Wilkes County Department of Social Services HANDWRITING COMPARISON and Lies Exposed

 

HANDWRITING COMPARISON and Lies Exposed

Real Safety Assessment V. Falsified, Fake Safety Assessment and Irrefutable Proof of Wilkes County DSS Lies, Illegal Activities, Threats, Retaliation, and Unethical Behavior

 

By Lawdoll

An in-depth comparison of the only real DSS safety assessment Allison S. Baker ever conducted about us versus the fabricated, falsified, and forged safety assessment that Allison S. Baker created to make it appear she had performed her duties as required by law.  I have included pictures of the documents in question.  Also contains some of the lies and documentation that proves those lies, threats, illegal and unethical behavior, and intimidation.

The first thing that needs to be stated is that we reported the mother for abuse and neglect on August 15, 2006 and the report was accepted that same day.  We were not the only persons who reported this mom, there was another report of abuse received and accepted on August 10, 2006, that we did not make.  Allison Baker was assigned to our report August 16, 2006, but she did not begin investigating the abuse and neglect until the middle of October.

The retaliatory “child abuse and neglect” report that was used as the excuse to begin an investigation on us October 25, 2006, was received by Surry County DSS (the county we reside in) on August 16, 2006.  This report was made the same day the mother was informed during mediation that we had made a report of abuse against her.

Surry County DSS screened this report out because, IT DID NOT MEET THE STATUTORY DEFINITION OF ABUSE OR NEGLECT, required to initiate an investigation.

Wilkes County DSS, apparently, after we complained about them in late October, obtained this report from Surry County DSS, over two months later, and screened it in.

The first time Allison Baker even hinted at investigating us, and I had contact with her constantly, was during a phone call on October 25, 2006.  During that phone call, Allison Baker began asking me a lot of questions, such as social security numbers and the like.

This call is recorded so I can prove that this is the date that she began investigating us.

This vindictive investigation, which began precisely two days after I called Phyllis Fulton in Raleigh and complained about the Wilkes County Department of Social Services and their failure to perform their duties as prescribed by law and protect my stepdaughter, supports our assertion that it was began as a means to discredit, intimidate, and malciously prosecute us in retaliation of our valid complaints against them.

When we met with Allison Baker October 27, 2006, she had in her possession this screened out report from Surry County DSS, which said idiotic things:

• Trees growing in our gutters
• Poison Ivy in the yard
• Dirty dishes in the sink
• My stepdaughter woke up with a rat on her chest

Absolutely crazy stuff like that.

Allison Baker had already seen video of our home, which documented August 4, 2006, and up, and remarked about how clean it was and how nice our daughter’s room was.

Furthermore, if she had already performed a Safety Assessment on us August 17, 2006, why would she need to ask all of these questions, which should have been asked when she performed the safety assessment? 

She had never performed a safety assessment, she had never been to our home and did not come to our home until December 9, 2006.

She NEVER went to the mother’s home, who our report of abuse was on, until the middle or end of October either!  We know this, because the mother moved in September 06, but the only house Allison ever visited was her new residence. Remember our report of abuse was made and accepted August 15, 2006.  I am positive if a comprehensive investigation was conducted falsified documents and forgeries would be found concerning the biological mom, and the other daughters father and stepmom as well.

A significant fact that must be noted is, if our house was this bad, then why was an investigation never commenced about the 3 children that LIVED in our home FULL TIME? 

Neither Wilkes County DSS, nor Surry County DSS ever opened an investigation or case on us concerning the 3 children who lived in our home 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

These 3 children are not mentioned on any of the paperwork, safety assessments, risk assessments, case plan, nothing.  The three children living in our home were never talked to, or interviewed, nor was any CPS Assessement or investigaion of any form ever conducted regarding them… period. 

Although according to North Carolina DSS Policy they were supposed to.

 “Based on N.C.G.S. § 7B-302 (b), all children living in the home, in a non-institutional setting, shall be considered as alleged victim children when there is any allegation of abuse, neglect or dependency. Therefore, initiation of a CPS Assessment includes face-to-face interviews with all children living in the home.”

There is ample evidence that proves the sole purpose of the Wilkes County Department of Social Services investigation of us was far outside the scope of their duties, and a complete abuse of their power. 

Wilkes County DSS abused their power and unlawfully and maliciously targeted us as a means to discredit our valid complaints against Wilkes County DSS, to intimidate us, to shut us up and to cover up WCDSS’s failure to perform their duties by law and protect a child that was being abused and neglected by her mother.

Wilkes County DSS threatened us with foster care for my stepdaughter, thereby ensuring our compliance with their law breaking, through intimidation.  We had no choice but to comply with their illegal and unethical activities, it was abundantly clear that to do otherwise meant having the child, WE WERE NEITHER ABUSING OR NEGLECTING, needlessly placed into foster care.

Even when faced with overwhelming evidence of abuse and neglect my stepdaughter and her sister were enduring by their mother’s hand…  (Not my husband’s or the father of her other child), the Wilkes County Department of Social Services, ignored that evidence and instead focused solely on discrediting and persecuting us.

They ignored the mother’s noncompliance, lies, and the abuse and neglect of two little girls, so they could teach us a lesson, for speaking out about their initial failure to investigate an accepted report of abuse in the manner and time constraints required by law.

Wilkes County Department of Social Services instituted a malicious investigation against us, without good cause, they falsified records, forged my husband’s signature, discriminated against my husband for being male and the father, lied in assessments and their records, lied to the judge, the psychologist, threatened and intimidated us, abused their power, and neglected their legally duty.

 And then when all of their lies, fabrications, threats and intimidation, illegal and unethical behavior still failed to give them ammunition against us, and after, wrongly and illegally, trying to substantiate against us for serious emotional neglect, they created a new type of neglect and substantiated against us for that.  Injurious environment, parent’s inability to get along, a finding that does not even exist, a finding so far removed from the statutory definition of any type of abuse or neglect that it should have been found invalid the moment they used it, a finding that is so vague that every person in the world could be substantiated against for it.

With the evidence that we have, that proves what Wilkes County DSS did to us, my stepdaughter, her sister and her sister’s father and stepmom, the fact that not one government official will do anything demonstrates the lack of total accountability DSS faces, even when they commit felonious criminal acts.

Handwriting Analysis

•  This is a comparison of the handwriting on the REAL and ONLY safety assessment, dated December 9, 2006 Allison Baker ever did on me and my husband (Top) and the Fabricated, falsified, and forged one that was created to make it appear she had done one on us, when she had not, dated August 17, 2006.  You can clearly tell these are written by the same person.

• Again, this is a comparison of the handwriting on the REAL and ONLY safety assessment, dated December 9, 2006 Allison Baker ever did on me and my husband (Top) and the Fabricated, falsified, and forged one that was created to make it appear she had done one on us, when she had not, dated August 17, 2006.  Furthermore, I have no idea where the spanking allegation came from, neither one of us had ever spanked her.  Just another lie.

 

 

 

•  Below  this is a comparison of the signatures on the REAL and ONLY safety assessment, dated December 9, 2006 Allison Baker ever did on me and my husband (Top) and the Fabricated, falsified, and forged one (bottom) that was created to make it appear she had done one on us, when she had not, dated August 17, 2006. 
•  I was the only one home on August 17, 2006, David was at work, I will post his work record following this comparison, and you can see for yourself that on the day in question David worked 10 hours at LP.  Note that my signature is missing, David’s signature is different on these documents, and the only ones that look the same are Allison Baker’s and Mary Henderson’s.  The signature for David in the signature section on the bottom is forgery.

