Skip navigation

Category Archives: illegal investigation



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.


When we stood up to them, my life was threatened on, 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:


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


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

Chicago mom and CPS reform advocate, Miranda Yonts has vowed to find and bring home the remains of Tyler Payne, so he, and his mom, Jamie Hallam, can finally be at peace.

Yonts is the founder of The Miles Payne foundation, a soon to be 501(C) non-profit organization, which was named after Shavon Miles and Tyler and Ariana Payne.

She is also Jamie Hallam’s best friend.

The Miles Payne Foundation advocates needed changes to the laws that govern CPS, to ensure better protection of America’s children through the accountability and transparency of Child Protection Services.

Yonts feels that the only way to protect the children in this country, and save lives is to hold CPS liable when they fail to perform their legally required duties.

Continue reading on Chicago mom vows to solve cold case – Winston-Salem CPS |



In Memory of Tyler and Ariana Payne


Tyler and Ariana

Swain County father, Michael Shannon, has filed a civil lawsuit alleging that the civil rights of him, his daughter, and his father have been violated by key personnel in local and state government.

The lawsuit filed August 15, 2011 in the Swain County North Carolina Superior Court, names Michael Shannon, his father, Scott Shannon and his Daughter, Sierra Shannon as the Plaintiff’s and names the following as some of the Defendant’s.

  •  Michael Bonfoey, District Attorney, Swain County, North Carolina
  • Lanier Cansler,  Secretary of the North Carolina Division of Health and Human Services. (click the link to find more stories of Lanier Cansler on this blog)
  • Patrick Betancourt,  Director of Child Protective Services, North Carolina. Department of Health and Human Services.
  • Tammy Cagle, Director of the Swain County Department of Social Services (Tammy Cagle was fired for  insubordination and conduct unbecoming of a state employee detrimental to state service during an investigation into the death of 15 month old Aubrey Kina-Marie Littlejohn)
  • Jerry Smith, Interim Director of the Swain County Department of Social Services
  • Justin Green, counsel to the Swain County Department of Social Services
  • Ellen Thomas-Pullen,  Child Welfare Services Consultant with the North Carolina Division of Health and Human Services
  • Aaron Ammons, Officer of the North Carolina Highway Patrol.
  • Swain County Commissioners
  • Swain County Department of Social Services Board

The lawsuit alleges, among other things, accounts of government corruption so all encompassing that I believe an SBI investigation into this matter is desperately warranted.

This corruption includes, but is not limited to:

  • Failure to obey a custody order,
  • Failure to obey a judges order to pick up a child,
  • Wrongful arrest,
  • Malicious prosecution,
  • Placing a child in a dangerous environment
  • Allowing a child to be abused and neglected
  • Failure to obey statutory law
  • Failure to protect
  • Kidnapping
  • Child abduction
  • Perjury
  • illegal and unethical practices
The Swain County Department of Social Services has been the subject of an intense investigation into their involvement in the death of 15 month old, Aubrey Kina-Marie Littlejohn.  Social Worker, Craig Smith, falsified his records after Aubrey’s death, so it would appear that he followed the laws and policies during an investigation into the suspected abuse of Aubrey.  According to The Citizen Times, When investigator’s informed Smith that they knew he was lying,
“Smith then told the investigators that he was instructed to falsify the records by his supervisor after Aubrey died to show that he followed up with a call to the hospital.

He said he was later called to a meeting with his supervisor, Candice Lassiter, other agency officials and DSS Director Tammy Cagle.

They questioned him about his investigation at the Powell home. Cagle, according to the court papers, told Smith “we have to get everything in order and everything straight.”

The director, Tammy Cagle who is listed as a defendant is Shannon’s lawsuit, was fired  for insubordination and conduct unbecoming of a state employee detrimental to state service, for her apparent involvement in the falsification of records in Aubrey’s case.

It is abundantly apparent that Swain County DSS has broken laws in the case of Aubrey Littlejohn and in an attempt to cover their asses they falsified records and lied.  It is also abundantly apparent to me that these people were completely comfortable in their illegal behavior, so comfortable in fact, that they even held a meeting and discussed how to get “everything in order and everything straight”, or what I refer to as “a document forging party”.

The chances that the Aubrey Littlejohn case is the first and only case in which the Swain County DSS has exhibited this type of illegal and unethical behavior in, is in my opinion, slim to none.  I believe, based on the Swain County DSS’s proven behavior, that the case of Michael, Scott and Sierra Shannon should be looked at by unbiased, appropriate law enforcement.

I have heard the 911 call placed by Scott Shannon when he was being assaulted by Shannon’s mother, I have read some of the court papers and I have talked with Scott Shannon…there is something really fishy occurring in their case, and I believe with the illegal practices that have been brought to light in Swain County, that the Attorney General and the SBI owe a duty to investigate not only the Shannon case, but any other case that has been handled by the Swain County DSS.

If you or anyone you know has been a victim of the Swain County Department of Social Services Please contact me at

For more information about Sierra’s case, please visit Michael Shannon’s site at the link below.

Sierra Shannon, 4 years old

A Victim of Child Abuse by

The Swain County, North Carolina

Department of Social Services

in Bryson City, North Carolina

We desperately need your help to save Sierra from the bureaucrats and criminals in the department of Social Services in North Carolina. A civil case was filed in the Superior Court of Swain County North Carolina on August 15, 2011 on her behalf by her father, Michael Shannon and her grandfather, Scott Shannon. The details of the case are below, as well as a link to a copy of the Civil Complaint. If you read these items you will discover a horror story that is almost beyond belief. 28 people are being sued in this case, and all have some responsibility for the abuse that Sierra has suffered since August 5, 2010.

Please read these materials and then take action to do what you can to help save Sierra from continuing abuse by these criminals, uncaring bureaucrats, and others who have allowed her to be abused and illegally taken her from her loving father. I know there is a lot of material to go through, but unless you know the entire story and all of the facts, you can’t understand the full horror of what has been done to my family. If you consider yourself a caring person, please read all of it. The links in the text will open in a new browser window so that you can always conveniently return to this page.

Read more

Review: CPS Inconsistent with Policies

Updated: Monday, 14 Dec 2009, 9:30 PM CST

Published : Monday, 14 Dec 2009, 1:18 PM CST

HOUSTON – Approximately 200 children die of abuse or neglect in Texas each year; a growing number of those children who die had a prior history with Child Protective Services.

There has been outrage that prior visits were failing to detect warning signs in order to protect children.

A review of the Houston CPS region was ordered in July by the state, after several deaths of children who had a history with CPS. The results from that review were released on Monday.

A team of people with the Department of Family and Protective Services were deployed to Houston for the review. They researched records and cases and did extensive interviews with staff.

The review team concluded that CPS caseworkers are not spending enough time with families and that is partly due to extensive workloads.

Caseworkers missed some risk and safety issues when conducting home visits during investigations, according to the review. In almost half the cases, risk and safety were evaluated appropriately.

Review team members also said that investigative caseworkers are only reviewing and using CPS history in approximately half the cases and need more training in mental health issues.

Reviewers found that cases were transferred out of investigations before all steps had been taken to to fully assess risk and safety, which has left regular caseworkers at a disadvantage and the child potentially unsafe.

Decisions made in case reviews lacked sufficient follow-up by caseworkers and supervisors, according to the review.

Reviewers added that in the Family Based Safety Services program, newly reported incidents of alleged abuse or neglect were addressed with families only half the time.

One recommendation made by reviewers is for CPS to hire all the 116 family-based safety service program caseworkers allocated in the previous legislative session and also reviewing whether more employees need to be shifted to this area.

Reviewers also recommended strengthen practices to keep children safe when parents voluntarily place them outside of the home with relatives or family friends.

Gaps in the transfer of cases from investigations to the Family Based Safety Service program need to be eliminated, reviewers said.

The review team also recommended that investigators be given more immediate access to critical case history and information.

On the Web: Child Protective Services Region 6 Operational and Management Review (.pdf) —


Review: CPS missed warning signs

Investigation shows family history of abuse missed in half of cases

Caseworkers for Texas Child Protective Services have regularly missed warning signs that Houston-area children were in danger, including failing to thoroughly investigate a family’s previous history of abuse or neglect, according to a report released on Monday.

“In only half the cases, risk and safety were evaluated appropriately,” the report’s investigators — a review team from the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services in Austin — concluded. “Investigative caseworkers are reviewing and utilizing CPS history in only about half of the cases.”

The team’s report is based on a review of 95 randomly selected child abuse investigations, a fraction of the 16,107 investigations completed between February and July in Harris and 12 surrounding counties.

