UPDATE ON EDITH BULLIS’ NEW COURT DATE

The Wilkes County Department of Social Services Supervisor, Edith Bullis, whose story has be posted on this blog previously, has been scheduled a new court date the new date follows.  Mrs. Bullis who was arrested for interfering with her sons arrest and hiding his drugs under her foot is a CPS supervisor a job, considering the circumstances, she should not continue to hold.

 

http://www1.aoc.state.nc.us/www/calendars.Offense.do?submit=submit&case=9602008054123&court=CR&defendant=BULLIS,EDITH,DODSON&courtDate=02/11/2009&county=WILKES&session=AM&courtRoom=0004

12/31/2008

Arraigned Offenses for Case Number:    2008054123 CR Arraigned Defendant Name:    BULLIS,EDITH,DODSON County:    WILKES Court Date:    02/11/2009 Session:    AM Court Room:    0004 <!––> Offense Code Description Statute  5310  Misdemeanor RESISTING PUBLIC OFFICER  14-223 << Back

12/31/2008

Arraigned Offenses for Case Number:    2008054124 CR Arraigned Defendant Name:    BULLIS,EDITH,DODSON County:    WILKES Court Date:    02/11/2009 Session:    AM Court Room:    0004 <!––> Offense Code Description Statute  3536  Misdemeanor SIMPLE POSSESS SCH II CS (M)  90-95(D)(2)

http://www1.aoc.state.nc.us/www/calendars.Offense.do?submit=submit&case=9602008054124&court=CR&defendant=BULLIS,EDITH,DODSON&courtDate=02/11/2009&county=WILKES&session=AM&courtRoom=0004

MOTHER ARRESTED FOR CONTEMPT FOR REFUSING TO REVEAL DAUGHTERS WHEREABOUTS

Bambi Baker-Hazen has been arrested for contempt for refusing to reveal the whereabouts of her 14 year old daughter who is a runaway from state custody. I say bravo to Bambi for doing everything in her power to protect her child from the corrupt DSS system.Ashton Baker was wrongly arrested and removed from her mothers home for truancy because of a mistake that Wichita middle school made when they misplaced documentation showing that Ashton was home schooled. Instead of admitting this error DSS has continued to tear this family apart. For the full story visit Bambi Baker-Hazen’s blog at:

http://countyinneedofchange.blogspot.com/

 

You can also view the USA Today story at:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/states/kansas/2008-12-12-1120627356_x.htm#Close”>

 

 

Written by Lawdoll http://www.standupspeakup-leesa.blogspot.com, http://www.stopcorruptdss.wordpress.com

WHAT WOULD DCF DO WITH BABY JESUS?

WHAT WOULD DCF DO WITH BABY JESUS?

HE WAS BORN IN A BARN WITH DIRTY FARM ANIMALS. DCF WITHOUT A WARRANT OR PROBABLE CAUSE BREAK DOWN 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. DCF WOULD TRY TO FORCE DNA ON FATHER IN ORDER TO GET JOSEPH OUT OF THE WAY SO THEY COULD THREATEN AND ATTACK MOTHER.

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. DCF WOULD TRY TO FORCE 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 NEED 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 FORM, “FATHER UNKNOWN”. DCF 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.
DCF would probably destroy the family and place the child in an abusive fostercare system even though the baby was not in imminent physical danger.

Connecticut DCF Watch
National Civil Rights Advocates For Families
P.O. Box 9775
Forestville, CT 06011-9775
860-833-4127
Admin@…
http://www.connecticutDCFwatch.com

STOLEN MILESTONES…A CPS NIGHTMARE

Can you imagine having your child stolen from you? Being accused of abuse that you did not do, missing all of the milestones in your child’s life?…Then finally being exonerated, only to be told by the court that although CPS should have never removed your child, it would be too harmful to the child to return her to you. Can you imagine that?

 

Well Kit and Nancy do not have to imagine this scenario, because it is what has happened to them. They are living the nightmare of the corrupt Child Protective Services System. A system that has the unlimited power to legally kidnap your child, without just cause, and keep them from you…Permanently!

 

Child Protective Services has the uncanny ability to hold your child just long enough to, in the eyes of the court, severe the parent, child bond and make it too emotionally damaging for your child to be returned home…it does not matter that they were wrongly removed from your care or that your constitutionally protected rights were violated. It does not matter that what children need is the love and safety that their natural parents can provide..better than any other.

 

Judges fall for this line time and again, I guess failing to realize the natural, God given bond between a child and their parents can never be severed and what is truly emotionally damaging is for this child to be removed from loving parents. Adopted children will always search for their parents when they are older, because the bond is never severed, postponed, maybe…but never broken.

 

I guess judges also fail to realize how emotionally damaging it was for the child to be wrongly removed in the first place. Just as I am sure they also fail to note that children of various ages are adopted by perfect strangers every day and manage to not only survive by thrive, so how could it not be in the child’s best interest to be returned home to the parents who love them, where they most assuredly will “bounce back” and thrive?

 

To not return a child to its natural parents is the cruelest of all the practices in this system. To severe the emotional bond between these families, does irreparable damage to these children, that will never heal. But as they say, I guess it is all about the Benjamin’s…

 

Kit and Nancy have a website located at the link below. Please visit them, view their pictures, story, videos and show your support. I have posted a couple of the newspaper stories below this link, I think they are straight and to the point of what occurred in this case.    Written by Lawdoll, www.stopcorruptdss.wordpress.com

 

http://kitandnancy.com/index.html

 

  

 NEWSPAPER ARTICLES ABOUT KIT AND NANCY’S STORY

http://www.examiner.com/a-1347693~Baby_snatching_by_Arlington_County.html

 

BABY SNATCHING BY ARLINGTON COUNTY

Editorial
Baby snatching by Arlington County
The Washington DC Examiner Newspaper
2008-04-18 07:00:00.0
Current rank: # 4,060 of 4,313

WASHINGTON -
There’s an empty highchair sitting in the kitchen of the Arlington home of Nancy Hey and Christopher Slitor. It’s their daughter Sabrina’s highchair. But it’s been empty for two years because thieves disguised as Arlington County social workers and judges took her from her parents. She was stolen with no public scrutiny or accountability. Arlington County social workers used unproven allegations of neglect in April 2005 to justify removing then-3-week-old Sabrina from her parent’s home. Her parents were accused – anonymously – of starving Sabrina. And they were deemed unable to care properly for their daughter, even with the frequent help of Nancy Hey’s mother and a full-time nanny. After more than two years of legal wrangling with the county’s Child Protective Services (CPS), Arlington Circuit Court Judge James Almand terminated the couple’s parental rights in June 2007.

But nine months earlier, Sabrina’s parents were completely exonerated by Virginia CPS hearing officer George Walton, who noted in his official report that, despite the baby’s worrisome 10-ounce weight loss soon after her birth by Caesarian section, nothing in the her medical record indicated she had ever been in danger. There was also no evidence, Walton added, that Sabrina’s “failure to thrive” resulted from parental neglect.

In fact, the record showed the opposite: Nancy Hey – who suffers from a developmental disorder that makes it difficult for her to recognize non-verbal signals from others – and her husband fully cooperated with medical professionals and CPS workers throughout their ordeal. In any case, Sabrina was at her proper weight when she was taken away by county officials, two days after her parents told social worker Dana Zemke that they were retaining a lawyer. Arlington Judge Esther Wiggins Lyles signed the removal order with neither Hey nor Slitor even aware of the proceedings, much less being present to contest the decision. Sabrina went to a politically influential local professional couple with no training as foster parents, despite CPS requirements that foster couples be trained before being entrusted with children.

