned over to you, how co-operative was he?
MOXAM. Prior to him being turned over to me?
CROWN. No. Up until the point you read him the demand.
MOXAM. I would say that he–he probably–I mean, heco-o perated. He didn’t resist in any waywhen-he was placed under arrest, or when he was turned over to me, or as I was escorting him back to the car. He came along with me voluntarily. He wasn’t resisting in any way.
CROWN. OK but you said he got combative and arguemntive as demand being read?
Moxam. Yes in the car. Thats when discussion heated up.
CROWN. OK, Why don’t you describe the discussion you had with accused?
MOXAM (Repeats all of the above) Believes Sgy Maki secured vehicle Does quote one word that I said during “discussion” but instead, gives his version. In the booking room says I was loud and causing commotion, but doesn’t repeat a word that I allegedley said. Moxam also tesified to the booking area being recorded. I made requets for this video tape for the next day of trial. Of course the video was conviently unavailable or destroyed because…..
CROWN. Can you tell me how many times you told him of his–he was told, to your knowledge, of his rights to contact a lawyer?
MOXAM. Oh, I would have told him, and he was directed to signs in booking area. So at least three times. I’m uncertain if–I believe, also, at the side of his vehicle when he placed under arrest.
CROWN. Did you have any conversation with the accused while you were in station?
MOXAM. I may have. I don’t have any notations that I did.
CROWN. Now, you say you’ve been an officer for just over fifteen years?
MOXAM. Yes.
CROWN. Was the accused ever out of your site?
MOXAM. No.
CROWN. And you told us that you stayed handy as the demand was recorded? During the demand we stayed nearby.
MOXAM. Yes. There is always two copies made. A master copy and as slave copy. The slave ccopy is forwarded to th Crown’s office for disclosure purposes and the master copy is sealed for evidence.
CROWN. Does that tape accurately portry what happened when the demand was given?
MOXAM. Yes.
CROWN. The courts indulgence. Now Sgt. Moxam, the accused seemed to be speaking to someone else?
MOXAM. I believe he was talking to me. I was standing out of the camera’s view with Sgt. Zembrzycki.
CROWN. No can you compare for me how the conduct that we’ve just seen on the tape was in comparison to the conduct you earlier reffered to?
MOXAM. It was a bit more reserved. Upon his arrival, the officer in charge brought his attention that the area was being recorded.
CORRUPTIONCENTRAL (Note that this tape conviently disappeared).
CROWN. Following this evening after his arrest, can you tell me what efforts if any you made to obtain a copy of that video tape?
MOXAM. Yes that evening, when I was completeing the paper work and crown breif, I completed a request form from our Technical Support Branch to make a copy for me. I checked with Technical Support on January 2001 and was advised that the copy had not yet been completed. And some time shortly after that in the spring of 2001, the officer that was assigned to that division resigned from our police services and the replacement officer made attemopts to locate a tape, if any that was made by the previous officer and came up with negative results on that–in that effort, so I have NO tape to provide to the court.
CROWN. Why do you think that tape would have been relevant to your investigation?
MOXAM. It would have should everything I said about the accused demenour.
CROSS EXAMINATION OF SGT. MOXAM BY THE VICTIM
VICTIM. Were you the senior officer at my arrest?
MOXAM. No, I was the–Constable Zembrzycki is senior to me.
VICTIM. Yes but you have authority over him, you are a sergeant?
Moxam. I have rank. Thats correct. In terms of who was in charge, Inspector Markiewich was in charge. Constable Zembrzycki and I worked together providing cover for Constable O’Malley. We were working as a team. I was not in charge of anyone.
JUDGE. If Sergent Moxam had gone out and committed a theft under, that would be irrelevant to what he was doing that night. That would be another matter.
VICTIM. Well Sir, what is relevant with the restraining order against Moxam is that it-it–its shows his demeanour in persecuting people simply because of their name or in my case being arrested 14 times only to have the charges withdrawn or dismissed. MIn fact the day I was arrested I had just had another charge dismissed! There was a restaining that was issued against Sergant Moxam.
JUDGE. Again the problem is it demands that we accept certain premises and its a very difficult thing to establish. Your contention is that you were discriminated or entrapped that night. Well you can call—have such a person, you can call them. All you can do this witness is say ” Do you know me?
VICTIM. Well I can bring in a copy of the restraining order.
CROWN. Well actually Sir you can’t, thats a collateral issue.
VICTIM. Well then Sergant Moxam is lieing on the stand.
CROWN. I’m speaking now. This is a collateral issue. The witness is entitled to answer the question. If the answer is “no there is no restaraining order against Sergent Moxam, the victim is stuck with it.
VICTIM. Where is the justice?
CROWN. The law in collateral issues is perfectly clear.
VICTIM. Where is the justice Sir? If he says “No” and I bring in a copy…this guy is allowed to lie on the stand.