The review was part of several regional reviews scheduled this year. However, the review here was expedited following the deaths of three Houston-area children who died of child abuse: 4-year-old Emma Thompson, of Spring, David Tijerina, 3, of Conroe and Katy infant Amber Maccurdy.

All three died either during or shortly after CPS investigated complaints of abuse involving their care and the children were allowed to remain in their homes. In the Maccurdy and Tijerina cases, there had been several visits to their families regarding abuse or neglect.

The caseworker in the Amber Maccurdy case walked away after the girl’s mother refused to let her examine the child. Amber died of a staph infection shortly after that visit.

In David Tijerina’s case, CPS workers had visited his home at least four times. He died of a beating.

Passing cases

In Emma Thompson’s case, the girl’s doctor called CPS after finding what appeared to be a genital herpes outbreak on her. Three weeks later, she was dead. An autopsy determined she had been sexually abused and suffered a skull fracture and more than 80 bruises.

The report also noted that child abuse cases in this region were passed too quickly from investigators to Family-Based Safety Services caseworkers — those assigned to help the family eliminate risk of abuse — leaving “the child potentially unsafe.”

With the exception of the removal of 439 children from their polygamist parents in 2008, CPS officials have strived to remove children from abusive households only when there is immediate risk to the child.

“We’ve always tried to keep children safely in their own homes or with their extended family, if possible,” CPS spokesman Patrick Crimmins said.

But at least one children’s advocate says this latest report shows once again that CPS’s goal of keeping families together often runs counter to keeping the child safe, which is the agency’s ultimate mission.

“Investigative and (Family Based Safety) have different focuses,” said Randy Burton, executive director of Justice for Children. “And these coordination challenges of keeping families together has led to the deaths of these children.”

No surprises

CPS insists the issue is not that clear-cut.

“Whether a child is removed from the home, whether or not there is a voluntary placement with family members or not, those are decisions made to ensure a child’s safety, not decisions made solely to keep families together,” Crimmins said.

Monday’s review offered several remedies, from reallocating workers from investigations to the family caseworker unit to using more of the agency’s “special investigators,” those workers with a law enforcement background, to help locate families more quickly, thereby getting the child help more quickly.

Burton said none of the findings were a surprise.

“These are things we have known for a long time,” he said.


CPS review of Houston cases targets caseworkers

AUSTIN, Texas — Risk and safety were properly evaluated in only about half of the Child Protective Services cases in the Houston region during an internal review.

Details are from a review of 95 randomly selected caseworkers conducted by the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services.

The report, released Monday in Austin, found caseworkers regularly missed warning signs that children were in danger.

CPS spokesman Patrick Crimmins says workers always tried to keep children safely in their own homes or with their extended family, if possible.

Suggestions for improvement included using more of the agency’s “special investigators,” those workers with a law enforcement background. Another recommendation is to enroll parents more quickly in parenting classes and substance abuse treatment.

Reports on other CPS regions of Texas are expected next year.

North Carolina Child Protective Services illegal and unethical practices?–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.

SB police officer accused of violating rights

Stacia Glenn, Staff Writer

Posted: 11/21/2009 07:24:50 AM PST

SAN BERNARDINO – Wylena Andrews landed in jail, she says, because police wanted her brother for burglarizing a sergeant’s house.

When they couldn’t find him, they took Andrews as a bargaining chip and threatened to haul her siblings off to Child Protective Services unless her brother turned himself in.

“I kept saying I hadn’t done anything, but they put me in the cell and that’s where I stayed,” Andrews, 30, recalled of the day San Bernardino police charged into her family’s Fontana home in 2006. “I fell asleep crying. I was just devastated. They basically played me and acted like it was all a big joke.”

Andrews claims that in holding her against her will without probable cause, police violated her civil rights. She blames San Bernardino police Sgt. Brad Lawrence, whose tumultuous career has landed him in the middle of several internal and criminal investigations over the years.

Criminologist William Schneid, who was hired by San Bernardino Police Chief Keith Kilmer to investigate allegations of misconduct in the department, confirmed Andrews’ case was part of his probe but declined to comment on his findings.

Sources close to the investigation say a portion of the findings have been turned over to the District Attorney’s Office for consideration of criminal charges.

In an e-mail, Kilmer also declined to discuss specifics of the investigation.

“First, it may impact the process by our department or any other agencythat may be involved or become involved,” Kilmer wrote. “Secondly, internal personnel information cannot be discussed outside of a court ordered process.”

Lawrence was placed on paid administrative leave Nov. 4.

Almost immediately after taking over the department in June, Kilmer hired Schneid to review an Internal Affairs probe into past allegations that Lawrence and his former narcotics team illegally detained people without probable cause, a practice commonly known as keeping someone “on ice.”

That investigation uncovered claims that money went missing from a department fund used to pay informants and buy drugs for undercover operations. Lawrence, who at that time supervised a narcotics team, is being investigated by the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department for misappropriation of funds, sources say.

Reached by phone, Lawrence said he was not told why he was put on leave and said he doesn’t remember Andrews.

He declined to comment further.

He also declined to have his attorney speak on his behalf.

Lawrence has worked as a patrol sergeant since March, when he returned to duty after a seven-month leave that ended when former Chief Michael Billdt declared past “on ice” allegations to be unfounded.

It is unclear whether Andrews’ ordeal was included in investigations handled by Billdt’s administration.

Andrews’ mother, Minerva Santana, filed a complaint after San Bernardino police took Andrews from her home Jan. 18, 2006. The family says investigators never followed up on the complaint or interviewed them until recently, when Schneid took their statements.

“This was swept under the table,” Andrews said. “Cops act like they can uproot people and do what they want. That’s wrong. They’re supposed to be protecting us, not incriminating us.”

Andrews has served time for burglary, forgery, theft and possession of narcotics.

But her past, Andrews says, does not give law enforcement the right to violate her civil rights and essentially hold her hostage because of a case involving her brother, Wiley Andrews.

Police wanted to question Wiley Andrews, 29, about the burglary of a sergeant’s San Bernardino home on Jan. 17, 2006. His fingerprint was reportedly found on a doorknob inside the sergeant’s house.

Wiley Andrews was on probation after being convicted of receiving stolen property, which enabled police to quickly identify him in their system.

Police couldn’t find an address for Wiley Andrews so they decided to go speak to Santana, who at the time was letting both Wylena and Wiley live in her Fontana condominium.

A boy, 14, and girl, 11, were the only ones home when Lawrence and his narcotics team arrived. The family claims they forced their way into the house and kept their hands on their guns while yelling for Wiley Andrews to come out.

An officer then called Santana and allegedly told her that she needed to come home immediately or they would call Child Protective Services. Since Santana could not leave work on such short notice, she asked Wylena Andrews to meet with the officers.

Wylena Andrews did not know where her brother was, but Lawrence eventually tracked him down on his cell phone.

“They said, `We’ve got your mom, we’ve got your sister and we’re taking them to jail,” Wiley Andrews said in an interview. “It was basically a deal with me that they’d let my family go if I turned myself in.”

Wiley Andrews told police he was in Las Vegas and would turn himself in the next morning.

Lawrence allegedly ordered Wylena Andrews to be taken to the city’s jail for a parole violation. Her parole agent would later tell authorities that she had not violated her parole and police never contacted him about Wylena Andrews, sources say.

Wylena Andrews spent nearly 24 hours in the Police Department’s jail cell. She was taken out only once to be grilled about her brother’s whereabouts.

When Wiley Andrews arrived at the station the following evening, his sister was immediately released.

Wylena Andrews was never charged with a parole violation. Her brother pleaded guilty to the burglary, though he says he did so only for his family’s safety.

Internal Affairs detectives interviewed the family last week and showed them several photographs, asking them to identify any officers they remembered.

Wylena Andrews says she remembers Lawrence’s face “like it was yesterday” but did not see him in the line-up of photographs.

She has not retained an attorney and said she only wants justice “so this doesn’t happen to anyone else.”

History of controversy:

Brad Lawrence joined the San Bernardino Police Department in 1984.

– In 1989, a school officer reported that Lawrence had threatened to tie an uncooperative suspect to the trunk of his car during a field interrogation. Lawrence was charged by the District Attorney’s Office and fired but was rehired after the trial ended with a hung jury.

– On July 2, 2008, Sgt. Mike Desrochers accused Lawrence of illegally detaining two men driving in a car.

– In August 2008, another officer lodged a complaint against Lawrence for allegedly overstepping the boundaries of a search warrant while raiding a San Bernardino motel.

– On Sept. 19, 2008, a booking log shows that a man named Greg Parker was “on ice” in the police jail. Parker’s attorney claims Lawrence kidnapped his client and later searched his home without a search warrant.


more about “Parents upset after DSS won’t let hea…“, posted with vodpod



Mecklenburg DSS has Prevented Noblely Lawson, who is finally well enough after almost being killed, from going home with her parents.