Judge Almand later used the baby’s inappropriate removal to justify making the separation permanent, saying it would be too “traumatic” to return Sabrina to her natural parents. So, when Sabrina turned 3 April 3rd, she didn’t blow out her birthday candles in the kitchen where her heart-broken parents still keep her empty highchair. Even after spending $350,000 in legal fees, they have not given up hope. They’ve asked the Virginia Court of Appeals to return their child. Meanwhile, every Arlington County employee involved should be put under oath and questioned in public about their role in this outrage.

 

Examiner

 IS IT CHILD PROTECTION OF LEGAL KIDNAPPING?

http://www.examiner.com/a-1413848~Is_it_child_protection_or_legal_kidnapping_.html

 

 Special Reports
Is it child protection or legal kidnapping?

Barbara F. Hollingsworth, The Examiner
2008-05-29 13:04:58.0
Current rank: # 2,970 of 4,313

Children being taken from their homes, based on tips from anonymous telephone callers alleging abuse or neglect, has been cast in a harsh spotlight in the Texas polygamy case, and there’s growing evidence that more than a few of the 510,000 children placed in foster care annually don’t belong there.

In February, Georgia state Sen. Nancy Schaefer released a blistering assessment of the bureaucrats entrusted to protect children there: “I believe Child Protective Services (CPS) nationwide has become corrupt and that the entire system is broken almost beyond repair. I am convinced parents and families should be warned of the dangers.”

Armed with court orders and protected by confidentiality statutes that function as bureaucratic shield laws, CPS workers need just one anonymous phone call to a hotline to swoop in and remove children, regardless of the facts.

Such calls can be legitimate, coming from a legally mandated reporter such as a doctor or teacher. But it could also be a fabrication from a vindictive ex-spouse, a nosy neighbor, or a disgruntled relative.

Since no laws clearly define child abuse and neglect, parents have been accused of these serious crimes when what they actually did was yell, withhold TV privileges, or “repressing” their children by supervising them too much.

Dr. Steven Krason, professor of political science and legal studies at Franciscan University of Steubenville, is writing a book on CPS wrongdoing based on two decades of research.

Krason says CPS itself now poses “a grave threat” because “it is almost impossible to fully insulate one’s family from…a system that on very little pretense can simply reach into the home and take away one’s offspring.”

He’s convinced the number of real child abuse cases has remained fairly steady over the last three decades; what has been growing is an unprecedented government assault on innocent parents.

And if it doesn’t take much to have your children placed in foster care, getting them back can be another story. An anonymous call about a 10-ounce weight loss by their then 3-week-old daughter triggered a legal avalanche that buried Arlington residents Nancy Hey and Christopher Slitor.

Their parental rights were terminated last year by Arlington Judge James Almand even though Hey and Slitor had been exonerated by of all neglect charges nine months earlier.

In another local case, Georgetown residents Greg and Juliana Caplan had to spend $75,000 on lawyers and wait two weeks before their children were returned, even after five doctors confirmed that an injury sustained by one of their twin daughters was not caused by abuse.

The Caplans are still listed as possible child abusers in D.C., however, because they refused to submit to psychological counseling. Despite the stigma, that might have been a wise decision.

The psychological evaluation trap is one of the least expected obstacles facing parents snared unfairly in the CPS system. Most panicked parents promise to do anything to get their children back, often agreeing to a battery of psychological tests they naively believe will prove their parental competence and end the nightmare. But it doesn’t always work out that way.

Arlington social workers told Hey that she had to undergo psychological testing before she could get her baby back, so the longtime Federal Communications Commission employee readily agreed.

She was diagnosed with two clinical disorders by Dr. Giselle Hass at the Multicultural Clinical Center in Springfield. This psychological evaluation was cited in the court ruling terminating Hey’s parental rights.

But an independent, expert analysis of the report obtained by The Examiner included scathing critique of the methodology used to evaluate Hey, saying it “…reads more like advocacy than a professional psychological assessment… clear and frequent evidence of error… Any graduate student who turned in as poorly scored and interpreted a test as did this evaluator would probably have failed the first semester.”

Besides violations of standard practice and professional rules of ethics, the analysis noted numerous illustrations of bias in the psychological profile and “a consistent failure to include data that would be favorable to Mrs. Hey,”including 17 computer-generated scores on the Parental Stress Index that were all in the normal range.

This was a significant omission, given that Judge Almand cited Hey’s tendency of “freezing…in times of stress” as one of the main reasons she could not be trusted to raise her own child.

Hey – who has never been convicted of either abuse or neglect – has had no contact with three-year-old Sabrina since Judge Almand allowed her to be adopted by the same foster family Arlington CPS workers originally selected to care for her baby.

Barbara F. Hollingsworth is The Examiner’s local opinion editor.
Examiner

DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS ON THIS PAGE

EXPLAINATION OF DOCUMENTS ON THIS BLOG

 This is a description of all of the documents on this blog, if you click on them a bigger image will appear.   If you view these documents you will see exactly what DSS did, not only did they forge documents, but the falsified them and lied in them. I have used the name Julie for my stepdaughter.

FORGED SIGNATURE

This is not my husband’s signature, whats more this assessment never even occurred. Allison Baker did not begin investigating us until October 25, 2006 as proven by recorded phone calls between myself and her. Two days, I might add, after I called Raleigh and complained about DSS handling of our report of child abuse

ACTUAL SIGNATURE

 My husbands actual signature, compare the two, you will see the big difference.

FIRST LETTER FROM THE DENTIST

 This is the letter the dentist wrote about how bad, Julie’s teeth were.

TEETH

 This is picture of my stepdaughters teeth. My husband told her mother about these cavities December 17, 2005 and the mother allowed Julie to live in pain for the next 6 months. She would not take her to the dentist, she told my husband if he tried to pick his daughter up from school and took her to the dentist that she would have him arrested, because it was not his custody time. In order to get this little girl to the dentist we had to file for emergency custody, the mother had sent her out of the state in violation of the custody order during his two weeks in June visitation. As soon as we got Julie, we took her to the dentist. Her teeth were so infected that she had to be put on antibiotic’s and a week later had to have these two teeth extracted. Please remember not only did we have insurance on the child at the time, her mother had insurance and she also had the children on medicaid.

NOTARIZED STATEMENT FROM THE DENTIST

This is the notarized statement that the dentist wrote to tell the judge and DSS just how bad Julie’s teeth were. I think it is plain from the tone of this statement that he felt Julie had been neglected by her mother. The missed appointment that I had to cancel was one that I had made and her mother refused to take her to, stating that she had scheduled her an appointment with her “usual dentist”, whom Julie had not seen in three years. Julie’s appointment with her “usual dentist” was cancelled several times, until we pushed the issue.

LETTER CLOSING THE CASE FROM WILKES COUNTY

 If you read this letter it includes the statement by the SW for us to continue to monitor Julie’s care from her mother. Now, why, if the mother is doing what she is supposed to do to take care of her child, do we need to continue to monitor her care from her mother? The day they closed the case I made a report because Julie had bruises around her upper arm that looked like someone had grabbed her by the arm. The therapist that we were taking her to saw these bruises and felt that they were suspicious as well but that they weren’t fresh enough for him to make a report…They screened this report out because I didn’t state who had abused her…another stupid reason for screening out a report.