JUDGE. Remember the copy you may bring in may say that a certain person was not allowed to have anything to do with another person. but again the difficulty you have is tying that into your case. And remember, if yo’re going to prove that, it can’t be—Well its with difficulty you could prove by calling somebody to say they have restarining order against Sergant Moxam. You’ld have to have some type of—Presumably, if you could show the order.
VICTIM. Yes I will try.
CROWN. For the record Sir, I object just so the victim is not taken aback
JUDGE. Alright he answered no, he is not the subject of a restraining order against a citizen. Thats his answer
VICTIM. Who gave you the call?
MOXAM. I believe it was Sergant Maki
VICTIM. Where was he?
MOXAM. I don’t know.
VICTIM. Where was Constable O’Maley?
MOXAM I seen her walking away from drivers side door.
VICTIM. O’Malley said she attended the drivers side, and therefore would have had to walk away from the drivers sie.
MOXAM. I dont know what she said I can only tell you wat I saw.
VICTIM. What is your definition of combative?
MOXAM. Combative is someone who takes an opposite position to you and who escalates a situation to the point of an argument or to the point of being the opposite.
VICTIM. Is that what you use to describe someone that doesn’y agree with you?
MOXAM. Well, the activity that was taking place prior to the demand was combative. (missing tape).
VICTIM. How very convenient because I put an application in to obtain that video. and the police don’t have it?
MOXAM. Thats right and I.ve testified to
VICTIM. And theres a little episode in the video you do have…which shows me very calm, cool, and collected. Is this what you describe as combative? Where is the vulgarity you claimed?
MOXAM. I never used the term vulgarity, Constable Punkkinen did.
VICTIM. You said you made a request fir the booking in video where I was allegedly combative?
MOXAM. Yes.
VICTIM. What was the date? January something?
MOXAM. No. This was — I think I said that I requetsed it that night, but I see now its dated the Novemebr 27th 2000. I followed that up on the 10th of January and attended in the Technical Support Branch and was advised by the officer that the tape was not yet completed.
JUDGE. They have not completed it yet, meaning they haven’t made a copy.
VICTIM. When I put my application in for the videoit went from 6 months from november 23, 2000 and 6 months to the day when they finally told me that they only keep videos for 6 months. Now if this was made in January, two months later, they still said it was not completed yet and they keep for 6 months,they still would have had it when I requested it.
JUDGE. So the point being?
VICTIM. The point being that this should have been made aware to me.
CROWN. Frankly, its the first time I saw it today, and he may have apoint. It ought to have been disclosed.In my respectful submission, nothing turns on it.
JUDGE. They never did prepare it obviously. That was the difficulty, the police and crown never got it. Everybody wanted it. And technical Services didn’t produce it.
VICTIM. Another example of incplete disclosure.
CROWN. The victim can characterize it as he wishes
JUDGE. Yes. I don’t think—-Well I’m not going to rule on what the document means. What it seems to mean is that of January the copy hadn’t been made yet, and we know from prior evidence that it was destroyed six months from the November date. So it was still in existenceat the time. It just never got done.
VICTIM. Another coincidence. I was calm cool nd collected through the entire proceedure.
MOXAM. as I indicted inmy evidence earlier, you remained handcuffed throughout the proceedure.
VICTIM. Where was I when you gave me the papers for “increased penelty”? You said I ripped them up?
MOXAM. You were sitting adjacent to the bench we seen in the video.
VICTIM. Handcuffed?
MOXAM. Yes.
VICTIM. How was I able to rip up those documents while handcuffed?
MOXAM. The handcuffs were removed.
VICTIM. Non of the papers were signed by me. I couldn’t sign. I was handcuffed from the back.
MOXAM. No I don’t believe you were handcuffed at that point. I’ll just refer to my notes. I didn’t take the handcuffs off you myself. I don’t know who did.
VICTIM. Well, you said the handcuffs would have been removed when I was offered to sign the papers?
MOXAM. Thats correct
VICTIM. So you served me the papers when I was handcuffed?
MOXAM. No thats not what I’m saying.
VICTIM. You served me the papers and someone else took off the handcuffs is that what you’re saying?
MOXAM. Someone else must have taken them off because I don’t recall taking them off. I served you with the papers and you tore them up.
VICTIM. Handcuffed in the back of course?
MOXAM. My notes do not say that, so your handcuffs obviously had to be removed prior to that.
VICTIM. Do you recall me asking for a phonebook to call a lawyer?
MOXAM. No.
VICTIM. I guess it would have been on that video that we conveniently never recieved.
MOXAM. I guess it would be on file somewhere. I know I took steps to try to get that video tape and it was my best intentions to obtain that tape and provide it to the crown. And do to whatever circumstance, I wasnt able to retrieve that myself to disclose it, and I can’t explain to you what happened to that video other than to say that the individual that was assigned to that division has resigned from the police service.
(CONTINUED CROSS-EXAMINATION OF SGT CRAIG MOXAM SEPTEMBER 30, 2002 BEFORE JUSTICE A.L. GAUY SUDBURY ONTARIO)
(Coming very soon)