Noblely’s parents have done everything in their power to make sure that they had a suitable place to live for when Noblely was released from the hospital, but apparently, Mecklenburg DSS wants this baby no matter what. You can see the full story here.

These parents almost lost their daughter through the carelessness of someone else.  For the last month and a half, they have had to watch Noblely suffer in agony on a daily basis.  They have had to endure what no parent should ever have to, their child in pain, while they stand hopelessly by and watch. 

Any parent who has ever had an injured child knows this agony, the overwhelming fear, the sense of helplessness that occurs in this situation.  You long to be able to trade places with your child, if you could, you would gladly suffer the pain for them.  You live each and everyday wishing you really could kiss away the boo boos and make it all better, you live each and everyday wondering if your child will ever be the same again and the quality of life they will  have now.

…and now after these parents, Shane Lawson and Summer Brown, who were also struck by this car, have lived through the fear of loosing their child, the unknown results of this horrible accident, spent countless nights and days by their daughter side watching helplessly her struggle to survive…DSS has taken custody of this child and refuses to let her go home with her obviously loving parents.  


Why would they do this?  Is this some kind of sick sadistic game that Mecklenburg DSS is playing?  What does Mecklenburg DSS do, sit in their director’s $20, 000 office and decided how to make a families life’s more hell then it all ready is?  These parents and this child have been through enough!  Noblely almost died and instead of reaching out a helping hand to these parents, Mecklenburg DSS decides to kick them while they are down.  There was no reason to take this child…no evidence of abuse or neglect, if anything, these parents have went above and beyond DSS’s minimal requirements of care.   Mecklenburg DSS is way out of line with the removal or Nobely Lawson from her parents!

Everyone who reads this story needs to contact the media in Charlotte, as well as Lanier Cansler the Secretary of North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, the Governor Bev Perdue, complain about  the treatment this family has received, complain about the corrupt actions of the Mecklenburg County Department of Social Services.  I have listed the contact information at the end of this story.

Let me just say that DSS that work in glass offices should not throw stones…

DSS Director Mary E. Wilson glass filled $20,000 office

DSS Director Mary E. Wilson glass filled $20,000 office

Earlier this month I published on this blog a story about Mecklenburg DSS , in that story it was stated that Mecklenburg DSS Director Mary E. Wilson had spent $20,000 redoing her office, money that I felt could have been better spent on the Lawson family or some other families in this community.  I stated then and I still stand by what I said, “Look at this office…my living room doesn’t even look like this…do you know how many people she could have helped with all of the money she spent redoing her office…This is a prime example of why they have no money and are always requesting more funds…this just proves…they have the money, but they don’t use it to help children or the community!”

VIDEO: DSS director spends $20,000 renovating office

Not only did Mecklenburg County DSS spend $20,000 dollars on the Directors elaborate office with plasma screen T.V., they also spent $20,000 dollars on their annual holiday party, below is the video for this story.

While most workplaces are scaling back their holiday parties, one local government agency doubled their budget

That is a grand total of $40,000 dollars that they spent on themselves.  Less then most of their “clients” make in a year!!!  And they spent this amount of money on two things…the directors comfort and a party that they refused to allow the media to attend.  On my earlier blog I stated, “DSS could have used the $40,000 dollars that they spent on themselves on this family so Nobely and her family could have a place to live that would accommodate the equipment she now needs to survive.  Instead of using funds to help families like the Lawson’s, Mecklenburg County Department of Social Services blows thousands of dollars on themselves and then uses lack of funds to tear families apart or as an excuse not to help because of “lack of funds”.

They also use the excuse of lack of funds when they fail to protect a child from child abuse, “we are short staffed, we don’t have enough funds”…how many times have we heard this excuse as to why children died, why the child was not monitored closely enough…I, for one, am tired of their shitty excuses.  They are spending money left and right, misappropriating funds, stealing from the very people who need it the most…and where do you think this money comes from in the first place???  The taxpayer wallet…this is our money that they are blowing!  These are our children, neighbors, friends, and follow Americans that they are failing…if you step back and look…you will find one person, one child, one family member, or one friend that DSS has failed that you personally know….enough is enough…the time has come to speak out against this corruption.”

I stand by my earlier statement and add that the time to speak out is now, we cannot continue to allow these corrupt Department’s of Social Services to get away with their illegal, unethical, and corrupt behavior. 

There is currently a huge audit occurring at the Mecklenburg County Department of Social Services,

 Among the findings:

  • Mecklenburg County officials cannot account for $162,000 in donations meant to buy gifts for needy children. That includes a $10,000 check made out to an employee.
  • Of the 840 receipts inspected for that program, 799 had problems, including receipts that were altered, whited out or omitted in photocopying. (This to me is a nice way of saying falsified, forged receipts were found.)
  •  In a separate year-round program, auditors said, money meant to help foster families buy clothes and other necessities for children was spent on office supplies. (would that include, plasma T.V.’s, Queen Anne Desk and matching table, window treatments)

You can read the full story at: Spending probe spreads at DSS

And did you know that Mecklenburg County has been under a firing freeze, but apparently that can be lifted so long as the new employee has political connections.

Who did they hire??

  • The I-Team found that even though the county Department of Human Services was under a hiring freeze, Director Mary E. Wilson hired a friend and former co-worker who is the wife of an at-large city councilman.
  • Wilson hired Samara Foxx, wife of councilman and mayoral candidate Anthony Foxx, last July after posting the position for only one day, according to a DSS spokeswoman. (To read Mrs. Foxx’s statement to the I team, clickSamaraFoxxResponse.)
  • DSS hired the daughter of CMPD Chief Rodney Monroe in January
  • and the daughter of Superior Court Judge Yvonne Mims-Evans in February.

To see the full story, visit the following link:

‘Cronyism’ investigated in DSS hiring


My earlier blog post about Noblely Lawson and the Mecklenburg County Department of Social Services can be found at the following links:




Father Describes Moment Car Hit Baby’s Stroller

Parents may lose custody of child who survived crash

As young girl recovers, family’s future is in question

Parents may lose custody of injured baby

What Can You Do To Help The Lawson Family?  (From

What Can You Do To Help The Lawson Family?

The Lawsons don’t have the money or political connections to fight DSS. They need the help of people around the world who are willing to fight abusive government.

Here’s what you can do to help them:

  1. Pass around this story and others linked below about DSS harming this family. Help put pressure on DSS to leave this family alone.

  3. If you’re in the Charlotte, North Carolina area and have room to spare in your home and room in your heart to help out an abused family, consider offering space for the Lawson family to live while they recover from the car accident and the DSS threats.

  5. If you have some spare money for a good cause, consider donating to help the Lawson family protect their child from DSS and pay for her medical care:Donations may be made to the “Noblely Yvonne Lawson Assistance Fund” at any branch of Wachovia bank or they can be mailed to:Wachovia Bank, NA
    Attn: Noblely Yvonne Lawson Assistance Fund
    PO Box 26090
    Richmond, VA 23260-6090Please make checks payable to the Noblely Yvonne Lawson Assistance Fund c/o the fund’s administrator, David B. Pevney, Attorney at Law, PLLC.

  7. If you know the Charlotte, North Carolina, DSS personnel involved in the abuses against the Lawson family, spread their names and contact information around to as many people as you can. Encourage people to contact these DSS staff to make them personally accountable for their abusive conduct. Telephone them, email them, and fax them to let them know that you do not appreciate their abusive and corrupt behaviors.Director Mary E. Wilson
    704-336-2472 (main)
    704-336-6279 (direct)
    704-336-5887 (fax)

  9. Tell everyone you know about DSS being a corrupt and abusive organization that wastes taxpayer dollars and trains its employees to abuse children and families for the financial benefit of DSS.

  11. If you live in Mecklenburg County, vote out the current county supervisors. Talk with your neighbors about the rampant corruption, illicit hiring practices that smack of nepotism and benefit those in power, irresponsible spending, financial “controls” that can’t account for hundreds of thousands of dollars in missing money, and targeting of families like the Lawsons for abuse to obtain financial gain for DSS.