David did not sign this document and this safety assessment NEVER OCCURRED.

 

 

Work Record

 

• This is a copy of David’s work record for August 17, 2006, the day that Allison Baker claims to have performed the August 17, 2006 safety assessment on, impossible to do since David was at work for 10 hours that day. 

 

Personal Records

• I kept meticulous records; this is the August 2006 record.  Note that we made our report August 15, 2006, but there was a previous report made August 10, 2006 on the mom that we did not make.  
•  Note On August 15, 2006, the custody hearing was postponed, “Court postponed.  Turned Tammy in, Allison Baker assigned to case.”
• August 16, 2006, my stepdaughter finally had an appointment with Dr. Weinstein in Wilkesboro after two cancelled dentist appointment by her mom. She had new cavities that she did not have when she saw our dentist and had two teeth extracted on July 3, 2006. Court ordered mediation orientation between David and Tammy from 3-5, this is where David informed the Mediator about our report of abuse to DSS.  Special Note…  After this meeting is when Tammy made the report of abuse about us to Surry County, it was received August 16, 2006.  August 17, 2006 The ONLY note on this date is about my stepdaughter’s sister not being seen by the dentist again!  No visit to our home by Allison Baker, no safety assessment, nada.
• Also, note the continuous missed dentist appoints by both girls in their mothers care. In addition, note my contact with our insurance company verifying how much they would pay toward fixing my stepdaughters teeth.  We had insurance.  On August 11, I talked to the moms Medicaid worker who informed me that my stepdaughters Medicaid expired July 31, 2006…after having it continuously for her entire life.  (What a coincidence) Debbie Perry also informed me that the mom had never turned in David’s insurance information and that she was reporting her for Medicaid fraud.

Other Signatures

Scanned copy of David and my organ donation cards that we signed in 2004.  Please note David’s signature on both.  David has never signed his full last name the entire, almost 12 years I have known him.  I even have his high school senior shirt from 1998 and it is the same on it as it is here, just a little scribble.

• Below David’s signature on his driver’s license issued in 1999.

 

 

• David’s signature on his driver’s license, 10 years later this driver’s license was issued on November 17, 2009.  David has consistently signed his last name the same way for years…he does not write out his last name, but makes some form of N swoop.

 

• David’s signature on the “In Home Family Services Agreement” signed January 1, 2008.

 

(I changed my mind about Linda Brookes after reading the lies she wrote to Judge Byrd)

I can and have consistently proven that the signature on the safety assessment dated August 17, 2006 is not David’s. 

I have consistently shown and proven that David has signed his name the same way throughout his entire adult life.

I have also shown that the handwriting on both documents is consistent with Allison Baker’s, and that the signatures of Allison Baker and Mary Henderson match on both documents. 

It is obvious and clear that either Mary Henderson or Allison Baker forged David’s signature on the falsified safety assessment. 

There is more than adequate evidence to support that this safety assessment never occurred. 

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

First, we have David’s work record showing that on August 17, 2006, he was at work for 10 hours at LP.

Then, according to North Wilkesboro Police Detective, Chris Handy, there is the absence of our name and information on Allison Baker’s Worker Daily Report of Services to Clients, form DSS 4263.

The DSS 4263 form is required to be filled out daily and turned in weekly and records every service and activity performed, for payment and is absolutely, necessary for federal reimbursement.  Not only is this document required, it must be certified by the worker.  The fact that our name does not appear on the DSS 4263 form alone is proof enough.

When you combined the two, you have irrefutable, documented evidence that for this safety assessment document to exist a felony was committed…because it did not come into existence under legal means.

Since this safety assessment was fabricated, proving who forged David’s signature is not necessary in order to prosecute Allison Baker, Mary Henderson, or other personnel at the Wilkes County Department of Social Services who may have had knowledge of its creation or participated in covering it up after the fact.

Why, in spite of all of this evidence and documentation, charges were dropped against Allison Baker in this case…CITING not enough evidence,  could it be because her grandfather, Glenn  Johnson, was a Wilkesboro Commissioner for 26 years?  

And why charges were never brought against Mary Henderson should be a matter of deep concern, as well?

Furthermore, why has an investigation about the conduct of the Wilkes County Department of Social Services in regards to us, and in the face of this evidence NEVER OCCURRED?

Why, in spite of all of this evidence and documentation, charges were dropped against Allison Baker in this case…CITING not enough evidence, and why charges were never brought against Mary Henderson should be a matter of deep concern, as well.

Frankly, when you considered the fact that the former, Wilkes County DSS Director, James (Donnie) Bumgarner and the current Director, Bill Sebastian were and are aware of this and have been since it occurred, alarm bells should be ringing loudly in your head. 

Tellingly, neither one has asked local or state law enforcement to conduct an investigation.

 Neither one has removed the substantiation against us that was based on the lies, false documents, forgeries, illegal and ethical behavior; it should make anyone reading this question their motives for allowing such a travesty to continue.

 I believe Donnie Bumgarner was involved in this forgery and falsification and/or at the very least, covered it up.

In fact, many government officials were contacted about this issue and all of them failed or refused to do anything.

People who have been made aware of this illegal and unethical behavior include.

• Renae Steele, Caseworker, Wilkes County Department of Social Services
• Nikki Hull, Caseworker, Surry County Department of Social Services
• Linda Brookes, Caseworker, Wilkes County Department of Social Services
• Mary Henderson, CPS supervisor, Wilkes County DSS
• Sonya Freeman, CPS supervisor, Wilkes County DSS
• Donnie Bumgarner, Former Director, Wilkes County DSS
• Bill Sebastian, Current Director, Wilkes County DSS
• Dr. James D. Powell, (who went right along with DSS’ lies)
• Matthew Levchuk, Assistant District Attorney, Wilkes County (who believed the lies told to him by Wilkes County DSS)
• Charles F. Bauer, Assistant District Attorney, Wilkes County (who dismissed the charges against Allison Baker for lack of evidence.)
• Keith Elmore, Wilkes County DSS Board Chair
• Rudy Holbrooke, Wilkes County DSS Board member
• Ken Noland, Town Manager, Wilkesboro, NC
• Lanier Cansler, North Carolina Health and Human Services Secretary
• Dempsey Benton, Former North Carolina Health and Human Services Secretary
• Sherry Bradsher, North Carolina DSS director
• Joann Lamm, North Carolina DSS Deputy Director
• Ellen Thomas-Pullen, Child Welfare Services Consultant
• Former North Carolina Governor, Mike Easley
• North Carolina Governor, Bev Purdue
• Chris Downing, Region IV Director
• Carlis V. Williams, Region IV Administrator
• Ruth Parker, Regional Program Manager, Region IV, Administration for Children and Families

And many others.

Not one of these people did anything about the law breaking, discrimination, malicious persecution of me and my husband for trying to protect a child…, which WAS the only thing we did.

Not one of these people stood up and tried to enforce the laws of this state, nor did any of them take any steps to protect these children by ensuring that the Wilkes County Department performed its statutory duty.

Not one of these people cared about the children who were being harmed while WCDSS continually harassed us, persecuted us, violated welfare policy and broke the law.  NOT ONE!

Even when faced with the damning evidence I have shown in this document, these people ignored it and allowed this travesty to continue.

Honestly, if these government officials were upstanding, honest, people you would think that when faced with this type of evidence they would do what is right or at the very least ask for an investigation.

The only person who tried to stand up for what is right and enforce the law was Chris Handy, North Wilkesboro Police Detective (who tried to seek justice, but was blocked by ADA Bauer)

We did not do the things that Wilkes County DSS lied about.

