a. December 3, 2007 quoteFor example, I put the objectionable part of the Jan. 27 post in bold:
b. December 13, 2007 description
c. January 8, 2008 description
d. January 9, 2 008 description
e. January 27, 2008 description
f. February 7, 2008 descniption
g. February 25, 2008 description
h. June 29, 2008 quote and description
i. July 30, 2008 description
J. August 8, 2008 link to angry-dad.corn
k. August 24, 2008 refers to angry-dad.com
a. Picture of the minors under title, "About George, the Angry Dad"
There is no good reason for Sally Mitchell's testimony to be confidential, that I can see, except to cover up incompetence and maliciousness. She testified that she did not know of any specific act of abuse on my part. Comm. Joseph accuses me of child abuse, but he doesn't want anyone to know how flimsy the evidence against me is. I would post the transcript if I could.I fail to see what would be so confidential about the above. My ex-wife has been bombarding the public court record for years with much worse stuff.
Section 827 doesn't say anything about court testimony or transcripts. It merely says that parents, lawyers, court personnel, CPS, and others have access to juvenile court case files. There was no such case file that was ever even discussed. Ms. Mitchell just testified about dogs, alarm clocks, dishes, homework, and other such matters.