Charlotte Media:

*NewsChannel 36
1001 Wood Ridge Center Drive
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217-1901
Phone: 704-329-3636

Send us a story
If you see news breaking, call us:

*WBTV News Channel 3

News Tips:  To report breaking news, call 704-374-3691 or email

Consumer storiesTo send suggestions for a consumer-related story, email

PSI Charlotte:  Got a story you want our Problem Solvers Investigators to look into?  Call 704-374-3511 or email

More contacts at WBTV…



 1 Julian Price Place
 Charlotte, NC 28208 

Main phone:  704-374-3500, ext 1

*WSOC-TV channel 9
Phone: 704-338-9999 (Main switchboard)
Phone: 704-335-4871 (Newsroom)
Street address: 1901 N. Tryon St., Charlotte, NC 28206
Mailing address: P.O. Box 34665, Charlotte, NC 28234*NEWS 14 CAROLINA

316 E. Morehead Street
Suite 100
Charlotte, NC 28202
(704) 973-5800

Lanier Cansler

Lanier M. Cansler, Secretary
919-733-4534; fax: 919-715-4645

2001 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-2001
Location: Adams Building, 101 Blair Drive, Raleigh


Governor Bev Perdue

Citizen and Community Services Office

The Citizen and Community Services Office responds to requests and questions that the Governor’s Office receives from citizens throughout North Carolina.

(800) 662-7952
(919) 733-2391

Special note:  There are pictures inserted into this post,  if you click on them you can see some of the documentation of my complaint, including the forged document.  I recommend seeing the picture titled actual Signature and then viewing the forgery, it is the only way you can see the difference between the two.  Also if you wish to view just the juicy parts of Allison Bakers Criminal Background Search see pages 3 and 4, she was charged with 8 counts of forging perscriptions to obtain a controlled substance.  These counts were Knocked down to misdemeanor drug possession, but why was she even working for DSS?

Allow me to apologize for the lengths of my posts in advance,  the only way to get the full stories out is to put all the information on here.  There is never a short version when it comes to CPS involvement.  Also, I am really interested in your comments, or if you have a story to tell, please feel free to leave a comment on this page.  I will read and respond to them all.  If you would like to email me, to share your story, comment on mine, or just to talk…my email address is



 NOTE: Social Worker 1, Allison S. Baker, has been charged with Felony Obstruction of Justice and is awaiting trial for forging my husband’s signature to a Safety Assessment that never occured. I name NCDSS in this complaint, because although I have complained about this repeatedly to them and sent them documented proof of the violations in this case, they have done nothing. NCDSS is directly responsible for the conduct of a county office according to case law that has, found and held, that NCDSS a principle, agent relationship exsist between North Carolina DSS and a county office. By not stepping in and responding to this matter, NCDSS has violated its duties and is therefore also responsible for the illegal activities that have occurred in this case. 


This is my story…Of course it isn’t the whole story, but it is without a doubt what I am most pissed off about at the moment.

CPS’s Failure To Protect My Stepdaughter

I am writing because I feel that the Wilkes County Department of Social Services has failed in its duty to protect my step-daughter. I have listed the reasons for this complaint as follows:

  • Forged and Falsified Documents
  • Failed to follow statutory investigation requirements/time limits.
  • Accepted a retaliatory report on us that had been screened out by another county.
  • Failed to disclose vital information during a physiological evaluation.
  • Failed to investigate reports of bruises and neglect.
  • Bias and discriminatory comments directed at me and my husband.
  • Retaliated against us for complaining about their violations.


My husband, and I made the initial report to the Wilkes County Department of Social Services on August 15, 2006 and for the first two months they did nothing, even though our report concerned unexplained bruises and dental neglect. The worker assigned to the case,Allison Baker did not go to the residence of my step-daughters mother until the last week of October. Two months after our initial report. I supplied CPS with pictures of my Stepdaughter’s teeth taken by the dentist and a statement written by him, stating that it was neglect.

After our initial report was made I spoke with our social workers supervisor Mary Henderson, who asked why my husband hadn’t taken his daughter to the dentist if we first noticed the cavities on December 17, 2005, I explained to her that my husband has standard visitation, he has his daughter every other weekend, dentist offices are not normally open on weekends and that he had informed her mother several times of the condition of the child’s teeth.

The first time that we had her on a week day we took her to the dentist. (June 27, 2006) I also explained to Mary Henderson that my husband was told that if he tried to take his daughter before then, on a date that was not scheduled for visitation, that he would be arrested. The mother did not take the child to the dentist although we carry dental insurance, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, effective date 7/05, The mother carries dental insurance Delta Dental, effective date 11/05 and the child was on North Carolina Medicaid until July 31, 2006, this to me is willful neglect on the mother’s part.

On August 21, 2006, I called the Allison Baker, and informed her that on my stepdaughter’s weekend visitation with us I had noticed small round bruises on her back in the vicinity of the waist line of her jeans. The social worker told me that the next time the child had bruises to get pictures, yet she still did not go to the residence and conduct an investigation.

On August 27, 2006, I met with the Allison Baker, at the Wilkes County Department of Social Services at 10:00am. I took with me the pictures of my stepdaughter’s teeth and a videotape of her in our care and footage of our home dated August 4, 2006 to present.

On October 14, 2006 I noticed that my stepdaughter had a bruise on her right side, on her stomach, dime sized and turning brown, so I looked her over and discovered more bruises on her. One on the back of her right leg right below her butt, it was dark quarter sized and another on the inside of her left upper thigh, this one looked like fingers, not finger prints, but full finger, three to be exact. These were not welts or red marks but actual bruises. I took pictures, as I had been advised by the Allison Baker to do; I also videotaped the bruises in case the pictures did not come out. Plus, it could not be disputed that it was truly my stepdaughter that way.

While I was videotaping the bruises on the upper part of her body, she leaned over rubbed the front of her shin and said, ‘These are normal bruises.‘ I took that to mean that the ones I was videotaping were not ‘normal’.

I then called the Wilkes County Department of Social Services emergency number, but was greeted by the message, ‘This phone is not answered and these messages are not listened to.’ I was, at this point, at a complete loss of what to do next, so I called the Surry County Sheriff’s Department who informed me that it was not their jurisdiction because the bruises occurred in Wilkes County at the child’s mother’s home.

On Sunday, October 15, 2006 I found the Allison Baker’s home phone number in the phone book and called her at home. I informed her of the bruises, that I had taken pictures and videotaped the bruises and asked her what to do. She advised me to call the Wilkes County Sheriff’s Department and make a report with the worker on call. Allison Baker did not come to our home, even though she was the assigned worker, she did not do anything. This social worker, aware of the bruises, did not go to the child’s school to check on her, until five days after I informed her of these bruises nor would she return my calls on October 16, 2006 when I tried to get the videotape to her.

I called the worker on call at the Wilkes County Sheriff’s Department; I specifically described the appearance and location of the bruises. I explained to the worker on call that we hadn’t noticed the bruises October 13, 2005, because we went to the haunted trail and did not get home until late. The worker on call said that she had to call her supervisor to see if this was urgent enough to send some one out to our house at that time, but called later and said that they declined to investigate it. The call was screened out because of an error that the intake worker made.

On October 23, 2006 I called the main office in Raleigh and complained about the way that Allison Baker and the Wilkes County Department of Social Services were handling this case. I was directed to someone else.

On October 24, 2006, 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 advice me to make another report. A report that I was later criticized for making.  

On October 24, 2006 I received a letter from the Wilkes County Department of Social Services dated October 15, 2005, that thanked me for my report of suspected child abuse…’The report was not accepted for investigation because the child is nine years old and is not stating that anything adverse has happened to her.’ This letter is signed by Deborah Koen, SWIII and Oscar Howard “Hal” Wilson, III is listed as Social Worker Supervisor at the bottom. ( He had clearly shown his compentenc level with the phone call above.)Now I fail to see how this report could have been screened out because the child did not state that anything adverse had happened to her and no one even spoke to her on October 15, 2006.

It was also stated during my phone contact with Wilkes County Department of Social Services that the child fell at the haunted trail and that was how she received the bruises. I informed them that her daddy carried her through the whole trail because she was scared, that she never fell and that if she had it still would not explain how she got bruises on such a diverse area of her body. I was treated like a liar.

I called a different supervisor Bill Sebastian on October 24, 2006 and complained about the fact that the report was screened out on October 15, 2006. He suggested that I file a new report with the Wilkes County Department of Social Services that would be assigned to a different team. I did file a new report on this date. I listed specific dates that my stepdaughter had shown up with bruises, the exact placement and size of the bruises. I also stated that her dental care had been neglected to the point that when we took her to the dentist on July 3, 2006 she had to have teeth I and J extracted. The new report was accepted and assigned to a new social worker, Ruth Parker as of this date, March 8, 2007, I still haven’t heard from her.