Threats

When we stood up to them, my life was threatened on www.gowilkes.com, a public forum.

• You best be glad you live out of the county.
• I know what your “REAL NAME” is.
• Be careful and don’t cut your own throat.
• You will be dealt with, and just as the same in your case, this is the “END”!

And still nothing was done! 

Then after my stepdaughter’s mother died, on the same public forum, another person who clearly worked at Wilkes County Department of Social Services accused me of killing her.

This person also talked about statutory protected confidential DSS information, for even if it is not true, it is still confidential.

Again, nothing was done.

We are the victims in a series of crimes committed by The Wilkes County Department of Social Services and the fact that no one will step up and do what is right, just enables WCDSS to continue to break the law and do this to other people.

Investigation Needed

An investigation desperately needs to occur in this case…and the wrong that has been done to us corrected… in order for that to happen, an extensive examination of the department and persons involved must be conducted.

• First and foremost, my husband and I must have access to the Wilkes County case file on us, so that we can view the contents and expose the lies, forgeries, and unethical documents, notes, and assessments, among other things, that are hidden behind the confidentiality laws that protect DSS case files from view, even when they have broken the law.
• The Wilkes County Department of Social Services and its DSS board members need to be investigated.
• The substantiation against us needs to be removed and our names cleared.
• The Wilkes County District Attorney’s conduct and refusal to prosecute, despite having adequate evidence to do so, needs to be investigated.
• Charges need to be pressed against the person/persons who committed these crimes.
• Most importantly, Charges need to be press against the Wilkes County DSS for failing to protect these two little girls.

To be clear

The Wilkes County Department of Social Services, in retaliation for our criticism about their unscrupulous conduct and dereliction of statutory mandated duties to protect children, invented a reason to investigate us, and created a fictitious abuse and neglect case against us, with the intention of discrediting, intimidating, and silencing us. 

When their harassing and vindictive, examination of us failed to uncover any abuse, neglect, or dependency being committed by us, they conjured a statutory nonexistent neglect finding out of thin air, so they could cruelly, spitefully, and callously brand us as child abusers.

After WCDSS vindictively substantiated against us, they continued their unlawful, harassing, and needless invasion in our lives forcing us to comply with whatever they “recommended” by threatening to place my stepdaughter into foster care if we bulked.

Some of the lies

They created an In Home Family Services Agreement that contained ignorant and useless findings, which did not remotely meet the definition of abuse, neglect, or dependency.

1. 1.  David was to provide basic insurance as directed by the child support agency, so cost would not be a reason to deny dental care.

• When her mother neglected her dental care, and allowed her teeth to get so decayed that two of them had to be extracted, David had insurance on his daughter, the mother had insurance on her, and the mother had her on N.C. Medicaid.  Lack of insurance was not the reason her mother denied her dental care.  Neglect by her mother was the reason for the denial of dental care!
• Not having insurance is not neglect or abuse, but besides that point, the only reason David did not have insurance on his daughter at this time was because he had lost his job, because of DSS, and their inability to attend appointments, for example:
• When we were scheduled to meet at Dr. Powell’s for the “evaluation” meeting, DSS did not show up so it had to be rescheduled.  David had to take off for the meeting because of DSS negligence to attend, then turn around and take off again for the rescheduled appointment, that DSS, specifically Renae Steele was an hour and a half late to.
• DSS was order by Judge Byrd after he was notified that we had made a report of abuse, to submit their findings to him.  DSS, failed to investigate the reported abuse in the manner prescribed by law for 2 and a half months, then drug their feet for almost 2 years.  David would have to miss work to go to court, only to have it postponed because DSS had not sent the Judge their findings.

1. 2.  David and I were required to make the child custody exchanges that were taking place “be as amicable as possible, with no heated exchanges.

•  David and I always made the exchanges as “amicable” as possible.  When the mother screamed, yelled, and cussed at us, we did not even respond.  We recorded the custody exchanges to ensure that the mother could not lie about our behavior and to document hers.  DSS ignored this proof and lied about us.
• Heated exchanges, bitterness, and verbal hostility are not abuse or neglect furthermore, David I NEVER engaged in them, proven by recorded phone calls and video recordings of the exchanges.

3.  The parents were required to take the girls to counseling. 

• First, David and I had been trying to get counseling for his daughter for years, because of the abuse and neglect concerns we had in regards to her mother’s treatment of her.
•  Second, Dr. Powell their own “Forensic Psychologist” said the girls did not need counseling.

 The entire In Home Family Services Agreement was a complete and total sham of statutorily insufficient findings, a ruse for their continued illegal involvement in our lives.

Furthermore, they lied in the Strengths and Needs Assessments, the Risk Assessments saying that “minimally participated in pursuing objectives in service agreement”.  This is an outright lie.  WE always complied with anything and everything that they asked us to do. Even with the knowledge that they were illegally persecuting us. Further lies include:

• For the Risk Reassessment dated 11-07-07 it states as a reason for Discretionary override: “age and previous report static but not pursuing all goals outlined in cft of 9-11-07”…there was no cft on 9-11-07, or 11-07-07 the cft wasn’t completed until 1-08-08 two months later.
• On this assessment we had a total score of 3, mainly just because of this lie.  This is just them trying to justify leaving this case open against welfare policy.
• They use the same override reason on 3-27-08, but in this one they do not mark R8 and R9 with (b) Minimal participation in pursuing objectives in service agreement…….1…So I guess basically the only reason it was left open then is my husband’s age.  Under 29…we had a 1 on this reassessment.

Then suddenly, out of the blue, they closed the case even though the one and only circumstance that had to be met to “keep the child out of foster care” according to the In Home Family Services Agreement, had not been met.  It was so important for my stepdaughter to go to counseling that they threatened foster care if she did not, but then closed the case before the required 3 sessions, THAT THEY REQUIRED, had been completed. 

This speaks volume to their true intent and purpose.

We then received a letter from Linda Brooks that stated:

MONITORING HER CARE FROM HER MOTHER!

This letter from Linda Brooks is a direct contradiction to the one that she wrote, that same day, May 14, 2008, to Judge Byrd, in that letter, Linda Brookes lies about the entire situation, case, and us.

Letter to Judge Byrd page 1 and 2

Conclusion

From beginning to end, every step that the Wilkes County Department of Social Services made in our case was either, illegal, unethical, untrue, or in violation of statutory law.

Since the entire case was based on falsified, forged documents, lies, as well as unlawful and unethical conduct, any substantiation or case decision reached by them is unduly prejudicial and fatally tainted. 

A decision based on lies, is a lie itself, for the truth cannot be discovered with lies.

Wilkes County Department of Social Services behavior in our case denotes a willful, malicious, and conscious intent to deceive, invent, and lie in order to harass, harm, intimidate, and discredit us.  Their persecution of us was a calculated, deliberate, and purposeful act, a wanton abuse of power that served no legal purpose.

Our case is so illegally tainted with lies, fabrication, embellishments, falsified and forged documents that it is wholly unreliable, and should be considered a work of fiction.  The only truth that could ever be ascertained from the Wilkes County DSS file on us is that it is necessary to verify the corruption in this case.

Allowing the substantiation against us to remain, in view of this indisputable evidence, is a travesty of justice.

Failing to seek prosecution of these criminals, allows them to continue to operate in this unlawful manner, puts families at risk, and endangers the lives of children.  Failing to take legal action against the Wilkes County Department of Social Services enforces their belief, as evidenced by their behavior in our case, that they are untouchable, above the law, and can do whatever they want because they will never be held accountable for their crimes.