LETTER FROM SURRY COUNTY DSS CLOSING THE CASE

 This is the letter from Surry County DSS that not only proves when the in home services agreement was made but also directly contradicts the letter to the Judge and their findings that we were not complying with them.

LETTER TO THE JUDGE page 1

 This letter is nothing but lies and is nothing like what the SW told me in a recorded phone call that she was going to write. We did everything they ever asked us to do, while they had to fight with the mother every step of the way. We did not fight with the mother, but would call her on it when she was not fulfilling her duties as Julie and her sisters mother. The mother would lie to DSS, still would not let them come to her home or let them see the girls.

LETTER TO THE JUDGE page 2

 I love the first paragraph on this page, tell me if you break a child’s arm and it heals without permanent damage is it no longer abuse? If you don’t take your child to the dentist and leave her with a toothache for over 6 month, does it stop being neglect, because those teeth are pulled? No it is still abuse, the physical ailment may have healed but that doesn’t take away the neglect. It is a proven fact that having teeth this decayed can kill you.

REPORT NOT ACCEPTED

 This is the reason that they gave for not accepting the report that I made about the bruises on Julie. “The child is not stating that anything adverse has happened to her.” Since when does a child have to state that they are being abused for an investigation to be done. Children do not always disclose and the thing that always got me about this was the fact that they had not talked to the child at all.

MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION CONSENT FORM

 If you look at this document you will see that the consent from the parents was received through intimidation and coherision. The parents were led to believe that they had no choice but to sign this document because they believed that it had been ordered by the County Director.

IN HOME FAMILY SERVICES AGREEMENT PAGES 1 THROUGH 6

 Please note that the criteria on the Family Services Agreement is supposed to come from the Strengths and Needs Assessment. These don’t.

 The second page, first they are saying that my husband is to get medical and dental insurance on Julie, so that inability to pay will not be an excuse not to receive treatment. This is wrong for the following reason:

 1. He had insurance on Julie when her mother neglected to take her to the dentist before.
2. He lost said insurance coverage and his job, because of DSS. Their failure to investigate this case in a timely manner, causing numerous postponements in the court case and their missed appointments were the reason he lost his job and the insurance coverage.
3. Julie was covered under medicaid on this date.
4. This is not a DSS matter, this is a child support issue and my husband was well within the order of the court, which states, “when insurance is made available through the employer.” It had not been made available through his employer, because he had just started a new job because DSS made him loose the other one.
5. This is not abuse, what the mother did when she would not take the girls to the dentist even though they had insurance and medicaid, that is abuse.

Page 3 In Home Family Service Agreement

 Exchanges between the parents be as amicable as possible. They always had been and I have a years worth of video proving it. When the mother would yell and cuss at us we would walk away, we would not comment or we would say thank you.

 DSS was well aware that there was no arguing occurring at the exchanges, because they had seen some of the video’s and made inappropriate comments about the parents acting like robots, and not acting human. So which is it DSS?

 Also on page 3 note that my husband is to attend all sessions for counseling that the mother and he provide for Julie. Follow the recommendations of the counselor. Three sessions? That was all they wanted, what good does that do? Plus their own Strengths and Needs state that the child has minimal problems, what child doesn’t, and their own psychologist stated to me and the other step mom that the girls did not need counseling…I don’t care what he wrote in his evaluation, this is what he stated to us.

Page 4 In Home Family Services Agreement

 The threat of Foster Care….

 Under the section of what it will take for the case to close, the only thing listed is that at least 3 counseling sessions be met. Then they closed this case before those sessions were met, saying that the order had come down to close the case, that they did not care if the counseling was completed or not.

Page 6 In Home Family Services Agreement

 This is what I thought then and it is still what I think now, with one exception, after the lies that Linda Brooks told I now believe her to be just as guilty as the rest.

 That concludes the In Home Family Services Agreement…tell me where is the abuse?

RISK ASSESSMENT page 1

 Read this carefully and look at what they used to keep the case open, this is not child abuse or neglect in anyway shape or form. They mark a one on lines R8 and R9 saying that we weren’t complying with the in home services agreement, on this date, there was no in home services agreement. So exactly how were we failing to comply with something that did not exist? If you read the letter from Surry County DSS, it directly contradicts these findings stating that we complied with everything DSS ever told us to do and then it lists the date the in home services agreement was created.

 Furthermore, when one was created all it said on it was for my husband to get dental insurance on Julie and that the pick up and drops off should go smoothly without any arguments. And three counseling sessions….

 My husband had dental insurance on Julie when her mother wouldn’t take her to the dentist before and had kept coverage on her for years. We lost the insurance when he lost his job, due to DSS’s failure to investigate our report in a timely manner. Because they did not do their job, the civil action we had filed kept being postponed awaiting their findings, my husband had to keep asking for days off to be in court. Then DSS missed the appointment with the psychologist and it had to be postponed, so he had to ask for another day, which resulted in him being let go because he missed too much work. I guess what really gets me is they acted like the mother couldn’t take Julie to the dentist if he didn’t have insurance, but she had her on medicaid the entire time, so in my mind this shows willful neglect on her part.

RISK ASSESSMENT page 1

 Look at our score on this risk assessment, it is in the low box, and if you take off the boxes that they marked on the first page because it wasn’t true, then our actual score would have been a one. They knew they had nothing on us to substantiate against us for, they knew they had no reason for leaving this case open…so they made something up. Even with the score they gave us, they still had to do an override, because according to their own paper work, if the score is that low they are supposed to not substantiate or keep the case open, so they lied about us not complying with the case plan in order to leave the case open.

RISK ASSESSMENT SECOND page 1

 Pay attention to R8 and R9, now it says that we are complying and the only thing we receive a point on is my husband’s age…yet they still override this low score by stating that we are not complying with the cft of 9-11-07 there was no In Home Services Agreement on this date. Furthermore they state in this that we have “Successfully completed all programs recommended or actively participation in programs; pursuing objectives detailed in service agreement.”

 

RISK ASSESSMENT SECOND page 2

 Discretionary Override: This is a complete lie, by their own admission on this document.

RISK ASSESSMENT THIRD page 1 and 2

 This says the same thing as the previous Risk Assessment, but note that the Discretionary Override is missing. So why did they override it before and not now. They never had a case against us, we never committed any kind of abuse. They did all of this to discredit our valid complaints against them, because in their minds they felt that if they made us into child abusers, no one would listen to our complaints.

STRENGTHS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT page 1

 Good parenting skills, then why are you bothering us???

STRENGTHS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT page 2

 Look at the strengths, now look at the needs

 Minor child Characteristics…What child doesn’t but of course she has minor characteristic’s her mother had been married 3 times in four years and was constantly bring men in and out of the children’s lives introducing them to the children as this is you “new daddy”.

 Furthermore, the mother was mentally ill. Which I might point out we were not.

 Underemployed…Only because my husband lost his job because of them.

 Caregiver Neglected as a child…Yes I was abused and neglect, but by their own hand I have good parenting skills. I was abused as a child…I am 38 now. Tell me what this has to do with anything?

 Child’s needs;

 Tutoring: Well she lives with her mother full time, that falls on her shoulders although before DSS involvement we had already been going to the school and picking up her school work and making her make it up on our every other weekend visits.

 Speech problem: Again we had already contacted the school before DSS involvement about Julie’s speech and were told by them that she did not need therapy.