On October 25, 2006 I talked to the Allison Baker, who asked us to come in to her office on October 27, 2006 because she was now investigating us, although at the time of our phone conversation she did not tell us that there had been a report made against us. Allison Baker, also asked why I hadn’t told her that my husband had only been seeing his daughter regularly for a year, I told her that I did tell her that he hadn’t seen her for four years because her mother wouldn’t let him. I informed her that we had recorded phone calls between ourselves and the mother where my husband beg to see his daughter and told her I would bring her those tapes the 27the because the mother had not been truthful with her about the situation.

My husband and I met with the Allison Baker on October 27, 2006 at 4:00pm; it was at this time that we gave her the videotape from October 14, 2006. She viewed the tape at that time, did not really comment on the bruises and did not state that it was improper or show any concern over my videotaping the bruises on my stepdaughter.

Allison Baker had in her possession a report that had been made against us that contained things like…We had poison Ivy in our yard, trees growing in our gutters, dirty dishes in the sink, that we make the child sleep on the floor, eight children living in our home, the child had woke up with a rat on her chest, my daughter had left a bruise on child’s arm… I asked the her when this report was made and all she would say was that it was old, really old.  Then why didn’t they investigate it when it was made?  Another statutory law violation or an excuse to investigate us because we complained two days earlier?

I didn’t understand why she was even investigating it, the stuff contained in it was stupid and the social worker had already seen videotape of the inside of our home, dated August 4, 2006 and on up. Furthermore, why didn’t she come to our home and investigate it? Isn’t that the statutory requirement?

Allison Baker voiced concern and informed me specifically that no recording devices were allowed in the interview room. She also stated that she was covering her ass in case the District Attorney’s office became involved in our case, when we question why the DA would become involved she never answered the question.

At this meeting Allison Baker also stated that she had finally had a home visit at the mother’s home and the place was immaculate. I stated, ‘Yea but what about the trailer that she was living in two months ago when we made our report.’ The mother had moved by the time a home visit was done. The social worker also did not want to hear the tapes that proved that the mother was lying to her. Allison Baker restated at this meeting for us to get pictures of the bruises and did not say anything negative about the videotape I had made of the bruises.

On October 30, 2006 I spoke with James D. (Donnie) Bumgarner, Director of the Wilkes County Department of Social Services and voiced my concerns about the way this case was being handled. I was scheduled to met with the Mr. Bumgarner, October 31, 2006, but when I arrived I found out that I would be by myself in a room with not just the Mr. Bumgarner, but With supervisors Mary Henderson, Bill Sebastian, and Sonya Freeman. I felt that this was an intimidation tactic on their part, but I am not easily intimidated so I again voiced my concerns about the handling of this case.

I was told that since the child was not disclosing their hands were tied to which I replied, ‘So when shes older and all messed up from being abused are you going to tell her that if she would have disclosed you could have helped her, lay all the responsibility of the abuse on her shoulders, her fault you couldn’t help.’ I also told them that abused children do not always disclose and when they can’t speak for themselves because they’re scared and intimidated by the abuser, someone else needs to step in and be a voice for them. That’s what I am trying to do.

At the meeting on October 31, 2006 one of the supervisors, Sonya Freeman asked if my husband and I would be willing to come in for mediation with the mother. I said that we would, but voiced a concern about mediating abuse. North Carolina court doesn’t even allow mediation where there is suspected domestic or child abuse, so I failed to comprehend how Child Protective Services could.

On November 6, 2006 my husband and I showed up for the scheduled mediation, we were the only ones who showed up. Sonya Freeman was supposed to be there, but had an emergency with her son. The mother had apparently never been contacted about the date and time of the mediation. Allison Baker made excuses about why we were not called and notified that the mediation would not occur. We had to drive for forty five minutes to make this appointment, it was also my son’s fourteenth birthday, but we made it a priority to make this appointment.

According to Sonya Freeman when I spoke with her November 7, 2006 the Allison Baker was supposed to have called us and informed us that the mediation would need to be rescheduled, but she never did. The mediation was rescheduled for November 8, 2006, but my husband had to work that day and we could not attend. Furthermore, by this time we were so frustrated with, what our opinion appeared to be gross incompetence that we had developed a trust issue with the Wilkes County Department of Social Services and their ability to investigate this case.

On November 10, 2006 my stepdaughter came home for weekend visitation with a huge bruise on the inside/front of her right thigh that appeared to be a hand print, I did videotape this bruise. During this video she is making excuses for the bruise, ‘I usually get them from running into windows’, ‘I threw a bouncy ball and it came back and hit me in the leg’, ‘I must have got it from being kicked in Karate’. I again informed Allison Baker of the bruise and that I had videotaped it, although I waited until Monday to do so, because honestly what was the point of calling before then, they wouldn’t have responded anyway.

November 14, 2006 we went to court on our petition for change of custody filed in June 2006. This hearing was postponed until the Wilkes County Department of Social Services finished the investigation that we initiated. The Judge also issued an order that DSS submit their findings to him.

On November 20, 2006 I delivered a copy of the videotape to Sonya Freeman, when I spoke with Ms. Freeman on November 22, 2006 she stated that she could see prints on the child and that she was concerned by what she saw. She did not state any concerns about my videotaping the bruises.

On November 27, 2006 I spoke with Sonya Freeman who was now stating that the video was not very clear and jumped around, speeding up and down. I told her at points in the video I had recorded for her that I paused it and slowed it down so that she could see the bruises. I also believe that it was on this occasion that concern was voiced over my videotaping bruises on my stepdaughter. I made an appointment to meet with Sonya Freeman on December 5, 2006 at 4:30pm. Also somewhere around this date is when Wilkes County Department of Social Services stated that they couldn’t tell who was ‘telling the truth’ and decided to send all parties for a physiological evaluation.

On November 30, 2006 I spoke with Allison Baker, who on this date, for the first time, voiced a concern over the videotaping. I told her that she was the one who told me to get her pictures and proof of the bruises and that was what I had done. She stated get pictures.

On December 1, 2006 I faxed a letter to Allison Baker, I also faxed a written complaint to Donnie Bumgarner asking that the Allison Baker be removed from our case and requesting that our case be moved to a different county. I have never received a response from him regarding this request and complaint. In this complaint I stated my concerns about the handling of this case, that we believed there to be some kind of bias, coercion, or other unethical behavior occurring in this case, because we could not understand how given the demographics and evidence that we had submitted in this case WCDSS couldn’t see what was going on.

I think I need to mention that we are not the only ones who filed a report of abuse and neglect against the mother. The mother’s other daughter’s, dad and step mom filed a report August 10, 2006 alleging, among other things neglect and physical abuse. They have pictures of bruises on his daughter, but Wilkes Department of Social Services has never contacted them about their report, or viewed the pictures. They are participating in the physiological evaluation as is this daughter. They have major complaints against the Wilkes County Department of Social Services too.

I met with Sonya Freeman and Mary Henderson on December 5, 2006; at this time they voiced concern over my videotaping the bruises. They also made what I felt was inappropriate comments, such as saying that the father and mother didn’t even act human during the pick up and drop offs, how close could the child and her little brother be since they never see each other…(we schedule their visits together if we can.) I was even criticized for saying that children need hugs and that normal families hug and show affection.

During my meeting with Sonya Freeman and Mary Henderson they stated that the child was clearly uncomfortable during the videotaping. First if you see the video, she is uncomfortable, as am I. She doesn’t want her underwear to show and she is afraid that someone will come in, but she is also joking around and talking. In the second video she is trying to prevent me from recording the bruises and making excuses but she is joking around and playing as well. Plus she wore the same clothes the rest of the night (T-shirt and panties). I don’t think it is so much the fact that I am recording her, but the fact that I am recording the bruises that makes her uncomfortable.

I asked Mary Henderson and Sonya Freeman at this meeting if they thought the child would have been any more comfortable if someone from Social Services had took pictures of the bruises and they stated that she would not have been. I also tried to explain to them that the mother is so verbally abusive to my husband that he can not communicate with her that is why they don’t talk. If he says the slightest thing to her during the pick up and drop offs she causes a scene in front of their daughter and she does not need to see that. I also tried to explain to them that my stepdaughter will not even acknowledge us when her mother is present because she is so scared of her. Mary Henderson’s reply was, ‘Why should she have to?’ I could not get her to understand that the child is perfectly fine, comfortable, and happy with us when her mother isn’t around, but when her mom is around she becomes wooden.

After my meeting with Mary Henderson and Sonya Freeman on December 5th, I felt completely helpless and defeated. I was also angry because of the bias nature of their comments about my husband. It was at this point that we realized that we were not going to be listened to.

On December 9, 2006 the Allison Baker came to our house as part of her investigation, almost four months after the report was filed. We were found to have a safe home, which means that the report against us should have been found unsubstantiated, but as of this date February 27, 2007 it has not. She wrote a under Section 2 Safety Response, “1 (circled) Stepmom and dad, agree to not physically discipline the child and to use other forms of punishment. Neither on of us had ever used physical discipline on my stepdaughter…ever. According to DSS policy, Allison Baker was not allowed to use allegations on this assessment, but she did.