They will do it again…if they have not already, and eventually a child is going to lose their life because of the rampant, unchecked, corruption of Wilkes County DSS.

 The unjustified treatment and criminal manner in which we were subjected to has left a scar on our lives.  The bogus, unlawful substantiation placed on us can prevent us from working in a daycare, or with children, prevent us from adopting or being foster parents…it can and does impinge on our lives.

 To allow this illicit, unethical, and fictitious case and phony finding to remain against us, despite the overwhelming facts attesting our innocence in this matter, harms not only us, but also the entire community and damages the public trust in Child Protective Services.

If CPS is permitted to behave in this manner without consequences, or accountability, why would anyone trust them to protect children?

Wilkes County Department of Social Services has proven with this contemptible behavior that they are unreliable, untrustworthy, criminal, and corrupted; they are more concerned with protecting themselves then the children of Wilkes County.

It would injudicious and foolish to assume that our family has been the sole victim of their corruption.

*This document does not contain everything that happened, I have complete documentation and records of everything that occurred, if you received this via email then those records are attached, if you are seeing this one line then those documents are below this posting.

I have other evidence that proves our claim, if I have emailed this to you, that evidence is attached.  If you are reading this one line, then that evidence is below this posting.  I have not finished uploading all the phone calls on to my computer, but when I do, they too will be sent or posted.

You can see the rest of this story and more documentation at Wilkes County Department of Social Services Failure to Protect my Stepdaughter

Incompetence, ignorance, or willful failure to protect a child?

The following is a message that was left on my answering machine October 24, 2006.

Hal Wilson to Phyllis Fulton  <<<< Click this link to hear.  (left on my answering machine)

*I did remove the child’s name from this audio recording!

In it Oscar Howard “Hal” Wilson III,  a Social Worker Supervisor at the Wilkes County Department of Social Services called our home, believing that he was calling Phyllis Fulton in Raleigh. During his lengthy message to Ms. Fulton, which he left on our home answering machine, he released my name as the reporter, the child’s name, and basically admitted that it was improbable the child received all of these bruises from a haunted ‘hay ride, but…’ He also said that they were going to advise me to make another report. A report that I was later criticized for making.

The level of incompetence required to make this phone call and then leave this message is astounding..  

First, “Hal” had to dial the wrong number,  Phyllis Fulton’s area code is 919, mine is 336, a huge difference.  Mr Wilson should have realized he was dialing a local number,  since Wilkes County’s area code is also 336.

Next, my answering machine, at the time, clearly indicated that “you have reached the Nixon family“.  NOT Phyllis Fulton at the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services.

Third, Hal then proceeds to break the law.  He releases the child’s name, (which I removed from this copy of the recording) then the reporters name on MY ANSWERING MACHINE.  

Hal Wilson had no clue who he was talking to, no idea who would hear this message.

But as a social worker supervisor, he should have!

Finally, He admits, “We kind of surmised, after hearing the child had been out on a hayride, we thought well maybe she could  have gotten some bruising from that “although its improbable“ but the child’s age was taken into consideration….”

The last time I checked, which hasn’t been long, the North Carolina General Statutes does not say that DSS and the Director are only required to investigate and accept reports, where the child is saying something “adverse” has happened to them.  

Nor does it say that DSS is allowed to listen to the concerns of the reporter and just ASSUME that the bruises or injuries happened in an accident.

…and that is not what he says here, he basically admits that it is improbable that she received the bruises on the “hay ride” but they chose not to investigate the report based on their own conclusions, without ever talking to the child or viewing the bruises! (it wasn’t a “hay ride” at all, but a haunted trail, that she was carried through by her daddy…and no injuries occurred there! DSS was informed of this at the time of the report!) 

Of course, Hal’s statement in this phone call does not say that they believe “the child received the bruises by accidental means, Hal’s statement in this phone call says, although we believe it is improbable that this child received the bruises during a “hayride”, we aren’t going to investigate this report. 

So they believed that this child received these bruises some other way, other than a hayride, possibly from abuse, but they were not going to investigate it because the child DID NOT state she was being abused!

…and while the child had not stated that anything adverse had happened to her, she had not stated that anything adverse HAD NOT happened to her either!

I did not question her about the bruises, because I did not want to take the chance that DSS would then say that I coached her, or put ideas into her head!

I did what I was told to do, if the child came to our home with unexplained bruises I was supposed to call Allison Baker, which I did, but she refused to come to our home and talk to the child and see the bruises…and instead told me to call the “on call worker”, who refused the report.

In the letter that I received explaining why the report was not accepted, the reasons given is, “the child is nine years old and is not stating that anything adverse has happened to her.”

Refusal does not fit the criteria required for the report to have been screened out and not investigated.

It further states “Allegations do not meet CPS criteria”

Yet according to Chapter VIII:Protective Services 1407 – STRUCTURED INTAKE  a report of abuse is supposed to be screened using the following tools, (I have placed only the ones that apply to this case here) : 

VI. MALTREATMENT SCREENING TOOL AND PROCEDURES

The purpose of the screening tools is to determine which reports meet the legal definitions of abuse, neglect and dependency and to aid in achieving consistency in regards to the screening of CPS reports.

Which cases:	The screening tools are to be utilized with every CPS report received in order to determine whether the allegations meet the legal definitions of abuse, neglect and dependency. If the information received meets the legal definitions; a CPS assessment is required. This includes telephone calls and all other means of referral, and includes information on new families and families already known to the agency; whether or not a case is open to CPS Assessments/Investigations, CPS In-Home Services or Child Placement Services.
Who:	Every staff member who has the responsibility for CPS intake.
Decision:	Screening tools determine whether the report should be accepted for CPS assessment. This is a joint decision made with the CPS Intake social worker and the supervisor.
When:	Screening tools are consulted immediately upon receipt of the report.
Appropriate Consultation:	Please refer to the definitions page for each screening tool. The tools correspond with the abuse, neglect and dependency statutes. The corresponding screening tools for abuse reports include: physical injury, cruel/grossly inappropriate behavior modification, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and moral turpitude. The corresponding tools for neglect reports include: improper care, improper supervision, improper discipline, abandonment, improper medical/remedial care, injurious environment, and illegal placement/adoption. The directions provide case examples but are not all-inclusive. It is impossible to account for all incidences of child abuse, neglect and dependency. These tools are guidelines to assist in the decision making process. The social worker should consult each tool as it corresponds to the allegations. Every allegation made by the reporter requires an examination of the corresponding screening tool. It is likely that a reporter will allege maltreatment which requires an examination of multiple screening tools. It is crucial to evaluate each allegation based on the statutory definitions of abuse, neglect and dependency, and consulting the Maltreatment Screening Tools serves this purpose.

“A. Physical Injury Screening Tool Directions

Is the parent/caretaker causing serious non-accidental physical injury which creates a substantial risk of death, disfigurement, or impairment?

Fractures, subdural hematoma, dislocations, sprains, internal injuries, burns and inflicted injuries such as extensive welts, bruises, lacerations and abrasions would be indicative of abuse. The specific injuries listed are not intended to be an all-inclusive list, but are an indication of information that does warrant an Investigative Assessment. There may be instances where a child has bruises that do not rise to the level of abuse, but are considered improper discipline (refer to Improper Discipline Maltreatment Screening Tool), as well as situations where there may be bruising and there is no abuse or neglect. Physical abuse of a preschool aged child or a developmentally disabled child requires an immediate response.