 Not seeing Counselor: We had been trying to get Julie to a counselor for years before DSS involvement, the mother would not let her go and it is hard to find someone to take her on the weekend.

STRENGTHS AND NEEDS SECOND ASSESSMENT pages 1 and 2

 This says the same thing as the First, it still states that we have good parenting skills, so why are they bothering us?

STRENGTHS AND NEEDS THIRD ASSESSMENT pages 1 and 2

 This says the same thing as the First, except now I guess the jobs we had were good enough, it still states that we have good parenting skills, so why are they bothering us?

PETITION FILED BY DSS TO GET THE MOTHER TO COMPLY page 1

 This is the petition that DSS filed the same day, just mere hours, after I called them and asked them why they had done nothing about the mother’s failure to attend and take Julie and her sister to the psychologist for the evaluation. They dismissed this petition, because after they filed it she took the girls and herself. In this phone call I also accuse them of negligence.

PETITION FILED BY DSS TO GET THE MOTHER TO COMPLY page 2

 If you read this page, it basically tells you that we have done what we were supposed to, while the mother had not. She would not even set up times so the SW could check on the girls, yet they dismissed the petition. The other thing I found funny was that they went after her for failing to take the girl’s to the mental health evaluation, but would not do anything about her not taking them to the dentist. As a matter of fact, Julie’s sisters teeth were not fixed until her last appointment with the psychologist, almost a year after they received their report.

SECOND REPORT NOT ACCEPTED

 This is another report that I made because Julie had bruises on her upper right arm that looked as if someone grabbed her. The psychologist say these bruises too and felt they were suspicious, but did not report them because he was unsure of what caused them. He did state he would be watching Julie more closely in the future. Look at why they screened this one out….

LETTER FROM DSS ATTORNEY MR. FREEMAN

 In my view this is a very intimidating letter sent to try and shut me up. I am asking for more documentation because I feel that their are more forgeries and falsified documents in the file. I believe they do not want me to have them because there are more forgeries and falsified documents in the file. I love how he states that the case is closed. Closed or not it does not excuse their behavior in this case, nor does it end their liability.

JUDGE BYRD’S ORDER DATED NOVEMBER 20, 2006 pages 1 and 2(coming soon)

 If you notice in this order Judge Byrd orders DSS to submit a written report of all findings, this was in November of 06. They did not submit their findings to him until May 08, and then it is not even the truth but lies. All Judge Byrd received from them was the psychologist report that was full of BS and the letter date May 08, that was also full of BS. Just how long do you think you have to comply with a Judges order? Also note in Judge Byrd’s order that he was concerned enough about the teeth to allow documentation from the dentist without the dentist being present.

SECOND LETTER FROM DSS ATTORNEY MR. FREEMAN(coming soon)

 Again with the intimidation.

ALLISON S. BAKERS CRIMINAL BACKGROUND SEARCH Pages 3 and 4

 This is the background check I had done on Allison S. Baker, the original Social Worker, at the Wilkes County Courthouse, May 15, 2007. As you can see Mrs. Baker has been charged with 8 Counts of Forgery, Obtain Control Substance by Fraud/Forgery.

 These Charges were knocked down to misdemeanor, possession of a controlled substance to which she was sentenced to probation and community service and when she complied with that they did what is known as a 90 96 Review and dismissed the charges. The point remains, someone who has been charged like this should not be working for Social Services where they remove children from the home for substance abuse by the parents.

INITIAL CASE PLAN, DON’T KNOW WHAT THIS IS(coming soon)

 Nikki Hull brought this to our house when she came August 20, 2007. Even she said that this stuff made no sense as DSS is not supposed to involve themselves in custody issues. Nothing on this was ever set up or scheduled by DSS. Now if this is what they are talking about in the Risk Assessments they are responsible for setting this stuff up and they never did. In fact we were told that they decided not to use this.

MY DISCOURAGED VENT…RANT, RAVE, CUSS…SESSION…I feel better now..

Sometimes the responses I receive are so heartbreaking for me, people telling me that I am doing this out of anger or vindictively, because they do not know what I know.  They have not done the research or read the stories, so they have no clue about the big picture, they just see the pretty picture that DSS draws for the world and believe blindlessly that DSS will protect the children.  You cannot understand the flaws in the Child Protective Services system if you have not seen them first hand.  Sometimes their comments hurt me so bad, that I feel like giving up and then I remind myself what it is that I am fighting for…CHILDREN.  How could any fight to save children’s lives be wrong? 

For the record, I do not speak out about the corruption of the DSS system for vindictive reasons.  I am angry, yes I will admit that, it is hard not to be angry at a system that children are dying in.   It is hard not to be angry when you realize that but by the grace of God…it could have been a child you loved.   I think that my anger is justified, considering what they did to us,  and I think if you do not get angry about the senseless death of a child, that there is something wrong with you.

I speak out against the corruption I see in the DSS system, because I feel to sit quietly back and just accept it, makes me responsible for these children’s deaths and I for one, could not live with myself if I did that.  I speak out about the flaws, because to not speak out allows their failures to continue. The only way to change the system is to speak out about it.  You can not change the system if you sit quietly at home, knowing the truth, but not sharing it.   I speak out because the children need someone to speak out for them. 

I really do at times get discouraged, it is hard not to when people threaten you,  call you names or take every word you say and twist into something you did not say.  It is hard not to get discouraged when people think the only reason you are doing this is to maliciously persecute the DSS system.  Well I do not maliciously persecute them, but I am after prosecution and accountability for them, and honestly there is a difference between the two.

 Malicious in my mind means that you have no reason except to try and hurt someone..because you don’t like them or they wronged you somehow and you want revenge.  That is not what this is about, if it had just been me that they wronged I could have walked away, but they wronged children…they are wronging children across the country.  Malicious…no, not in the least.  I am trying to stop the hurt they are causing. 

It is not malicious, it is a quest to protect children.  Some of you who come to my blog have blogs of your own, so I know that you will understand my feelings here.  It isn’t like I am asking for prosecution and accountability for innocent people.  I am asking that people who have broken the law, forged documents, falsified records, committed perjury, failed to protect children that needed their protection, abused their power to remove children they shouldn’t have, be held accountable for their actions.  That isn’t called malicious prosecution, that is called justice.

If a person forges your signature on documents, say a legal brief, they broke the law and are arrested and punished for it.  It should not be any different when Social Workers forge signatures.  If someone falsifies records in a doctors office or company, they are arrested.  If a person murders a child, and another person knew that the child was in danger or could be in danger, they are prosecuted for it, it should not be any different with social services.  If you fail to protect your child from abuse, even by inaction, you can and will be charged with a crime, it should be the same for CPS.

When people call for the death penalty for a child murder, it is not viewed as malicious, it is viewed as a call for justice.  When people gather together because a child has been killed by a drunk driver or a person talking on their cell phone, and demand stronger laws that hold these people accountable for their actions it is viewed as a cry for justice, a cry for protection…but to cry out for laws holding DSS/CPS accountable for their wrongs is just done “vindictively”…there is something seriously wrong with this picture.

Are these children not as important as other children…is it because they were abused, so they are not given the same love and protection as children from happy homes.  People act like because these children ended up in the Child Protective Services system, ( most of them wrongly) that they are worth less then other children and to cry out for them to be protected is wrong, because CPS protects children.  CPS does not protect children…they fail miserably at their job,  do research, look it up, then come talk to me.

