On Jul 2, 4:57 pm, Greegor wrote:
Dan wrote

Among a host of other enormous mistakes that precipitated the removal,
you screwed Lisa's case from the start by having her father, a retired
policeman, arrested.

1. He's not a retired policeman. 6th grade education (like Jethro
Bodeen)

Excuse me, then it was his friend, a retired cop, who called the
authorities on you?

2. How could arrest precipitate removal when it took place AFTER
removal?

I didn't say the arrest precipitated the removal.

The authorities removed the little girl and then grandpa wacked you in
the face?

3. He was arrested for an ASSAULT on me and plead guilty.

What did he plead guilty to?

4. Did I make him commit the crime he admitted to, or the one he
should have been charged for?

What should he have been charged with?

Where were you when he wacked you in the face?

Were the authorities and the little girl still at the house?

5. When psych eval input pretended assault was my delusion, wasn't
arrest & guilty plea STRATEGIC for us?

The input according to you didn't say "assault" victim till a few days
ago.

What makes you think it was strategic in any way?

6. Keep in mind also that citizens can not press criminal charges. A
prosecutor did.

Which means what?

After all that she still could have gotten her daughter back... IN 2001!!!

By ignoring damning PERJURY?

No, by doing what was necessary and appropriate to get her daughter
back.

How do you prove them wrong while refusing to fight
outright caseworker PERJURY?

You prove everything else wrong first.

And who refused to fight the perjury?

Isn't that part of proving them wrong?

What is?

How can you prove them wrong without "rocking the boat"?

By not making it personal.

You think caseworkers LIKE being proven wrong?

I'm sure they don't enjoy it.

A number of the cases are downright insane.
One woman here... snip

You ask what I suggest families do to get their children back from CPS
ASAP and after I respond you go into stories of people who never had
decent advice on how to deal with the system.

I agree with you about the quality of most public defenders.

I wasn't referring to PDs.

I was referring to people like you who advise parents to get arrested
in Court.

To sit on their thumbs till CPS proves their case in Court.. and then
it's THEIR kids (NOT YOUR'S) stuck in foster care for at least six
months.

The mother in the story was completely in their hands and got shafted.

Who advised her to do what she did?

In fact they (like the Christines) probably had advice from morons
like yourself, Greg.

No, she had a public defender attorney in charge.
So did we, once we were allowed to have one, 21 days after physical
child removal.

Yeah, but I believe it only took you two weeks to decide to fight CPS
over every issue, big or small.

Is it any wonder the people who go to "Constitutionalists" websites
like the one Mr.Steele mentioned, rarely get their children back!

You meant that as a slur on citizens.

No, I meant just what I said.

Clearly you disregard the meaning of the Constitution.

Not at all.

I'm sure you didn't consider what is wrong with
your statement, some rather derogatory implications
about the modus operandi of the courts and system.

The issue I raise is the modus operandi of the website (and similar
websites) that Mr. Steele mentioned in his statement.

Do you think ANY Constitutionalists are rational?

In regard to what?

You paint ALL Constitutionalists as being like the
ones seeking to void money or the IRS, don't you Dan?

Mr. Steele painted the "Constitutionalists" based on what their advice
did to the Christine family.

Do you honestly mean to portray the Constitution
as dangerous for citizens to read or quote in court?

I didn't say that.

Parents quoting the Constitution really BOTHER you don't they?

No.

If not in court, then where?

???

Would you void the whole Constitution?

What for?

Made it an act of sedition to read it?

???