The physically injury screening tool for use in assessing a report of physical abuse.

I. Improper Discipline Screening Tool Directions

Is the parent/caretaker using corporal punishment that results in any type of injury, cuts or extreme bruises?

...significant trauma and tissue damage, such as bruises, welts, or lacerations may be signs of child neglect (inappropriate discipline) or child abuse, depending on the extent of the injuries. Factors to consider regarding bruising include: location and severity of the injury, child’s age and developmental stage, and whether the bruises are consistent with normal play. Injuries such as these, not resulting from an accident, must be assessed. A definition of significant trauma is any injury beyond temporary redness of the skin. A practical guideline to use is that any inflicted injury which lasts more than 24 hours constitutes significant injury and requires an investigation. (PEDIATRICS, Vol. 110 No. 3, September 2002, American Academy of Pediatrics.) A reporter’s knowledge that this was the parent’s first time inflicting such an injury or that the injury is just a small bruise does not impact screening. Spanking and corporal punishment should be confined to the buttocks or legs and should not result in injury, scarring or bruising. Physical discipline that is administered to a child’s head or torso area presents a greater risk of injury. The child’s age and abilities are relevant to whether the discipline used is reasonable…”

Improper discipline screening tool for use in assessing abuse/neglect

If the appropriate response is in doubt, the social worker should respond in the most protective way.

Yet even though, Hal Wilson, thought it was improbable that the bruises occurred during a hayride, and knowing that this child had a hand shaped BRUISE on her inner thigh, and bruises on her stomach (a very dangerous area to hit) as well as other bruises…he chose to screen out this report of abuse because the child did not say she was being abused!

This is not how you investigate reports of child abuse, this is how children end up dead!

A look at the law…

“§ 7B‑302.  Assessment by director; access to confidential information; notification of person making the report.

(a)        When a report of abuse, neglect, or dependency is received, the director of the department of social services shall make a prompt and thorough assessment, using either a family assessment response or an investigative assessment response, in order to ascertain the facts of the case, the extent of the abuse or neglect, and the risk of harm to the juvenile, in order to determine whether protective services should be provided or the complaint filed as a petition. When the report alleges abuse, the director shall immediately, but no later than 24 hours after receipt of the report, initiate the assessment. When the report alleges neglect or dependency, the director shall initiate the assessment within 72 hours following receipt of the report. When the report alleges abandonment, the director shall immediately initiate an assessment, take appropriate steps to assume temporary custody of the juvenile, and take appropriate steps to secure an order for nonsecure custody of the juvenile. The assessment and evaluation shall include a visit to the place where the juvenile resides, except when the report alleges abuse or neglect in a child care facility as defined in Article 7 of Chapter 110 of the General Statutes. When a report alleges abuse or neglect in a child care facility as defined in Article 7 of Chapter 110 of the General Statutes, a visit to the place where the juvenile resides is not required. When the report alleges abandonment, the assessment shall include a request from the director to law enforcement officials to investigate through the North Carolina Center for Missing Persons and other national and State resources whether the juvenile is a missing child.

(a1)      All information received by the department of social services, including the identity of the reporter, shall be held in strictest confidence by the department, except that:…”

No where in the law does it state that the department of social services is to listen to the report and then JUMP to conclusions about how the bruises occurred!

Nor does the law state that the only reports that will be accepted and investigated are those where the child is saying that someone abused them.

Furthermore, there is no age limitations for investigating a report of abuse, meaning the age of the child does not matter, they are supposed to investigate reports of abuse of any child under the age of 18, who is not married, emancipated, or a member of the armed forces.

 If DSS receives a report of abuse saying that suspected abuse is happening to a nine year old, whether that nine year old is saying it is or not, they are required by law to investigate that report.

Unexplained bruises, some of which look like a hand print fit the criteria of suspected abuse and should be accepted for CPS investigation.

That is not what happened here.

And because that did not happen here, because of the obvious incompetence of this supervisor and the Wilkes County Department of Social Services, this child was left in the care of her mother, and the abuse was allowed to continue, while DSS turned their focus to shutting us up with a malicious, unethical, and illegal investigation!

The failure of the Wilkes County Department of Social Services to protect the child in this case, especially in light of their belief that it was improbable that the bruises occurred by accidental means, constitutes willful failure to follow the laws of North Carolina and America, as well as willful failure to protect a child from abuse.

I believe that breaking the law is a criminal offense, so why haven’t these people been charged with the crimes they committed?

NORTH CAROLINA CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES ILLEGAL AND UNETHICAL PRACTICES?

 

http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-29636-Surry-County-CPS-Examiner~y2009m12d2-North-Carolina-Child-Protective-Services-illegal–and-unethical-practices#

Do you know a child who has died during or after a DSS investigation in North Carolina?

Do you know a child who has died after reports of abuse where made to DSS? Did DSS ignore your report and fail to protect the child?

Do you know a child who has died in foster care or after being adopted from foster care due to child abuse or neglect?

Are you the family member of a child that died during or after DSS involvement?

Are you a family member of a child who has died as a result of DSS policy violations or inaction when it came to investigating reports of abuse?

 

To read more of this article please visit the above link…more importantly, if you have a complaint against North Carolina DSS, in any county…visit the above link and contact the reporter.

HOW CAN WE ALLOW THIS TO GO ON?

 

http://www.komonews.com/news/problemsolvers/70599312.html

By Tracy Vedder

SEATTLE — The most vulnerable children in our state – children who are supposed to be protected by the state – are dying at an alarming rate. The KOMO 4 Problem Solvers spent two years filing legal requests and analyzing hundreds of documents from the state’s Child Protective Services. What we’ve discovered is both startling and heartbreaking.

Three-year-old Kekoa Ravenell’s future sparkled. He sang. He golfed. He loved his baby sister, Chelsea, and his papa, Michael.

But Kekoa’s future was stolen. He was beaten and choked to death by his mother’s boyfriend.

“I wish he was still with us here,” said his father, Michael Ravenell, sobbing.

Take the anguish of Kekoa’s death and multiply it by dozens. You can’t forget their names. Sirita Sotelo was beaten to death by her stepmother. Justice and Raiden Robinson died of starvation and dehydration while their mother was passed out amidst 300 empty beer cans. Summer Phelps was killed by her father and stepmother. The list seems unending. Each child died while under the watch of the state’s Children’s Administration.

And as in Kekoa’s case, there were warning signs.

“There was no doubt,” said Michael Ravenell. “He (Kekoa) just came out and said, ‘He hit me. Noah hit me.”‘

Ravenell called Child Protective Service, not once but several times.

“Something’s wrong. There’s something wrong. She’s not, the case worker wasn’t doing her job,” he said.

What he didn’t know and what the social workers didn’t check, was that the mother’s boyfriend, Noah Thomas, had a prior conviction for abusing his own children. But Ravenell’s pleas for help fell on deaf ears.

“Bottom line: the system failed me,” he said.

Similar cases lost in the files

It took more than two years, but the Problem Solvers obtained the death reports of 595 children who had some contact with the state’s Children’s Administration and who died some time between 2002 and mid-2009. We wanted to find how many of those deaths might have been prevented.

Crunching the numbers, the state ruled at least 120 children died of abuse or neglect. That’s an average of 16 kids dying a year; more than one child died of abuse or neglect every single month.

And we found another 40 cases in which the state did not find abuse or neglect connected to the death, but the Problem Solvers dug up some horrifying facts. In one case, the social worker falsified documents and claimed treatment, which hadn’t been administered, had been given. The baby girl died.