On December 11, 2006 I spoke with the Allison Baker about the date of the physiological evaluation, it was scheduled to begin January 5, 2007. On December 12, 2006 Allison Baker called and stated that she needed my husband to come in and sign papers giving his permission for his daughter to do the physiological evaluation. The social worker also informed me during this phone call that I should sit on the Child Abuse Prevention Team in Wilkes County.

My husband went and signed a consent/authorization for medical/mental health evaluation child medical evaluation program form on December 18, 2006. This form lists that the referral is made by authority of (check one) Checked is DSS Director—when acting as temporary guardian of child found abandoned or without natural guardian or when having been vested with parental rights by the adoption or termination of parental rights laws (G.S. 35A-1220). The Criteria marked does not fit this case. The parents in this case have joint legal custody of their daughter. The box that was checked was misleading in that it made my husband feel that the evaluation had been ordered and he had no choice but to allow the evaluation. This consent was therefore, illegally obtained.

On January 9, 2007 a new Wilkes County Social Worker,Renae Steele called and spoke with my husband. She informed him that Allison Baker was no longer employed at the Wilkes County Department of Social Services and that she had been assigned the case.

On January 17, 2007 Renae Steele came to our home and verified it as a safe home. I showed her the videotape of the bruises, and she asked at that time that I no longer videotape the bruises , instead we are to call her and she will come right out. I told her I had only videotaped the bruises on two occasions and had only done so because Allison Baker instructed me to get her pictures.

On January 24, 2007 my husband and I met with the Psychologist, Dr. James Powell, who informed him that a report had been filed against him. I called Renae Steele and left several messages; I also called, Keith Elmore, on this date and complained about the way Wilkes County had handled this case, he told me that he would go to WCDSS and look at the file and the pictures of Lydia’s teeth, but when I spoke with him again on January 26, 2007 he informed me that he did not veiw the file or the pictures and assured me that WCDSS would make an unbiased decision. Mr. Elmore advised me to call someone else, who advised me to call someone else in Raleigh, who had someone else call me.

January 30, 2007 I spoke with Renae Steele about the report against us that they had given to the Psychologist; because I do not believe it is a viable report. It does not meet the statutory definition of abuse or neglect. Renae Steele said that the initial report had been made to and screened out by Surry County Department of Social Service on August 16, 2006. (We live in Surry County) She further stated that Wilkes County Department of Social Services received the report on August 17, 2006, she stated that she didn’t understand why it was screened in by Wilkes County, but she would find out and call me back.

Renae Steele called back about an hour later and stated that she had asked Mary Henderson why the report had been screened in and that she told her the only reason it was screen in was because of the rat on the child’s chest statement. Now remember before Allison Baker started investigating the retaliatory report, she had already seen video of our home, Dated August 4, 2006 and on to the present time. She knew this was a false report.

I met with the Psychologist, Dr. Powell, February 6, 2007 who told me one of the things that Wilkes County asked to him to evaluate was whether or not my videotaping the bruises on my stepdaughter had any adverse effect on her. They did not inform him that I had been told by them to get pictures of the bruises.

February 7, 2007 I spoke with Donnie Bumgarner about their failure to disclose to the Psychologist that I had been instructed by them to get pictures of the bruises; he told me that he would have Mary Henderson call me. I called Mary Henderson and asked her why they did not inform the Psychologist that I was told by Allison Baker to get her pictures of the bruises, she admitted that I was told to get pictures, but not videotape. She also stated that she would call Psychologist and inform him, but she never did. I recorded this conversation and gave a copy to the Psychologist.

I called Raleigh and complained about the Wilkes County Department of Social Services, again. It was admitted to me that in the beginning of this case they had failed in their duties, but they did not need to inform the Psychologist that they told me to get pictures and that I should trust them. I can not trust them because they have failed to protect my stepdaughter as they are required to do by law.

February 13, 2007, my husband’s last appointment with The psychologist, Dr. Powell and my MMPI 2 test, which I completed in less than 1 hour.

February 23, 2007, my stepdaughter missed a scheduled appointment with the psychologist.

March 20, 2007 I e-mailed Donnie Bumgarner, in it I asked him the following questions:

What was occurring with our report of abuse against the mother?

When the psychological evaluation would be complete?

Why the report against us was screened in, after being screened out by Surry County?

Why the retaliatory report against us had not been unsubstantiated yet? Especially since two different workers had been to our home and completed a Safety Assessment, and found our home and us to be safe and appropriate, obviously these workers could tell that the report against us was a lie.

Why Renae Steele, had not sent us a copy of the Safety Assessment as she said should would when she did it.

In this e-mail I also point out that per our last conversation he had stated that he would have Renee Steel call me, which she never did, I also pointed out that it had been over 6 month since we made our report and it should not take that long to make a decision, just as it should not have taken Allison Baker over 2 months to go to the mother’s home. I also stated the following:

‘I am still very concerned about the way your office has handled this investigation. The comments that have been made to us by Mary Henderson and Sonya Freeman, have been very bias in nature and should not be ignored or blown off with a comment such as ‘I am sure those comments made this more difficult for you.’

Enough is enough, either substantiate the abuse and neglect against the mother that we have proven to your department or don’t. But make a decision, and allow us to set a court date so that we can at least try to protect these little girls through the legal system. Our court hearing has been postponed until you make your report. It should have been completed months ago. I know for a fact that we have enough evidence of abuse to prove it in court.

We have cooperated with you fully and done everything that you request we do, even though we should never have been investigated by your department at all. We reported abuse as we are required to by law and in turn you have allowed us to persecuted for speaking up. In my opinion your departments handling of this case has enabled the abuse of these little girls to continue and given the mother a heads up on how better to hide the evidence of it.’

March 29, 2007, I spoke with the psychologist’s office, my stepdaugher still has not made an appointment. I called to speak with the Donnie Bumgarner, but was put through to Mary Henderson instead. ( This call is recorded.) I asked her why they had done nothing about the mother not taking my stepdaugher to the psychological evaluation, I also asked if they had considered that she might not be taking the girls on purpose and Mary Henderson stated that they had considered that possiblity. I asked what they were going to do about it. I also told her I felt that the Wilkes County Department of Social Services was guilty of negligence and failure to protect in their handling of this case.

Wilkes County DSS filed a Juvenile summons and notice of hearing (abuse/neglect/dependency) March 29, 2007 at 4:19 pm, directly after I made this phone call.

March 30, 2007, I spoke with the psychologist and he stated that he had reported all missed appointments to DSS, but he can’t make them come. He will give them a month.

April 2, 2007, We went to the Wilkes County Courthouse and picked up the petition filed by DSS on March 29, 2007 in it, it states that they are filing because:

‘The juvenile is a neglected juvenile, in that the juvenile is not provided necessary medical care. Specifically, on or about 8-16-06 to present:

stated facts filled in by DSS state:

In order to complete this investigation, a forensic interview with the families involved was reccomended. (Their spelling error) Parents are not following DSS reccomendations in regards to a mental health assessment for children and adults. Dad and step mom (us) have gone to the psychologist and finished their interviews. The mother and her husband continue to miss their appointments, and also not take the juvenile and her sister to theirs. The psychologist has called SWS supervisor Mary Henderson as well as SW Renae Steele to get the parents to come and finish the sessions. SW Renae Steele has tried on numerous occasions to set up a time to visit the mother and her family, with little cooperation.’

The name of the petitioner on this motion is Mary Henderson as authorized Represenative of the director. The correct box is checked. ( I guess she learned after that one case was vacated)

After this petition was filed the mother took the girls to The psychologist for their appointments and DSS dismissed the petition. How is it that they could file a petition for medical neglect for this, but not for the condition of the girl’s teeth and the mother’s failure to take them to the dentist?

April 16, 2007 DSS court hearing on the petition, the petition was dismissed per DSS request. Neither us nor our attorney, nor the father and stepmom of my stepdaugher’s sister were notified of the dismissal. Renee Steel would only talk to the mother and basically ignored the rest of us. So much for ‘family friendly policy.’

May 1, 2007 Appointment with the psychologist. My husband and I, The father and stepmom of the other daugher showed up, but DSS, specifically, Renae Steele and the mother did not. Since DSS, specifically, Renae Steele didn’t show up the appointment had to be rescheduled, and this after they had just filed a petition for the mother missing appointments with the same psychologist…. a complete waste of our time and gas money. My husband also lost his job due to missing work to make this appointment.

