See the Flaw First Hand- CPS Expert Witness- And the Lives He Ruined
CPS expert witnesses. See the horrible injustices of just one man who by his own expert witness has ruined lives of innocent families.
In our case it is “suspected” and used as evidence in court that 3 year old Katie whose behaviors and delays indicate autism. Shas been evaluated by Birth to Three and according to their findings her age equivalent is 14-15 months. As part of their Termination of Parental Rights the Agency or DCF in this case only has to show a preponderance of evidence meaning specifically; the greater weight of the evidence (and its probable truth or accuracy) required in a civil lawsuit for the trier of fact to decide in favor of one side or the other.
Having said that DCF claims “she repeatedly put a toy in and out of a play microwave, and continually put a toy car in her mouth. Consistent with previous reports of sexualized behaviors. Katie was also observed kissing a doll on the mouth. and the “previous reports” were a diaper rash on her bottom (she wears a diaper) and she regularly touches her vagina and buttocks- This is coming from the Foster parent and entered as credible testimony against the family involved. However, There is nothing qualified about her presumptions.
The circumstances that promoted this removal were as follows according to the DCF Report:
In November 2009 the Department of Childre and Families (DCF) received a referral alleging physical abuse and neglect against Katie’s mother Ms. Maggie and her boyfriend Mr.XXXXXXX. Katie was found in a room by herself strapped to her occupational therapy (OT) chair with bruises on her nose and around her eye. It had already been determined earlier that week- that as least one of the bruises were caused by Mr. XXXXX’s 3 year old son who was experiencing great difficulties adjusting to his new family and because of that difficulty he went up to Katie and bit her nose, leaving the mark on her nose that was well but healing according to the picture evidence. In Sept. of 2009 Tommy’s teacher notified DCF because of bruises on Tommy’s legs. Tommy was taken to the hospital to investigate the injuries. Janet Parelli a DCF caseworker who managed Maggie’s case for quite sometime when she lived in Enfield, CT went to Maggie’s workplace to notify her that Tommy had been taken to the hospital- and prceeded to take Maggie to the hospital; where she (Janet) attested on Maggie’s behalf to witnessing the children being physically aggressive toward eachother and that she did NOT believe Maggie or Mr. XXXX were abusing the children. It is also stated in this same report that Tommy was found that same day and upon her arrival the Birth to Three representative claims that upon entering the home she sees Tommy was “Strapped to a bed with duct tape over his mouth” She then goes on to service Katie for the next hour… LEAVES ( according to CGS 17a-101) this was against the law if she in fact had witnessed Tommy in this manner.) THEN she allegedly calls the hotline to report the child was strapped to his bed with duct tape over his mouth (their so called Exigent circumstances) and the police and DCF show up at the home an hour after that! I guess it is a good thing this wasn’t really the case; as Tommy could have been dead by the time they arrived if this were really true. BUT… the thing that baffles me is that she NEVER calls the police…. I know if I walked into a house and saw a child tied to his bed and gagged with tape, that something was wrong and I would non nonchalantly excuse myself to my car and call the police Immediately. As I would suspect any other “reasonable person” would do. But she goes on to what she came to do and just leaves? How does this make sense? Charges were never brought up because the evidence found at the hospital did not concur with the story. But it is included as part of the “preponderance of evidence to the court” to support “Allegations” of her unfitness. Maggie was never found unfit- she never had her day in court which is what I am fighting for! Instead she was bullied into voluntarily signing her parental rights away. And, as a result of her serous mental health issues; was not able to defend herself and the humiliation and embarrassment of the allegations led her to hide the findings of the report from her family, leaving them unable to help her at the time.
While under the care of (pediatrician) Richard Segool, since birth- DCF prompted MANY investigations. Dr Segool stated on many occasions the gross frivolity of the continued DCF allegations. DCF had him examine the children on several occasions for suspected abuse; and he firmly attested that these children were NOT being abused by their parents. He also stated concern for the childrens well-being because of the constant unnecessary turmoil and disruption this was causing in the childrens life.
It is undeniable that our CT children need protection. But… From Whom? is the real question.
FACT: CT DCF and its facilities account for more than half of all abuse and neglect cases in CT-