In the case of a 2-year-old boy, the case worker decided there could be immediate harm and the child should be removed, yet the case was closed and the child died.

In a third case, the parents gave their kids Benadryl so they’d sleep. One died of an overdose. And in spite of the case worker reporting the surviving children lived in filth, with feces on the walls, the agency ruled the kids should stay in the home.

And in yet another case, a medical examiner ruled a 2 month old died of unexplained, natural causes. But the report concluded, “there was concerning CPS history on this family.” Part of that history includes allegations of abuse and neglect in the home. But most startling fact was that the family had had another baby girl die three years earlier.

And then there are another large group of files in which CPS was called five times, eight times, even 13 times. The agency was called to help a child, yet the child remained in the home and later died.

“There’s (sic) resources out there to help you, and I didn’t get any help at all,” said Ravenell.

‘I am the victim of the many years of abuse’

What we can’t even begin to calculate is the number of cases that don’t wind up in death, but still leave children physically and emotionally maimed.

Few will forget this girl’s horror story.

“I am the victim of the many years of abuse Rebecca Long put upon me until just last year,” she said. Because she is the victim of abuse, KOMO News has chosen not to identify her.

Found by law enforcement at age 14, she weighed just 48 pounds. Her stepmother and her father have both been convicted of criminal mistreatment for keeping the girl locked up in their Carnation home, and so severely limiting her food and water to the point that her teeth had nearly all rotted away.

But years earlier, a teacher had reported the family to CPS. She told the judge at her stepmother’s sentencing, “This is where I desperately wished that I could contact a social worker who came to our house that one afternoon.”

But after minimal investigation, CPS closed the case and the girl spent another three years in hell.

“I could not make contact, because that was when Rebecca began keeping me barricaded into a room all day,” she said.

Then there’s little P.T., whom KOMO News has chosen not to identify beyond her initials.

“I was hoping she would live,” said her godmother, Afua Ndiaye, last December. “She had cigarette burns under her eyes and all over her body.”

P.T. was just 2 years old at the time. The now 3 year old is partially blind and may have a brain injury.

“You could just see blood and scalp,” said Ndiaye as she gulped for air. “It was really bad.”

P.T.’s godmother says she repeatedly warned CPS about the little girl’s mother and her boyfriend, who had a criminal record.

“They did nothing. It was like another case, waiting on the side,” she said. “And while it waited on the side, she almost died.”

Sen. Stevens: ‘Why can’t we get this right?’

All of this has happened since 2005 when the state began adding 465 new workers for child welfare and protection. And last spring, Gov. Christine Gregoire hired a new head for the state Department of Social and Health Services — Susan Dreyfus, who, in turn, has brought in new blood to head up Children’s Administration.

“We have to be accountable. There is no worse day in this state when a child’s not safe in their own home,” Dreyfus said.

But we’ve heard these sentiments from state leaders for years. It appears things have only gotten worse, and some lawmakers are frankly fed up.

“How can we allow this to go on?” said Rep. Mike Armstrong, R-Wenatchee.

“Why can’t we get this right?” said Sen. Val Stevens, R-Arlington.

We went to state lawmakers with some of our research, and asked what’s being done to fix the problems. In fact, they’ve passed laws and given the agency millions to force them to do a better job of protecting kids.

During a 2004 gubernatorial debate, Gregoire talked of the need to overhaul the DSHS, which oversees Children’s Administration.

“And the track record is not stellar, and we have been ravaged here in Eastern Washington by some very tragic deaths,” she said.

Gregoire promised to make that agency a priority. But the instances of deaths and abuse have only gotten worse.

“Children are dying at the hands of people who are not able to take care of them,” said Stevens.

Stevens has worked for years to overhaul the system, in one effort even forcing the agency to seek national accreditation. After several years of working with the National Council on Accreditation, last year the COA set a deadline for Washington to meet its standards. Children’s Administration refused to comply, and dropped out of the accreditation process.

“It was a bill that we passed and they said, ‘We’re not going to do it,”‘ Stevens said. “But too often that’s what’s happening. They are thwarting the very laws that we are passing.”

Falling behind on the national scale

Records indicate Washington’s child welfare agency scores poorly in two different national evaluations. A review by U.S. Health and Human Services found 36 states were better than Washington at meeting children’s needs and keeping them safe.

And a review by the national organization Every Child Matters shows that between 2001 and 2007, the state’s per-capita number of kids who were abused or neglected have gone up, as has the number of deaths.

Washington’s Children’s Administration contends the rise may be partially due to a difference in the way they now determine deaths by abuse.

In 2004, then-candidate Gregoire said she wanted to make Children’s Administration directly answerable to the governor.

When asked why she hadn’t been able to follow through on those promises, Gregoire said, “Well, we’ve made good progress.” Now into her second term, Gregoire still hasn’t made Children’s a separate agency or directly accountable to her.

But last spring she hired Susan Dreyfus, who used to head up Wisconsin’s Division of Children and Families.

“It’s about being accountable, and it’s about being transparent and being very upfront with people (on) where we have weaknesses, what we have to do to change, and that we are changing,” Dreyfus said.

Dreyfus has many supporters across the country. Bt the state she comes from, Wisconsin, did even worse in both those national evaluations than Washington. We asked if that wasn’t a report card on her tenure there.

“I don’t believe so, no. I’m looking at outcomes, I’m looking at how many children are in care, our permanency record,” she said.

Dreyfus has now hired Denise Revels Robinson to head up Children’s. Revels Robinson also gets high marks across the country. But she left her last post – also in Wisconsin – under a cloud after a high-profile case of a child who died under her watch.

When asked if she bears some responsibility in that case, she said, “I think the head of the agency always bears some responsibility, because as we talked about earlier, accountability is key.”

A Milwaukee Journal Sentinel investigation of the county’s children’s services with Revels Robinson at its helm showed evidence that 22 children died of abuse or neglect under her watch.

We asked Dreyfus why she would you bring someone into our already-troubled state who has a history of running an agency that’s troubled.

“You know, it’s so funny, you’re responding to media,” Dreyfus said. “I’m not looking for media sensationalism in making my selection of who’s the right person on my team, but I am looking for someone that’s proven, passionate and has outcomes to prove it.”

But several legislators insist the only way to fix the system is to break it apart, making Children’s Administration more accountable to both the governor and, more importantly, to the citizens

“I think a lot of folks are to-the-point. They just want to get this thing fixed and start taking care of kids,” said Armstrong.

The Problem Solvers are not going to let this go. We’re taking the results of our investigation to key legislators. And we will be there when the legislative session begins next year to see if action is taken and CPS is held accountable.

DSHS death investigation reports:

- Michael-Kekoa Ravenell

- Bryce Meining

- Tiffany Marie Granquist

- Louise Hope Cowan

- Aliyah Hickson

Report from Every Child Matters:

- Child Abuse and Neglect Deaths in America

American’s dead children and Child Protective Services

America’s dead children and Child Protective Services

 

http://www.examiner.com/x-29636-Surry-County-CPS-Examiner~y2009m11d11-Americas-dead-children-and-Child-Protective-Services

The list is long and heartbreaking, the children on it have been beaten, broken, drowned, burned, strangled, starved or neglected, and all of them are dead. Headlines have drawn attention to the cases of some of them, Danieal Kelly, Erin Maxwell, Kayla Allen, and Christopher Thomas, but there are many more, Phoenix Jordan Cody-Parrish, Brandon Williams, Elizabeth Goodwin, Logan Marr and Alexis (Lexie)Agyepong-Grover, just to name a few.