May 4, 2007 Appointment with the psychologist. My husband, me, The father and stepmom agains showed up, the mother was again a no show and DSS, specifically, Renae Steele was 1 and a half hours late. During this meeting we were told that the mother has a severe personality disorder that no amount of medication or therapy can help. We were also told that the psychologist could find no evidence of abuse or neglect. I was told by the psychologist that the videotaping had an adverse effect on my stepdaughter’s wellbeing. And my husband was told that it was wrong for him to call his daughter and leave a message stating, ‘hey baby, its daddy, I love you and miss you, see you soon.’ Because it upsets the mother’s significant other. Renae Steele lay, slouched down in her chair the whole time, to the point that the Dr. Powell finally asked her if she was going to go to sleep. Dr. Powell rushed us out the door because he needed to pick up a prescription, but before he could leave me and the other stepmom asked him point blank, if the girls needed counseling, to which he replied, NO.

I think I should point out here that the pick up and drop off’s occuring at the police department were court Ordered, by Judge David V. Byrd as were my husband’s phone calls to his daughter. He was ordered phone visitation at least 2 times per week. So they are also stating that the court was guilty of neglect for ordering it. That would be my opinion.

Dr. Powell, also condemned me for calling the mother and informing her of two dental appointments and that we would not be helping her pay for the next one because we had paid to have the teeth extracted. He quoted annimosity on my part. These phone calls are recorded and I can assure I did nothing wrong, all I did was try to get the mother to take the child to the dentist and tell her that it was her turn to pay, since we had paid the last time.

First I might have been snotty, but I was the one who witnesses the pain my stepdaughter went through having teeth I and J extracted, I was the one who heard her scream and held her when she cried. I think after experiencing that I had a right to be a little upset about the neglect her mother had put her through for not taking her to the dentist.

Second, no one has ever stated that my stepdaughter heard these messages, therefore it had no effect on her at all. But if I had not set up appointments for her dental care, if I had not have pushed the issue then I would have been just as guilty of neglect as the mother. Someone had to make sure this child got to the dentist.

If I had not had pushed the issue, who knows when her mother would have taken her to the dentist. My stepdaughter’s sister didn’t finally get to the dentist until her last appointment with the psychologist, almost a year after DSS received the report from her dad and stepmom about her.

June 19, 2007 We received letters in the mail today from DSS stating that we had been substantiated against for emotional abuse. It states:

‘This letter is to notify you that our agency has completed the child protective services investigation on the above-named children, and after careful consideration or recommendations from the psychologist, we found evidence of emotional abuse. Therefore, the case is being substantiated against you. This case will be tranferred to a treatment Social Worker. Please contact this agency if you have questions.’

It is signed by

Renae Steele CPS SWIII and Mary Henderson Social Worker Supervisor

On June 22, 2007 I sent the director an e-mail and asked to appeal the substantiation against us. It stated:

‘Dear Mr. Bumgarner:

We want to appeal the decision your office has made against us. This finding does not follow DSS policy and neither has your office in the course of this investigation. I would appreciate it if you could send me the information I need to appeal this. I believe there is a time limit on appealing these decision, so your quick response would be deeply appreciated.’

On June 29, 2007, We received a letter from the Donnie Bumgarner stating:

‘On behalf of the Wilkes County Department of Social Services, I would like to take this opportunity to inform you that I have reviewed the Child Protective Services Investigation involving the above named child. The decision to substantiate emotional abuse against you was mailed by mistake and I apologize for this error. The Department of Social Services did find evidence to substantiate neglect against you due to the child living in an environment injurious to her welfare.’

July 2, 2007 I again wrote to Mr.Bumgarner,requesting to appeal his decision. I also informed him that his department’s decision does not fit the criteria of North Carolina’s Welfare Policy or the criteria of the North Carolina General Statutes. I further stated:

‘I have thoroughly investigated Welfare policy and law since the beginning of this case. During my research I found that your substantiated finding of neglect against us does not meet the criteria of neglect under North Carolina policy. I am again asking you to review your findings and to remove these findings against us. I feel that your findings are based on retaliatory motives because we have complained about your department and your failure to follow welfare law, state law and policy. I believe you are trying to find us guilty of wrong doing to discredit our complaint against you. Your inability to ‘pick’ an abuse that we have committed, proves this point to me.’

On September 20, 2007 I received a letter from Donnie Bumgarner, that stated:

‘Re: Review of Neglect Substatiation

I would like to take this opportunity to inform you that the Wilkes County Department of Social Services has reviewed, as requested, the decision to substantiate neglect against you due the child living in an environment injurious to her welfare. Following the review, it has been determined that the decision to substantiate neglect should not be changed. I trust this information will be helpful to you.’

I have written to The director several more times, asking the the substantiation be removed from us. My request December 13, 2007 was after finding the forged safety assessment. It stated:


‘Dear Mr. Bumgarner:

I am once again writing to ask you to reconsider your finding of neglect against us. I think in light of the current situation it is only proper for you to do so. I am of course referring to Allison Baker’s forging of my husband’s name, falsifying a safety assessment and arrest for Felony Obstruction of Justice.

I think it is also important for you to consider the following.

First, The psychologist’s findings in his report are different from what he stated to us. He did not include the fact that the mother has a severe personality disorder that no amount of therapy or medication can help. Dr. Powell also stated in his report that the girls needed therapy, but We specifically asked Dr. Powell if the girls needed any therapy and he told us no. Also Allison Baker was the first person to meet with the doctor and I have serious concerns about what she may have told him.

Second, I think that Linda Brooks and your department are now fully aware of who the instigator is in this situation. If the mother will not co-operate with DSS, who can take away her children, why do you believe that she will work with us?

Finally, the findings that you have listed do not meet the statutory requirements of neglect, you can not find people guilty of neglect because they do not get along with the other parent. If that was the case you would have to file against anyone going through a custody dispute or divorced. We have tried repeatedly to get along with the mother, we do not talk to her because when we even say hello she is verbally abusive to us in front of the girls.

I think with out a doubt considering the arrest of Allison Baker, that you and your department need to admit that this investigation was tainted, bias and improper, you cannot, therefore in good conscience keep the neglect substantiation against us. It is wrong, you know it, I know and other people are beginning to see it too.’

Then after receiving yet another letter from Mr. Bumgarner, stating that they would not remove the substantiation against us, I wrote January 29, 2008:

‘Dear Mr. Bumgarner:

I received your letter RE: Review of Substantiated Child Neglect Investigation, today January 29, 2008 and I must say that I am very disappointed in your decision not to change your findings in light of Allison Baker’s arrest and the forged document by your department.

Yes your department, Allison Baker was your employee and you are responsible for her actions. You will not even admit that your department’s investigation is tainted by her actions, you will not admit or take responsibility for what has occurred in this case and that is wrong. You expect everyone else to be accountable for their actions, admit what they have done wrong and fix it, but when it comes to you, your employees and your department you will not admit your wrong doings, accept responsibility or even apologize when you have wronged someone.

Your department has wronged us! Your substantiation against us is unfounded, need I remind you that the first sentence in the psychologist’s evaluation is ‘ I could find no evidence of abuse or neglect.’ Furthermore you are relying on Allison Baker’s investigation and I believe it has already been proven that she was not doing her job and breaking the law.

I am once again asking you to remove the substantiation against us, , you cannot substantiated against people merely to cover your own wrong doings. Your neglect finding against us DOES NOT meet statutory requirements, it is unfounded, it is I believe an abuse of power, used only to discredit our complaints against your department.

I believe you need to step out of our case and assign it to a different county, you and your department are bias against us, Allison Baker has been arrested and charged for her illegal activities and I believe that others in your department were directly involved in her wrong doings and knew about them, yet you do nothing.

If justice, fairness and doing what is right is your intention you will remove the substantiation against us and admit the wrong doings in your investigation.’

We still have not had a response to this last e-mail as of this date, May 5, 2008.

We have complied with everything that DSS has ever asked us to do. Even though we do not agree with their decision, we have allowed Linda Brooks (from WCDSS) and Nikki Hull, from Surry county into our home, we have done a case plan, the works. We did all of this even though we have done nothing wrong. During the ‘family treatment’ the mother has still failed to comply and/or work with DSS. They have had to fight with her every step of the way! They cannot even get along with her, yet they substantiate neglect against us because, ‘we can’t get along.’ I dare say then they need to substatiate against themselves and any person going through a divorce or child custody dispute.

I e-mailed the director again on April 23, 2008. It stated as follows:

‘Dear Mr. Bumgarner:

I am once again writing to you to ask you to remove the unfounded substantiation that you and your department have made against us. The substantiation of neglect for an environment injurious does not met statutory guidelines…nor does it fall under any decisions in case law. I have researched this thoroughly and cannot find any law or case law that states that the parents inability to get along constitutes neglect.

