I have posted many times about holding CPS and other govt officials accountable for busting up families.
Here is a video of Angel Adams, who also wants to hold the social service agencies accountable. She says, "Somebody needs to held accountable, and they need to pay." The reporter says DCF, but that is the same as CPS.
Angel has 15 kids by 3 men. They were evicted from a 2-bedroom apartment. She was put in jail for contempt of court because she refused to tell the judge whether she was pregnant. The kids have been in and out of foster care. Watch the 10-minute video, and have all your prejudices confirmed.
12 comments:
Not sure where your going with this other than making me so angry at this mother. Having kids when you can not afford them X 12.. Holy shit she is not fit to be a mother and social services should break her family up, tie her tubes and send her free loading ass to jail
George,
None of my prejudices were confirmed.
What's your opinion on how cps and the judge handled the situation ?
There's plenty of videos of Sen. Nancy Schaefer on youtube that reveal much more about how cps breaks up families.
I don't know what CPS did, except that it took away the kids twice, and returned them once. I do think that our society should not have given her the incentives to have so many kids in the first place.
C.P.S. is empowered by having this sort of video publicized.
Do you think that Morse would be opining on dental xrays, changing her orders, holding you in contempt, or pressing you to pay for a shrink to decide if your kid should surf or not, if there had been a video camera taping her and she knew it might be all over youtube an hour later ?
Do you think that Johnson and Perlmutter would have charged what they charged and done as they did if they were being taped doing so ?
Without taping, we're left with arguing that the prohibiting of it might indicate corruption is occurring.
Go to the bank, walk into 7/11 or down a street downtown and you're being videotaped, right ? About the only public place people AREN'T being videotaped is in the family law courts. Attack this.
It's a simple and direct solution that the opposition is unable to dismiss, or object to with any reasonable explanation.
How many people walking into Safeway, would object to signing a petition to install videocameras in the family law courts to protect children and families from corruption and abuse ?
Why focus on fighting what you personally, feel is better versus that which you can construct a base and favoring concensus ? It's what's achievable that matters.
If the public is influenced and like seeing this video of the court, then they can be swayed into supporting videoeotaping of ALL proceedings.
George,
They couldn't gain the support in calif. to legalize marijuana, so they did it by legalizing medical marijuana.
Family law court reform can't gain traction, but something like "judicial transparency" can, and it can serve to reform family law.
Yes, I agree with video-recording all court proceedings and all expert interviews. The psychologist and social worker testimony should be inadmissible if there was an opportunity to video-record, and they did not.
I think the same thing about criminal confessions. If the interrogation was not video-recorded, the confession should not be admissible.
If an employee at a bank or 7/11 store were to provide their employer 100 reasons why they object/refuse to be videotaped at the cash register or teller window, how many people would support the employer for denying the person employment over this one isssue ? 99% or 100% ?
Yet, WE THE PEOPLE, PAY AND EMPLOY JUDGES who adamantly refuse it.
We the people have the right to only employ judges who are willing to do whatever we pay them to do on tape, or deny them the job.
The judges don't object to constantly being videotaped all day at various locations, but they prohibit it when they are working for us and the public might see what our taxpayer dollars are paying for, and how "justice" is being handed out.
There is only ONE reasonable expalnation for the objection of recording them.
Do you think that by boiling down the fight to one simple more generic gripe like "judicial transperancy"" videotape courts, might garner the support to fill up petition pages for it in front of Safeway stores...
Sir, are you in favor of the courts practicing in secrecy ? or would you rather sign this petition to make it law that all court proceedings are videotaped to eliminated corruption and preserve justice in our country ? We're not asking for much, just a camera.
I would sign the petition. But I would go farther, and require all interviews to be videorecorded.
first to keep it really simple...
You would sign it. Now, of 100 people entering Safeway, were asked, "Would you please sign this petion here to "improve justice in america ?"
And if asked to elaborate before signing, they were then told, "currently, just some courts are using videotaping to makes the courts transparent to us citizens, and we"re asking that you sign this petition to make it law that ALL court proceedings are taped to protect the rights of all citizens in courts. "
What percentage would end up signing ?
There is one thing every American wants... better/more justice, right ?
Not signing it, suggests that you prefer the courts act with more scerecy, and you want less justice, ... there's no spin to this... there's no controversy, there's no debate..
Had a campaign to place videocameras on cop cars not had some success, I don't know if I'd feel as strongly about the prospect of it.
It's not exactly the same thing, but it's very close to being the same, don't you think ?
Cameras in the Courtroom and Online Access
Nevada courts make good use of technology with voice-activated cameras aimed at judges, witnesses, attorneys and litigants to videotape all family court proceedings. Copies of videotapes are readily available for a small price or at no charge if you provide your own videotape.
Post a Comment