The children on this list died in very different settings; some died in their own homes, some in foster care, while others were killed by their adoptive parents. Yet, all of these dead, abused, children had one thing in common, Child Protective Services.

INNOCENTS DESTROYED PARTS 1, 2, & 3…WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES

THE HEARTBREAKING STORY OF ADRIANNA CRAM 

ADVOCATES CALL FOR ACTION ON BIRTHDAY OF SLAIN FOSTER CHILD  (Marcus Fiesel)

THE SHORT, HORRIFIC LIFE OF DANIEAL KELLY: WARNING THIS PAGE CONTAINS GRAPHIC PICTURES AND ARTICLES

4 DHS WORKERS OUSTED IN FALLOUT FROM DANIEAL KELLY CASE

http://www.kyw1060.com/pages/3117385.php??

by KYW’s Mike Dunnsee related story). Four DHS workers involved in the death of 14-year old Danieal Kelley  are now being shown the door. The four employees — Shawn Davis, Ingrid Hawk, Martha Poller, and Valerie Mond — had been named but not indicted the Danieal Kelly grand jury report.   Now DHS Commissioner Anne Marie Ambrose says all four will be gone.   Poller was allowed to retire, Mond allowed to resign while Hawk and Davis are being fired.   DHS spokeswoman Alicia Taylor says Ambrose felt the actions of the four were unconscionable: “Given their egregious disregard for their professional responsibilities, and the role that it played in Danieal Kelly’s death, she felt that she had no other choice but to rule the way she did.” Now, Taylor says, the department hopes to move on, though never forget: “Danieal Kelly will always be remembered in the department.  Because of her death, there’s been a major reform effort underway at DHS.” Nine others face charges in Kelly’s death, including two DHS workers and the girl’s parents (

EX-BAKERSFIELD WOMAN FACES MURDER CHARGE

Why was this woman allowed to adopt a child after a foster child had already died in her care?

  

NOW

  

 

Ex-Bakersfield woman faces murder charge

 

http://www.bakersfield.com/news/local/x616725415/Ex-Bakersfield-woman-faces-murder-charge

BY STEVE E. SWENSON, Californian staff writer

A former Bakersfield foster mother once arrested on charges of willful child cruelty in Kern County is now facing murder charges in Sacramento County in a child’s death.

Sabrina Banks, 41, formerly known as Sabrina Stafford, was arrested by Bakersfield police in September 2003 after foster child Angelic Clary, 3 months old, was found dead in her home on Castleford Street.

Despite an extensive investigation, no charges were ever filed against her in Angelic’s death.

Deputy District Attorney Scott Spielman said there was no conclusive medical evidence that the infant’s death was either due to abuse or neglect.

He last reviewed the evidence in March 2004.

The Kern County coroner’s office ruled the infant’s death was either natural or accidental. The infant likely breathed in something, possibly vomit, and choked, the coroner’s office found.

The child’s twin sister, Tiffany, was also found in the foster home near Panama Lane and Wible Road with a 104.8-degree fever.

Paramedics took the surviving sister to Memorial Hospital where doctors found her to be hungry, dehydrated, had low sodium in her blood and barbiturates in her systems.

Barbiturates are depressants, normally used as a sleeping aid.

Tiffany was removed from Stafford’s care.

The mother of the twins, Ruth Rodriguez, filed a lawsuit against Kern County, but it was dismissed in January 2005.

Stafford, as she was known then, lost her foster license shortly after Angelic’s death. She reportedly had ties to Visalia.

The Sacramento County case stems from the May 2, 2008, death of 3-year-old Lavender Banks, the adopted daughter of the woman now known as Sabrina Banks.

Sacramento County coroners determined that Lavender died from asphyxia and several blunt force injuries, the Sacramento Bee reported.

The Elk Grove Police Department reported last month that an investigation showed Banks was responsible for the child’s death, and a murder warrant was issued for her.

Banks was arrested Aug. 5 in Visalia.

Banks made news over the adoption of Lavender because Chinese central authorities had refused to approve the adoption on the grounds that Banks was African American.

Many adoptive parents rallied behind Banks and China authorities reversed their stand and approved the adoption, news reports say.

Before the 2003 death of Angelic in Bakersfield, two complaints were filed with Child Protective Services against Stafford.

The first, in January 2002, alleged Stafford hit one of her children on the back and thighs, leaving marks.

Investigators concluded no license violations were committed, CPS documents said.

The second was in May 2002, alleging Stafford burned a 3-year-old child on the hip with a hot spoon.

Stafford denied anything like that ever happened. Her license was voluntarily withdrawn when she went to Visalia, but it was restored in Kern County in early 2003.

 

Former Foster Mom Arrested In Connection With Child’s Death

 

http://www.turnto23.com/southwest_county/20727996/detail.html

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. — A former Kern County foster mother who was once suspected in the death of a foster baby has been arrested on suspicion of murdering her adoptive child near Sacramento.

Sabrina Banks, formerly known as Sabrina Stafford was arrested in Visalia for the May 2008 death of her 3-year-old adopted daughter, Lavender Banks.

Elk Grove police said Banks called 911 and said the child wasn’t breathing.

Paramedics were unable to resuscitate her.

Sacramento County’s Coroner said Lavender died from asphyxia by smothering and multiple blunt force injuries.

In 2003, Banks was arrested in southwest Bakersfield after she called 911 to say one of the twin babies she was fostering wasn’t breathing.

The baby, 3-month-old Angelic, was pronounced dead at the scene.

The other twin, Tiffany, was taken to a nearby hospital with a temperature of 104 degrees, and was found to be malnourished and dehydrated, police said.

Banks was arrested and charged with two counts of felony willful child neglect.

Deputy district attorney Scott Spielman said, during that time, the county forensic pediatrician looked at the toxicology findings and the results were inconclusive as to whether Banks was responsible.

All charges were dropped.

Spielman said the DA is now going to forward the case back to the Bakersfield Police Department and contact police in Elk Grove to see if they can assist each other in their cases, and possibly re-file charges in Kern County for Angelic’s death.

 

THEN

 

Sept. 18, 2003:

 

CPS Feeling Heat After Baby Dies In Foster Mother’s Care

 

Stafford Facing Willful Child Neglect

 

http://www.turnto23.com/news/2495728/detail.html

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. — The death of 3-month-old Angelic Clary has led to the arrest of her foster mother, Sabrina Stafford, KERO reported. All eyes are also on the foster care system in Kern County.

Kern County Child Protective Services has faced criticism before — most recently in a grand jury report that said the system was failing to adequately inspect foster homes.

But CPS is quick to defend the system, saying it is exceeding the state standards by making quarterly visits to foster homes.

CPS Director Beverley Beasley Johnson said when the twins — Angelic and Tiffany — were placed in Stafford’s care a few months ago, the home met CPS requirements.

Stafford, 36, was arrested after police found one of the twins dead and another suffering from a 104.8-degree fever.

According to Bakersfield police detective Mary Degeare, the surviving twin had barbiturates in her system. Degeare said the coroner also found evidence of neglect on the dead baby’s body.

“There were multiple insect bites (on the baby),” Degeare said.

Police said they have found no reason to believe CPS failed Angelic, the dead baby.

Stafford is expected to be arraigned in court Friday on two counts of willful child neglect.

The investigation into Angelic’s death is continuing, KERO reported.

The surviving twin, Tiffany, is in good condition at Memorial Hospital.