Furthermore, we did not do anything to have a substantiation of neglect found against us. The only thing that we did was try to protect these little girls. As I have stated before, we do not cause a scene in front of my stepdaughter, we do not yell, scream, cuss, or any such thing in front of her or any other child. You are punishing us for the mother’s actions and that is wrong.

I would also like to point out, that even though we have disagreed with your decision and believe it to be wrong, even though one of your caseworkers committed a crime against us, even though we know that we have done absolutely nothing wrong. We have continued to work with DSS, never once have we refused to do anything your agency requested of us. Even though we feel that your department has judged us unfairly, conducted itself in a bias and unethical manner, and that your department has constantly broken welfare policy and statutory law, we have still tried to work with you.

The mother on the other hand has not complied with anything you have ever asked her to do, until she was threatened with court action. I have stated it before, if she will not work with you, when you can take her children, then how do you expect us to work with her. She has been difficult for your own employees to work with, even though she knows that you could step in and take her children at anytime.

We have tried everything in our power to work with the mother, she is not capable of working with anyone. Yet you still refuse to see that we are not the problem here. We are basically victims of a controlling, demanding, verbally abusive person, who has a severe personality disorder. Every action that we have taken has been a form of protection.

We reported child abuse and neglect to try and protect these little girls, we videotaped the pick up and drop offs to protect ourselves from prosecution, due to thr mother’s lies, she would lie and say that my husband or me was threatening her, cussing at her and it wasn’t true, but without the tapes we would not have been able to prove it. He could have gone to jail because of her malicious lies.

I videotaped the bruises on my stepdaugher to have proof of them, so that we could protect her. I did this under the advisement of your social worker and you persecuted me for it. What else was I supposed to do, when I called and reported the bruises and no one would come to the house, no one would help us protect her. No one cared, no one seemed to notice that the videotape did indeed show a child with bruises, exactly as I described.

I have attached some of the welfare policy here in order to show you that nothing we have done falls into the category of environment injurious, as a matter of fact, we have done nothing that falls into any category of abuse or neglect! The substantiation against us is wrong and it should be removed. Agencies are expected to adhere to laws and policies when administering and designating CPS roles and responsibilities. This has not occurred in this case.’

On April 28, 2008 I was informed by Linda Brooks, that they are closing the case. She said they did not care if the family treatment was completed or not, for her to close the case. All should would state was that it had come from high up. I asked her what our risk assessment was and she stated that it was low and I then stated that they never should have substantiated against us, according to their own policy. She also stated that the mother’s was not high, but it was not low either. Linda Brooks also stated that she is to have the case closed by Friday, but she wasn’t sure if she could do it because she had to write the case summary for the Judge.

I requested a copy of the risk assessment, the strengths and weeknesses and a copy of her summary to the Judge. I have mixed feelings about the closing of our case. I am happy that they are closing it, because against us and the other father and stepmom, it never should have been opened. We never should have been substatitated against. I am also upset that they are closing the case against the mother, she has never complied with them at all and it is my belief that they should have filed a petition against her a long time ago. Also so long as DSS was involved the girl’s were at least watched somewhat by them. I stated this to Linda Brooks, not in so many words, but I told her my concerns.

I have had no response from Donnie Bumgarner, regarding my last two e-mails.

May 16, 2008, I received a letter from the Wilkes County Department of Social Services informing us that the case had been closed it states:

‘Dear father and stepmom,

I am writing to inform you (both) that on May 14, 2008, Team 1, Children Protective Services Unit, closed the case on your child(ren) due to: Your willingness to pursue counseling for your daughter, thus lowering her risk factors, your expression of concern and determination for Lydia to receive assistance in her school work, and monitoring her care from her mother.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at phone number .


Linda Brooks

Team 1 In Home Treatment/Social Worker

Mary Henderson

Team 1 CPS Supervisor’

Now why, if the mother is such a responsible parent, do we need to monitor my stepdaughter’s care from her?

Furthermore, in the Family Risk Assessment of Abuse and Neglect that I requested and received a copy of the same day. It states that we only ‘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. 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 reason on 3-27-08, but in this one they do not mark R8 and R9 with (b) Minimal participaion 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.

Everything that they have said and done from day one has been a policy violation, they have lied, deceived, forged documents, broke the law…everything. Yet no one will do anything about it.

I mean after all they made us into child abusers to ensure that no one would take our complaints too seriously! WE ARE NOT CHILD ABUSERS…we are trying to protect these little girls. We would not go through the lengths that we have to get this story out and have them investigated if we were. We have been treated like our voice doesn’t matter, I mean they are DSS, they never do anything wrong and we must be just disgruntled ‘clients.’ Well we are not disgruntled ‘clients’ we are victims of their violations and lies and according to the DA handling Social Worker 1’s case, victims of a crime committed by their department.

On May 21, 2008, I received a letter from Nikki Hull, the Surry County Social Worker assigned to us by Wilkes County. This letter contridicts and proves that the Wilkes County Department of Social Services lied during their assessment of our case. It states as follows:

‘Dear Mr. and Mrs. :

The starting point for asessing a family’s readiness for termination of protective services is based on the family meeting specific objectives designed to alleviate the problems causing abuse or neglect in the family environment. Surry County has been a point of contact in you case based on a decision made by Wilkes County DSS.

On 1-08-08 the Wilkes County DSS developed a Family Services Case Plan with your family. Your family has been compliant with all recommendations made by Wilkes County DSS and have attended all scheduled meetings for child safety planning.

On 5-14-08 Wilkes County made a decision to close the In-Home services for your family. The Surry County Department of Social Services agrees with the decision that the your family has satisfactorily met the goals set forth in their Family Services Case Plan and achieved a safe environment for their children. Since no other problem has emerged that would interfere with this family’s ability to provide adequate care and supervision to the children, it is the Surry County Department of Social Services final opinion that your family is ready for the next phase of protective services, ‘Termination’.

On 5-14-08 Case # 44, 541 was terminated for Child Protective Services. There will be no further contact with your family regarding the issues taht led to the Department of Social Services involvement in the above-mentioned matter. Please feel free to contact me if any needs arise in the future.


Nikki Hull

Social Worker III

Donna Key

Social Worker Supervisor’

We have voiced our complaints numerous times and we do not feel we are being listened to. I have contacted, North Carolina DSS, Specifically Phyllis Fulton, Paul Waddle, Edith Thomas-Pullen, Chris Downings office in Atlanta GA, Carlis V. Williams head of AFC in Atlanta, Ruth Parker in Atlanta GA, Mike Levitts office in Washington DC. and numerous other people who will not do anything to rectify the situation. They will admit that what has been done is wrong, but tell us to call someone else. The lack of reponsibility in this case is mind boggling and quite frankly, in my opinion, idiots are running the services that are suppose to protect our children and failing miserbly at it.

We also feel that there is a whole lot of ass covering occurring in this case, at all levels. This in not just a simple case of a Social Worker breaking the law, but a complete and total miscarriage of justice. We have been maliciously prosecuted by WCDSS, without even the benefit of a trial, we have been found guilty of, in our opinion, one of the worse things you can be found guilty of. WCDSS needs to be investigated for their handling of this case and for many other that I have heard of since I began researching them. WE want the substatiation against us removed, we did nothing wrong and should not be punished for the actions of others.

The only time anyone shows the slightest concern for DSS policy violations is when a child that they have received reports on dies…it should not take that long. The moment policy violations are brought to their attention they should be investigated, at even the hint of such a thing, they should be investigated. It is too late to save a child when they are already dead. A child should not have to die for an investigation to occur. When DSS acts as they have in our case, children die. When they make mistakes as they have in our case, it is the children who pay for it.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.







In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work
in this BLOG is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
GRG [Ref.http:// uscode/17/ 107.shtml]
 I have created this blog to educate the public on what happens to children when CPS fails to do their job.  In order to do so, I must place the entire news/blog story here.  I do this for a simple purpose…many times after I have posted a link, that link was broken and those stories cannot be found.  In order to to show the public how many children are dying with CPS involvement or other types of corruption occurring in the CPS system, I must have all the stories in one place in order to make the impact need to try and create a public out cry for change,  I need these stories so that people can see exactly how many children it is, how many social workers are arrested, how many laws are broken.



There is no infringment intended at all. I do always provide the link to the stories and the author of the story so that they receive the credit for their work that the deserve.  My intent is to try and use these stories to educate the public and hopefully create enough awareness to change the laws and the accountability of CPS.    I can be reached at

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 158 other followers

%d bloggers like this: