Monday, September 21, 2015

J.P. vs. MCFD Lawsuit Trial Watch October 1, 2013

Papa Inbc commented on
Day two of the lawsuit continuation is underway, with social worker number two proudly reciting the non-evidence cited as removal reasons, those items mentioned in this story.
The first social worker dude I saw yesterday said these young kids reciting detailed accounts of abuse did not present a s.13 child protection concern, because mom was adequately protecting them from pedo-dad.

So today, social worker number two, a school marm knuckle rapping feminazi super-child protector lady, says mom is a mental health concern (because anonymous "credible community sources" said so), a cop said he though this mom would kill her kids, the custody battle meant (insinuated) that she was just coaching the kids to recite abuse stories to give her an advantage in custody court, that she was a flight risk (so the border patrol was alerted before the removal), that "credible sources" ("family") were concerned mom wasn't around with the kids (meaning there was probably something wrong, so mom was hiding something or getting ready to flee, or maybe already killed a kid or two). As long as it sounded horrible and made mom look bad, it was added to an intake report.
There was not one single redeeming quality cited of the mom by this worker. She was a danger to her kids, period, and those kids needed to be saved.

So, in the span of just a few weeks, formerly no-risk mom goes from adequate child protector to a potential child murderer, potential international kidnapper, probably stressed and deranged with mental health issues, fabricator of sexual abuse stories and corrupter of tiny children, evader of surprise visiting well-meaning social workers. With this massive collected hearsay evidence (oops, preponderance of evidence of credible risk reports), a removal was ordered to be done.

So, then, this child savior instructs the after hours social workers, who use the social worker police car and attached cop (social workers actually have their very own private marked police car and officer dedicated to the task of using it for child removals under some contract deal with the cops, called "car 86".) and the four kids are removed and dropped into a emergency 1-day foster home. The next day, moved to grandma's house. The week after that, moved the the brother/sister's/credible community reporters house (I guess the $500 tax-free a head for kinship placement is a nice perk.)

The questioning continues tomorrow in the top floor high security Vancouver BC Supreme courtroom 75. Be prepared to be patted down, possessions examined, standalone recorders held (ok to bring recording cell phones, ipods, ipads, compact cameras though). Apparently pedo-dad attends and his safety must be protected. There was one or two other non-family attendees, so there are LOTS of empty visitor seats.

I asked the lawyer Jack Hittrich who is acting for the parents, how can they afford this? He is doing this on a pro-bono / contingency basis, and cites the absolute shock at witnessing this government sponsored deliberate destruction of an innocent family, and he wants the public to know what is going on, and hopes the lawsuit will be the vehicle for this. From what I've seen, the government will obviously appeal any award, so all this effort is definitely not financially motivated, so I do buy the explanation.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are manually approved to eliminate spam and off topic discussions.