 

Sept. 19, 2003:

 

Foster Parents Blame Media For Negative Image

 

Lack Of Foster Families Is Crisis In Kern County

 

http://www.turnto23.com/news/2498704/detail.html

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. — A foster mother arrested Tuesday on charges stemming from the death of a baby was released Friday from police custody.

Police said they are awaiting toxicology reports on the child’s death to decide whether Sabrina Stafford should be charged with willful child neglect. Police do not know when the toxicology reports will be finished, KERO reported.

Police found one of Stafford’s foster children dead in her home Sunday morning. Another child was found with a temperature of nearly 105 degrees — she also appeared to be dehydrated.

Other foster parents said it is extremely rare for substandard parents to be allowed to foster children.

Jennifer Coffman has fostered about 16 children in the last four years. She now has three foster children. Coffman is one of the 408 foster families that support 3,000 foster children in Kern County. She said the problem is not the administration of child welfare services, but the foster family crisis.

“I think they are doing what they can with what they (have),” Coffman said.

Bobbie Rufus, a foster mother for 14 years, said there are several reasons for the shortage of foster parents. She said foster parents are not offered childcare, many of the children have behavorial problems and the media puts negative attention on the foster-care system.

“When something happens, there is an outcry in the community. Where’s the community when they need homes?” Rufus said.

There are countless success stories that are never reported, according to KERO.

Henry, a child Rufus raised since he was a baby, had severe emotional problems and was severely malnourished. Today, at the age of 16, Henry is a varsity football play at Liberty High School with a grade-point average of 3.5 and is involved in a host of school activities.

As for Coffman’s children, her home is spotless, and her children appear to be happy, playful and well-adjusted.

Foster parents said they are hoping more people in the community will reach out, so there will be more successes stories, and fewer children who currently don’t have a chance.

Child welfare officials said they have requested legislation that will provide day care for working foster parents.

 

OTHER KERN COUNTY CASES:

 

REPORT OFFERS GLIMPSE INTO TRAGIC CASE

17 NEWS INVESTIGATION: DOCUMENTS SHOW PRIOR NEGLECT

CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES: WHO’S HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE?

SENATOR DEMANDS INVESTIGATION OF BLINDED BOY CASE

DEATH OF FOSTER BABY LEAVES MANY QUESTIONS

 

OTHER SACRAMENTO COUNTY CASES:

UPDATE: TAMAIYHA MOORE: FOSTER MOM SENTENCED TO 25-TO-LIFE

JURY CONVICTS SAC FOSTER MOTHER OF MURDER

TRACY TORTURE VICTIM’S DISAPPEARANCE LONG UNKNOWN TO POLICE

SACRAMENTO COUNTY SUPERVISORS READY TO HIRE GROUP TO HELP CPS

BACKGROUND CHECK BILL PROPOSED

I DON’T BELIEVE MONITORING CPS WILL BE ENOUGH

CALIFORINA CPS VENDETTA EXPOSED

“NOTHING EVER CHANGES”

LYNN FRANK STEPS DOWN AMID CPS CONTROVERSY

SACRAMENTO COUNTY SUPERVISORS URGED TO BRING IN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT

LIKE I SAID, I THINK YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD TO BE EMPLOYED BY CPS

BOY’S CPS RECORD ALTERED AFTER DEATH TO REFLECT LIKELY ABUSE

 

 

FORMER CPS WORKER FOUND GUILTY OF FORGERY

 

http://www.appeal-democrat.com/news/powell-85213-sutter-county.html

August 06, 2009 11:40:00 PM

By Rob Young/Appeal-Democrat

A Sutter County judge on Thursday found former Child Protective Services worker Sarah Jane Powell guilty of forgery after she admitted “cutting and pasting” a court document, including a copy of another judge’s signature.

Judge H. Ted Hansen reached the verdict after a one-day trial in which Powell alternately wept and became angry under cross-examination by a prosecutor.

Powell testified she created the document April 15 so a foster child — a girl under the age of 5 — could get much-needed dental surgery. But Assistant District Attorney Jana McClung said Powell, who had just been reprimanded for not completing work on time, was trying to protect her job after failing to promptly file a true document.

Powell was fired after another social worker found a fake document, with Sutter County Judge Chris Chandler’s signature taped to it, in a copy machine where Powell left it.

“Why did you do it?” Powell’s attorney, Timothy Evans, asked her.

“I just panicked. I wanted to make sure (the foster child) got the procedure done she was scheduled for,” Powell said.

Delaying the dental procedure, which was scheduled the next day, would have meant the child living in pain months longer, she said.

But Craig Hungrige, an investigator for the Sutter County District Attorney’s Office, testified Powell told him soon after being caught that she was worried about losing her job.

Hungrige said he initially interviewed Powell at the CPS office on Live Oak Boulevard in Yuba City with her boss present. She denied knowledge of the fake papers, he said.

But when he and Powell, who knew each other from student days, walked to her car in the parking lot, Powell said, “Craig, I f—-d up,” and cited problems in her personal life. She acknowledged not getting her work done on time, he said. McClung aggressively cross-examined Powell.

“How many times had you done this before?” McClung said about the fake documents.

“I’d never done it before,” Powell snapped.

Asked why she hadn’t gone to supervisors to expedite the needed paperwork instead of forging it, Powell said, “I wish I knew the answer to that.”

Evans said it was very unlikely his client would have been fired for not filing the papers on time.

“She foolishly chose the path that ended with her losing her job,” Evans said in summing up the case.

Evans blamed CPS in general — and Powell’s boss Roberto Garcia in particular — for delaying the dental work, which was first proposed in August 2008.

Powell took over the case from another social worker in February or March, according to testimony.

Two CPS employees testified paperwork moved slowly once it got to the desk of Garcia, who had to approve documents submitted to the court.

Powell said she complained to a superior about Garcia’s “incompetence as a social worker.”

Garcia testified he left Powell two voice mail messages and talked to her once in person about the dental procedure. Her response was, “Don’t worry, I’ll take care of it,” he said.

Asked by Evans if Powell was a “poor social worker,” Garcia responded, “I would say so, yes.”

McClung summed up her case by saying Powell’s forgery defrauded the dentist, who needed a legal document before doing surgery, and damaged the credibility of CPS and the courts.

Hansen scheduled sentencing for Sept. 18. Powell could be sentenced on just one of three fraud charges, or could serve concurrent sentences on all three, he said. Two of the charges are “wobblers,” he said, meaning they could be reduced from felonies to misdemeanors.

If Powell is incarcerated, it will be in jail, not prison, according to McClung.

FEDERAL COURT REFUSES TO GRANT IMMUNITY TO NYC CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES CASEWORKER IN LAWSUIT

 

http://www.examiner.com/x-14537-Albany-CPS-and-Family-Court-Examiner~y2009m7d28-Federal-Court-refuses-to-grant-immunity-to-NYC-Child-Protective-Services-caseworker-in-lawsuit

The U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York has refused to grant immunity to a Child Protective Services caseworker from New York City in a lawsuit. Normally Child Protective Services caseworkers are granted limited immunity in lawsuits arising from their duties. However, the court on July 21, 2009 denied immunity to Marcos Cardenas for withholding information from his supervisors in a neglect proceeding.

Steven Friedman sued the New York City Administration for Children’s Services in 2005. Friedman had been the subject of a neglect proceeding brought by the New York City Administration for Children’s Services. The information that Cardenas used in investigating Friedman came from Doctor Daniel Cohen. What Cardenas did not tell his supervisors, and did not include in the neglect petition, was that Doctor Daniel Cohen was involved in a romantic relationship with Steven Friedman’s estranged wife’s sister, Jennifer Masnick.

MORE