 People act like their deaths are just part of the costs of the system, I have even been told that they can’t protect every child all the time!!!!  Well they damn well better, it is what they get paid for.

 What the hell is wrong with people, just because a child comes from an abusive family or dies in DSS custody does not lower the value of their lives. 

They still deserve protection.  Maybe even more so….

Furthermore:  I will state from experience:

Just because they are in DSS custody, doesn’t mean they should be, just as being left at home after a DSS investigation does not mean they are safe.

I am speaking out to try and protect the children who are falling through the cracks of the broken Child Protective Services system.  You can say whatever you want about me, but when it comes to the end of the day…I can look at myself and know I tried to make a difference in the world..What can you say?

ALLISON BAKERS NEW COURT DATE

Here is the date of the new court date of the social worker in our case…I will keep you informed.

12/16/2008

Arraigned Offenses for Case Number:

2007054787 CRS

Arraigned Defendant Name:

BAKER,ALLISON,SAUNDERS

County:

WILKES

Court Date:

01/20/2009

Session:

AM

Court Room:

002A

Offense Code
Description
Statute
–>
9999
OTHER – FREE TEXT

Edith Bullis Court Date Tomorrow

The Social Worker who was arrested for interfering with an arrest and possession for hiding her sons drugs under her feet has a court date tomorrow. I will keep you informed of what I find out.

51 08CR 054123 BULLIS,EDITH,DODSON KEY,C,S SFF
BOND: $1 WPA
(M)RESISTING PUBLIC OFFICER PLEA: VER:
CLS:2 P: L: JUDGMENT:

52 08CR 054124 BULLIS,EDITH,DODSON KEY,C,S SFF
BOND: WPA
(M)SIMPLE POSSESS SCH II CS (M) PLEA: VER:
CLS:1 P: L: JUDGMENT:

53 08CR 054120 BULLIS,GENE,ALTON,JR KEY,C,S SFF
BOND: $1 SEC
(T)FLEE/ELUDE ARREST W/MV (M) PLEA: VER:
CLS:1 P: L: JUDGMENT:

54 08CR 054121 BULLIS,GENE,ALTON,JR KEY,C,S SFF
BOND: $1 SEC
(M)RESISTING PUBLIC OFFICER PLEA: VER:
CLS:2 P: L: JUDGMENT:
1 DISTRICT COURT CALENDAR PAGE: 18

COURT DATE: 12/17/08 TIME: 09:30 AM COURTROOM NUMBER: 0004

NO. FILE NUMBER DEFENDANT NAME COMPLAINANT ATTORNEY CONT
****

55 08CR 054122 BULLIS,GENE,ALTON,JR KEY,C,S SFF
BOND: $2,500 SEC
(M)POSSESS MARIJUANA UP TO 1/2 OZ PLEA: VER:
CLS:3 P: L: JUDGMENT:

FEDERAL JACK STORY: Oregon CPS interviewed about the unlawful abduction of an infant by their agency

THIS IS A MUST SEE…You have to go visit this site, watch the videos and read this story.  I cannot believe that this has been allowed to happen.  Through the whole videos these parents continually ask why their baby was taken, what harm the baby was in  and they never receive any kind of answer.  Apparently, the only reason given at all is that Trudy’s other children were removed by the state of Washington, after the police raided their home.  Which is apparently the only reason the other children were taken to begin with.   The DSS workers in this video comments that it is because Trudy and Mark failed to do what Washington said they needed to do, in order to get her children back.  Trudy even tells them that they completed the parenting class required by Washington, the only thing required by Washington, and they were in the process of returning the children to their care. 

You have to watch the videos and read this story.  It is a must see.  I would call this a complete travisity of justice and kidnapping.  The father in this story was also arrested for making his video, although no one in the room seemed to have a problem with it being recorded, until they could not answer the couples questions.  I will write more on this story later as it unfolds to me.  I am hoping that I can contact a couple of people involved and find out some more.

http://federaljack.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2737

RESPONSE TO MY EMAILS

I sent this email out to various Government Official’s and Elected Official’s, attached were a lot of the same documents that you see on my story about DSS failure to protect my stepdaughter.  I believe I received two responses it to this email.  And what responses they were, just more of the same BS, sweep it under the rug and lies that I normally received.  I have included those responses here… These people do not even know law about their own departments and if they are aware of them, then they lie their asses off to protect themselves…. Read on

- Flag this messageFORGED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED

Sunday, October 19, 2008 12:30 AM
From: “Lawdoll (name and email removed by poster)

View contact details To: admin@ncchild.org, chris.downing@hhs.gov, dempsey.benton@ncmail.net, Done@ncleg.net, dssweb@ncmail.net, “Mike Easley” <gov.office@ncmail.net>, “Deric HHS Gilliard” <deric.gilliard@hhs.gov>, governor@ncmail.net, “Jim Harrell” <jimha@ncleg.net>, joann.lamm@ncmail.net, karen.ashton@hhs.gov, ltgovernor@ncmail.net, mike.leavitt_g06@hhs.gov, “Ruth Walker” <ruth.walker@acf.hhs.gov>, “Carlis Williams” <carlis.williams@acf.hhs.gov>… more

Message contains attachmentsForged safety assessment page 1.jpg (430KB), Forged safety assessment page 2.jpg (243KB), Husband’s (name removed) work record we 81906 for web.jpg (232KB), Only safety asessement Allison Baker ever diid page1.jpg (403KB), Only safety asessement Allison Baker ever diid with Father’s real siganature page 2.jpg (137KB), child’s teeth 55k.jpg (109KB), Notarized letter from dentist. 60.k.jpg (121KB), Letter from dentist.jpg (131KB), Subpeona from da for web.jpg (96KB), Complaint against wilkes county2.rtf (56KB)

First allow me to explain the attachments

• Forged safety assessment page 1

Look at the date…Allison Baker was not at our home on this date, WCDSS did not even receive the report until 8-17-06

• Forged safety assessment page 2

Look at Husband’s (name removed) signature on this page…this is not his signature. I believe that Allison Baker and/or Mary Henderson forged his (name removed) signature and fabricated this safety assessment sometime in October, 2006. Note the absence of my signature, even though I was the only one home on this date.

• Husband’s (name removed) Work Record for the week ending 8-19-06

The 17th was a Thursday…He (name removed) worked for 10 hours that day, he was not at home the day that Allison Baker claims to have done this safety assessment.

• Only safety assessment Allison Baker ever did on us page 1

Look at the date…Look at the name of the child…Not our child!

• Only safety assessment Allison Baker ever did on us page 2

Look at husband’s (name removed) signature on this document…this is his true signature. Also note my signature on this document.

• Child’s (name Removed) Teeth

This photo was taken by Dr. Michael Tumbarello, when we were finally able to take The child (name removed) to the dentist during the father’s (name removed) summer visitation that we had to fight to receive.

• Notarized letter from the dentist

Dr. Tumbarello felt so strongly that the condition of the child’s (name removed) teeth was neglect on the mother’s part, that he wrote a letter to DSS stating what he had seen and had it notarized.

• Letter from the dentist

This is the first letter that Dr. Tumbarello wrote describing the condition of the child’s (name removed) teeth and the amount of pain she had been in for at least 6 months.

• Subpoena from DA

The District Attorney’s Office in Wilkes County views my husband (name removed) as a victim of a crime committed by Allison Baker.

• Complaint Against Wilkes County

Another copy of our complaint about the Wilkes County Department of Social Services, pay attention to the bottom because it has been added to with more policy violations.

I have contacted you constantly trying to get you to investigate the Wilkes County Department of Social Services and their Statutory Violations, Welfare Policy Violation, unethical and bias behavior and so far nothing has been done.   Allison Baker’s trial is scheduled to begin in November and even the Detective who has been assigned to the case does not understand why no one has stepped up to investigate this department for the things they have done to us and he has seen the file!   WCDSS came after us because we complained about them.   They did not do their job as the Statutes say that they are required to do, they did not follow welfare policy.   What they did do was maliciously prosecute us to shut us up about their unethical behavior.   And still their policy violations continue…. See the news stories pasted below…

Edith Bullis is a CPS Supervisor at the Wilkes County Department of Social Services…why hasn’t she been fired? It is DSS policy to immediately dismiss employee’s who behave in this manner.

Furthermore, tell me how she is supposed to make a decision to remove someones child because the parents are doing drugs or living in a meth house, if she is hiding her owns sons drugs under her foot? All of you that I am writing owe a duty to do something about my complaint, the policy violations, the law violations, the unethical and bias behavior. 

I am demanding an investigation by an outside agency with someone who will actually talk to us and view our evidence.   I am also demanding a copy of our file with DSS, so that I can go through it and prove that the things theY wrote in it about us are false.  The mother passed away in July, so there is no reporter to protect. The child is protected NOW!, no thanks to DSS, who did not do their job.  But that is neither here nor there. It does not excuse DSS’s behavior in this manner, nor does it “get rid” of the wrongs that they committed.  

I am also demanding that the neglect substantiation be removed from My husband (name removed) and myself, The father of the other child and her stepmother (names removed and the mother’s husband (names removed). It is not ethical or right to leave it in place with the evidence that we have proving the wrongs that they committed. My phone number is Number removed. Don’t forget to read the news stories below. You need to do something about this department. I await your decision,

Lawdoll (name removed)

Mama and Son Arrested in Drug Case
3:59 pm, September 29, 2008

Wilkes sheriff deputies arrested two family members Saturday evening, after they chased one of them to the other’s house, had to use a Taser on him multiple times, and found her trying to hide a of marijuana until they left. It started when a deputy was dispatched to a suspicious vehicle call shortly after 7pm near Glen Ridge and Rock Creek Road, where a caller said they’d seen drug activity of some sort. On the way to the area, the deputy spotted the car that had been described, and was able to get the driver to pull over. What started as a routine stop turned into a high-speed chase when the deputy told the driver he could see what looked to be baggies of drugs in his left-hand jacket pocket. Having identified the driver as 39-year old Gene Bullis, Junior, the deputy followed at some distance and pulled up behind Bullis as he was getting out of the car at his parents’ home on Skyview Drive.

Once he got worked up, Bullis never seemed to calm down. A six-page crime report describes the deputy repeatedly shocking him with a Taser to no effect, Bullis being able to fight off multiple deputies, and other activity generally telling of being high on something, according to the deputy. During the confrontation, Bullis’ mother Edith came out of the house and stood between the deputies and her son, refusing for quite a while to allow them any access to him. When she did finally step aside, it was only because there were several deputies and a Lieutenant she knows at the scene. Still, she would not go further than arm’s reach from him, and after a while it became obvious she was trying to help him hide something. When a search of his jacket pocket turned up only one baggie of marijuana and deputies could not find any drugs by walking the driveway and some distance along the road, they confronted Mrs. Bullis, who was standing in one spot very firmly planing one foot. When she was told to move by one of the deputies, Mrs. Bullis allegedly started faking back pain as a distraction and tried to kick something under the nearby car. It turned out to be another baggie of drugs.

She was arrested for simple possession and resisting an officer, while her son was charged with Fleeing to elude arrest, resisting an officer, and drug possession. Apparently they left this child in the home with his father for at least two weeks Wilkesboro Man Charged for Burning 10-Year Old’s Hand to

“Teach Him a Lesson”
4:04 pm, October 15, 2008

http://12403wc.blogspot.com/search?q=Jairo+Barquero

 

A Wilkesboro man is jailed on a 10-thousand dollar bond, charged with abusing his son by burning his hand on a stove burner. When the 10-year old boy showed up at school about 2 weeks ago with his father, several teachers and students saw the severe burn. While the father, 26 year old Jairo Barquero, was telling school officials his son had burned himself picking up a hot skillet, the boy was telling friends his dad had burned him to teach him a lesson — apparently the boy had been burning matches.

When school officials asked the boy what had happened, he told them the same story his father had told…but he continued to tell friends the other story. At the school’s request, Mr. Barquero took his son to the hospital to have the hand checked out — but somehow, through all the people who looked at the injury, no photos are reported being taken of it except by the school nurse a day after the incident was reported to Wilkesboro Police.

A week ago yesterday, as police were following up on the case with Mr. Barquero, they learned social workers were talking to the boy at the school. When they met up with the social worker and talked with the boy, he originally stuck to the hot pan story, and demonstrated how he’d picked up the pan with both hands and burned himself. But when pressed whether he really believed the injury he had could have come from picking up a pan like that, the boy broke down and recanted that story, saying his father had held his hand on the burner until he’d suffered the burn.

A doctor in Winston-Salem looked at the photo taken three days after the incident happened, and determined that the core of the burner could be seen in the burn pattern, matching the boy’s descriptions to friends and police about what had happened. The doctor said there was no way a 10-year old would hold their hand on the burner long enough to receive that sort of burn, unless his hand was being held there by a person stronger than him. Police arrested Mr. Barquero yesterday on a charge of Felony Child Abuse with Serious Injury, and jailed him on a 10-thousand dollar bond. Police have closed their investigation with the arrest.

 My questions are…. There are a few things that I find puzzling…

1. How does someone know what was said between the child and DSS and is this information supposed to be released like this?

2. Why did DSS not interview this child until a week later. I would gather that since the Nurse is the only one who has a picture of the burn, that it was the school who reported it. Obviously the nurse felt that it was child abuse since she took the picture 3 days after he came back to school with the burn. I have to wonder if she had to resort to taking the pictures of the burn herself, because DSS did not respond to this report in the time they should have.

Reminder to DSS…You have no more than 24 hours to respond to reports of physical abuse!!!!

3. Why wasn’t DSS there to take the pictures that are needed as evidence in court?

4. Why did DSS tell this 10 year old child that his story wasn’t believable and push the issue of abuse, but when faced with a child with what was obviously a handprint on the inside of their thigh, believe that it came from a haunted trail????

RESPONSE FROM RUTH WALKER ACF ATLANTA, GA

From: Walker, Ruth (ACF) <ruth.walker@acf.hhs.gov>
Subject: RE: FORGED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
To: Lawdoll (name and email removed by poster), admin@ncchild.org, chris.downing@hhs.gov, dempsey.benton@ncmail.net, Done@ncleg.net, dssweb@ncmail.net, “Mike Easley” <gov.office@ncmail.net>, “Gilliard, Deric (HHS)” <deric.gilliard@hhs.gov>, governor@ncmail.net, “Jim Harrell” <jimha@ncleg.net>, joann.lamm@ncmail.net, “Ashton, Karen (HHS/OS)” <Karen.Ashton@hhs.gov>, ltgovernor@ncmail.net, Mike.Leavitt_G06@hhs.gov, “Williams, Carlis (ACF)” carlis.williams@acf.hhs.gov
Date: Thursday, October 23, 2008, 5:35 PM

Ms. Lawdoll (name removed by poster),

We have been in contact with the NC DSS regarding the child in this case. The state reported that the child is safe. The allegations that you have against the county and county staff are state issues and should be resolved by the NC Department of Social Services or the state courts. We at the federal level do not have case specific intervention authority in this matter. We hope that these issues are resolved for you and your family soon.

Ruth Walker

Regional Program Manager

Region IV – Children’s Bureau

Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center

61 Forsyth Street, SW – Suite 4 M60

Atlanta, Georgia 30303

404-562-2901

404-562-2983 Fax

MY RESPONSE TO MS. WALKER

Flag this message

RE: FORGED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED

Thursday, October 23, 2008 6:15 PM

From: “Lawdoll (name and email removed) View contact details To: “Walker, Ruth (ACF)” ruth.walker@acf.hhs.gov

Dear Ms. Walker:

It was my understanding that when the State level will not do something about a complaint that you are the next in line to be contacted.

The child is safe because she now lives with us…Her safety does not excuse DSS’s behavior, law breaking, policy violations and neglectful attitude in this matter.  If anything their actions should concern the Federal Government Immensely and make them want to investigate this department to ensure the safety of other children that come into their care or in need of their protection because they are not doing their job.  The point I am trying to make is that it does not matter if the child is safe now. They are still liable for their behavior, they allowed her to remain in danger because they did not follow statutory law or policy…they did nothing to protect this child.

When we complained about their behavior they came after us. They forged safety assessments, forged my husbands name, falsified the safety assessment and apparently the risk assessment and the strengths and needs documents since they were done before Allison Baker ever came to our home or even met my husband. They lied to the judge, and substantiated against us for basically speaking out against them and their wrong doings. If you want someone else’s story besides mine about the wrongs that they committed against us and the child in this case contact Detective Name removed at the Wilkesboro P.D. His comment when he saw the psychological report was, “well I guess I won’t call my girls anymore and tell them that I love them and miss them.” He made this comment because Dr. Powell stated that it was wrong for my husband (name removed) to call his daugter (name removed) and tell her he loved her and missed her. They made stuff up so they could substantiate against us, they LIED.

The Federal Government needs to step in to this matter and do something about this department!!! I do appreciate you writing me back, but I don’t think your only concern should be that the child is safe…what about the other children that they are doing this to? They deserve to be protected better than this. WCDSS’s actions in our case shows that they are not protecting the children in their county, just their own asses.

Sincerely,

Lawdoll (name removed by poster)

RESPONSE FROM EDITH THOMAS-PULLEN

- On Fri, 10/24/08, Ellen Thomas-Pullen <ellen.pullen@ncmail.net> wrote:From: Ellen Thomas-Pullen <ellen.pullen@ncmail.net>
Subject: Response to Ms. Lawdoll (name removed by poster)

To: Lawdoll (email removed by poster)

Cc: dssweb@ncmail.net, ruth.walker@acf.hhs.gov, “Kevin Kelley” <Kevin.Kelley@ncmail.net>
Date: Friday, October 24, 2008, 1:01 PM

Dear Ms. Lawdoll(name removed by poster):

Your e-mail to the DSS website has been forwarded to me for a response. Thank you for the opportunity to address your concerns.

I am sorry that you feel the Wilkes County Department of Social Services (DSS) has misrepresented themselves and that there has been insufficient attention devoted to investigating the concerns you address or listening to what you have to share regarding the safety of your stepdaughter, name removed. The fact that this office has previously responded to you and the Wilkes County DSS investigated your report and met with you makes evident you were heard and that your concerns were taken seriously. Mr. Bumgarner has honored your request for a review of the agency’s decision and a change in the substantiation was made. While you can certainly disagree to keep the substantiation, Mr. Bumgarner has informed you that another change is not a possibility. Furthermore, the concerns you share do not validate removal of the substantiation as it is the information and evidence gathered during the course of a protective services investigative assessment that justifies the case decision. To that end, this office does not have the authority to change the county’s decision or in any way instruct them to do so.

Regarding your request for a copy of the file, the provision of Child Protective Service (CPS) involves a particular responsibility for the sensitive management of confidential information. The rationale for stringent confidentiality rules in CPS is based on concern for the protection of the child. Families have a right to privacy. More critically, the child has a right to protection from disclosure of information learned in the course of the protective services assessment. Thus, confidentiality laws regarding CPS prohibits the DSS from discussing and sharing case specific information with both you and Mr. Lawdoll(name changed by poster). Lastly, your concerns regarding the conduct of a county employee are considered a personnel matter and the state office does not have authority to intervene in this matter. Personnel matters regarding county employees are handled by that particular local county DSS.

Thank you again for your expressing your concerns. I am hopeful that you will be able to come to a resolve soon. Best wishes to you and your family.

Sincerely,
–
Ellen L. Thomas-Pullen

Child Welfare Services Consultant
North Carolina Division of Social Services

(919)733-9467

NOTICE: “This document and/or Its attachments may contain sensitive information that requires protection under federal or state law. If you are an authorized recipient of such information, you are required to protect it in a safe, secure and confidential manner.”

“If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken in reliance on the contents of those documents is strictly prohibited. You are requested to notify the sender immediately, delete the e-mail along with any accompanying attachments, and destroy any copies you may have made.”

I responded to Ms. Pullen with the following e-mail:

— On Fri, 10/24/08, Lawdoll( name and email removed by poster):

From: Lawdoll(name and email removed by poster)
Subject: Re: Response to Ms. Lawdoll(name removed by poster)
To: “Ellen Thomas-Pullen” <ellen.pullen@ncmail.net>
Date: Friday, October 24, 2008, 2:29 PM

Dear Ms Pullen:

First lets address this comment from your e-mail…” The fact that this office has previously responded to you and the Wilkes County DSS investigated your report and met with you makes evident you were heard and that your concerns were taken seriously.” When has NCDSS ever met with me or my husband? You have never done so, just as you have never viewed our evidence about the Wilkes County Department of Social Services breaking Statutory law, violation welfare policy, unethical and neglectful behavior. You just called them up and took their word for it. NCDSS has even stated that you looked in the file and saw no policy violations. Of course you did not notice the Forged, falsified safety assessment in the file! Furthermore Donnie Bumgarner has never met with us to discuss our concerns about the forged and falsified documents in this case. Mr. Bumgarner has never even apologized to us for Allison Baker’s behavior while she was employed by him and acting as his agent. Mr. Bumgarner is responsible for the behavior of his employees, just as North Carolina DSS is responsible for the action of the county director of social services, the County Department and it’s employees. Please see, “In the Matter of Z.D.H.,184 NC App 183 (o6-945 June 19, 2007″ Attached to this e-mail.  

Second, I will address this comment from your e-mail, “To that end, this office does not have the authority to change the county’s decision or in any way instruct them to do so.” I would have to disagree, I am well aware of exactly what your authority is in this matter because the North Carolina courts have held that….
“1) there is a principal-agent relationship between DHHS and the DSS of individual counties; (2) the director of each county’s DSS is required, as part of its duties and responsibilities under N.C.G.S. § 108A-14, to act as agent of the Social Services Commission and DHHS in the county; and (3) the nature of the relationship would be destroyed if the agent were capable of acting on the principal’s behalf without being subject to the principal’s authority and direction.”184 NC App 183 (06-945 June 19, 2007  ” The Honorable Court in the same case also stated… “[b]ased on the plain language of our statutory law governing social services and the provision of child protective services, the Department of Human Resources has substantial and official control over the provision of child protective services and designates the county director as the person responsible for carrying out the policies formulated by the Department, through the Social Services Commission and the Division of Social Services. “Thus, in practice, as well as in name, the role of the County Director in the delivery of [child protective] services is that of an agent. Like the agent, the County Director acts on behalf of the Department of HumanResources and is subject to its control with respect to the actions he takes on its behalf.” “184 NC App 183 (06-945 June 19, 2007)”
So yes, “The North Carolina Department of Social Service or North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services does have the “authority to change the county’s decision or in any way instruct them to do so.” You are also liable for any wrongs that they commit, and laws that they break and so on.   So if you would please forward this e-mail to the Director of North Carolina Health and Human Services, I would really like to take this issue up directly with him, since he is the Principle in this case.

See the problem here, I believe is that although your offices knows that Wilkes County Department of Social Services broke the law, falsified documents, lied, acted unethically, and came after us solely for the purpose of discrediting our complaints against them, you don’t want to admit that wrong.   Because you were well aware of what was happening and therefore your office is just as guilty of their actions as they are.

Third, I will address this comment from your e-mail. “Furthermore, the concerns you share do not validate removal of the substantiation as it is the information and evidence gathered during the course of a protective services investigative assessment that justifies the case decision.” During the course of a protective services investigative assessment…First the Safety assessment from 8-17-06 is a forgery and falsified document. Second, the risk assessment and family strengths and needs filled out on or about 10-11-06, occurred before Allison Baker have ever investigated us, been to our home or even met Child’s name removed father, my husband (Name removed by poster); so that too is a falsified document, both of these documents are relied upon to make case decisions, therefore the case decision made against us is based on fabrications, forgeries, and lies. Furthermore, the DSS information given to Dr. Powell to “aid” him in his psychological assessment was also based on these same fabrications, forgeries and lies.   Allison Baker was also the first person who met with Dr. Powell and frankly God only knows what lies she told him, since she was certainly trying desperately to cover her ass at the time. Everything in their case decision was based either on a lie, a forgery, or a falsification therefore it is unethical for this bogus substantiation against us to remain in place.   I will state again for the record,   I was told to get pictures of the bruises by Allison Baker numerous times.   Allison Baker was well aware that I had videotaped the bruises and did not have a problem with it.   I only videotaped the bruised 2 times, neglect has to be more that one or two incidents and must be on going at the time of the decision.   Furthermore I never questioned the child, (name removed by poster) as to how she received the bruises, you never hear me ask her one question about it on the videotape, so that part is a lie.   I will again state for the record that My husband(name removed by poster) and I did not argue with the mother (name removed by poster)  in the child’s (name removed by poster) presence, we did not scream and cuss at her.   That part is a lie. Yes I did call the mother, (named removed by poster) on two occasion and inform her that I had made dentist appointment’s for the child (name removed by poster) and yes I may have been a little snooty during those calls, but there was never any indication that the child (name removed by poster) heard those messages, therefore if the child (name removed by poster) did not hear those messages, then they did not effect her in anyway and that is not any type of abuse.   In Dr. Powell’s report he said that it was wrong for the father (name removed by poster) to call his daughter and leave a message that said, “hey baby (name removed) it is Daddy, I love you and I miss you.” Dr. Powell said that this was wrong because it upset the mother’s (name removed)  significant other, that is ridiculous!!! How can it be wrong to tell your child you love them and miss them. It’s not. I will also state again for the record that Dr. Powell diagnosised the mother (name removed) with a severe personality disorder that, “no amount of therapy or medicine can help.”   Yet even with this diagnoses and knowing that no one, no even DSS could get along with her, (name removed) because her personality disorder made it impossible, we were substantiated against for parent’s inability to get along. This is no such statute that says anything about neglect being parent’s inability to get along. If that were the case you would have to substaniate against all parents going through a divorce, custody dispute, or even choosing which soccer team their child would play for. This is a trumped up charge, plain and simple.

Furthermore, Wilkes County could not even get her to work with them, so they need to by their own way of thinking substantiate against their selves. Our concerns have never been taken seriously, because if they had the substantiation against us would have been removed a long time ago.

Sincerely,

 Lawdoll (name removed)

 

Then in a later email I wrote:

Flag this messageFw: Re: Response to Ms. Lawdoll (name removed)

Monday, October 27, 2008 2:47 PM
From: “Lawdoll, name and email removed)

View contact details To: ellen.pullen@ncmail.net, “Ruth Walker” <ruth.walker@acf.hhs.gov>, “Kevin Kelley” <kevin.kelley@ncmail.net>Message contains attachmentscounty dss agent of DHHS.pdf (46KB), authorization4evaluation[1].pdf (27KB)

Ms. Pullen:

 I would also like to point out that the psychological evaluation obtained by WCDSS, was obtained by other than honorable (illegal) means. My husband, name removed and the mother (name removed) were tricked into signing the consent form by Allison Baker, who lead them to believe that they had no choice.

This evaluation would not even hold up in court and would be thrown out because it was illegally obtained. I have attached a copy of it here. As you can clearly see by the document the DSS director box is checked…”when acting as a temporary guardian of child found abandoned or without natural guardian…” You cannot force people to sign documents with threats! Donnie Bumgarner did not have temporary custody of the child (name removed) at the time this document was signed…Nor did he ever. The father (name removed and the mother (name removed) were forced to sign this document by coercion, and bullying and a court would never have allowed the evaluation to be presented because it was illegally obtain…fruit of the poisoned tree.

Therefore, legally, I don’t believe that WCDSS could use this evaluation in their “investigation” of us. Furthermore, as I explained in my earlier e-mail, everything that Dr. Powell received from DSS was based on lies and fabrications. The substantiation against all of us needs to be removed due to the illegal and unethical behavior during the course of the DSS investigation.

Sincerely,

Lawdoll (name removed by poster) 

 

Evaluation consent

 

MY FINAL RESPONSE TO MS. PULLEN

Flag this message

Have not had a response from you in almost a month

Monday, November 24, 2008 5:31 PM
From: Lawdoll (name removed by poster)

View contact details To: ellen.pullen@ncmail.netCc: dempsey.benton@ncmail.net, joann.lamm@ncmail.net, governor@ncmail.net, ltgovernor@ncmail.net, “Ruth Walker” <ruth.walker@acf.hhs.gov>, “Deric (HHS) Gilliard” <deric.gilliard@hhs.gov>, mike.leavitt_g06@hhs.gov

Message contains attachmentscounty dss agent of DHHS.pdf (46KB), authorization4evaluation[1].pdf (27KB)

Dear Ms. Pullen:

I have not heard back from you regarding my response to your previous e-mail. It seems to me that my information about NCDSS being the principle while, WCDSS is the agent who answers to the Principle is correct. Therefore, I have written and asked Dempsey Benton to conduct an investigation into this case.

 Every time I have ever spoken with or corresponded with you the information that you have told me has been incorrect, when I point out the truth, then I receive no response back from you. I would appreciate it if you would just pass my complaint onto someone else. Preferably someone who will respond in a timely manner.

Thank you,

Lawdoll (name removed by poster)

As you can see from their responses these people will make up any excuse in order for this not to be their responsibilty…I have come to the conclusion that idoits are running the departments that are supposed to protect our children.