Cops: Fla. Woman Kept 9 Handcuffed At Home,5 Foster Children, 4 AdultsWere Malnourished And Handcuffed Together, Police Say...

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 08:38:37 -0700, Dragon's Girl
wrote:

On Jul 24, 9:37 am, "0:-" wrote:
On Jul 24, 3:33 am, Dragon's Girl wrote:



On Jul 23, 11:16 pm, Greegor wrote:

Hey Donald!
Is it the ABUSE or bad PR for the Child Protection INDUSTRY that ticks
you off?

On Jul 20, 10:31 pm, "0:]" wrote:

fx wrote:

..."I believe in psychic powers"....

... "We have no idea how these kids came into her custody. We have no
idea where these kids came from and no idea who they are," Vega said. ...

But they are declared 'foster children' as though placed by the state?

Please show the CPS connection, since this group is a CPS group, and you
placed a blame statement at the end of your post.

Thank a lot. We know you'll follow through.

0:]

Cops: Fla. Woman Kept 9 Handcuffed At Home
5 Foster Children, 4 Adults Were Malnourished And Handcuffed Together,
Police Say
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n3079793.shtml

CBS/AP) A woman has been charged with keeping four malnourished
teenagers and five adults, some mentally disabled, in her home and
handcuffed together, police said Thursday.

When Judith Leekin, 62, would leave her home she bound the teenagers,
ages 15 to 17, and adults together, police spokesman Deputy Robert Vega
said.

"They were not allowed to leave the home," Vega said.

Some of the children were found with marks on their wrists, as well as
scars and burns. Two of the teens had less than a fourth-grade
education, while another is illiterate, authorities said.

"We have no idea how these kids came into her custody. We have no idea
where these kids came from and no idea who they are," Vega said.

It also was not clear how long they had been with Leekin. She was
charged Wednesday with five counts of aggravated child abuse, one count
of tampering with a witness and one count of possession of a fictitious
driver's license/identification, authorities said. She was being held on
a total bond of $435,000.

None of the children ever attended school or visited a doctor while in
Leekin's care, Vega said.

The investigation began when police were called to a supermarket July 4
because Leekin had apparently left an 18-year-old girl there, Vega said.
The girl told police Leekin was her adoptive mother and that she had
been living with her since she was 5, Vega said.

Leekin told investigators the girl had left a year ago, denied the abuse
allegations and said she lived in the home with her son, a court record
said.

During a search of her home, authorities found handcuffs, zip-ties and a
surveillance system. A fictitious birth certificate also was found for
one teen.

"We found more than one of the people under her care suffering from
malnutrition," Port St. Lucie Police Captain Scott Bartal told the
Scripps Treasure Coast Newspapers at a press conference Thursday. "We
were able to verify that they were restrained using handcuffs and
plastic ties."

Detectives were trying to determine the real identities of the nine
people found in the home. They were placed in the care of the Department
of Children & Families, Vega said.

"We are very saddened by the situation," Lorrene Egan, district 15
operations manager for DCF told The Palm Beach Post.

Leekin had several identities and Social Security numbers, and
authorities were trying to verify her identity, Vega said.

Authorities investigated Leekin in 1999, but the case was closed when
she left the area, police said.

Leekin's Miami attorney, Mario Garcia Jr., told The Post it was
premature to comment on the case.

"We are doing our own investigation to determine what is and is not
true," he said. "We don't have any comment because we don't have any
information at this point."

"We found more than one of the people under her care suffering from
malnutrition," Port St. Lucie Police Captain Scott Bartal told the Port
St. Lucie News at a press conference Thursday. "We were able to verify
that they were restrained using handcuffs and plastic ties."

CURRENTLY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES VIOLATES MORE CIVIL RIGHTS ON A
DAILY BASIS THEN ALL OTHER AGENCIES COMBINED INCLUDING THE NSA / CIA
WIRETAPPING PROGRAM....

CPS Does not protect children...
It is sickening how many children are subject to abuse, neglect and even
killed at the hands of Child Protective Services.

every parent should read this .pdf from
connecticut dcf watch...

http://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com/8x11.pdf

http://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com

Number of Cases per 100,000 children in the US
These numbers come from The National Center on
Child Abuse and Neglect in Washington. (NCCAN)
Recent numbers have increased significantly for CPS

*Perpetrators of Maltreatment*

Physical Abuse CPS 160, Parents 59
Sexual Abuse CPS 112, Parents 13
Neglect CPS 410, Parents 241
Medical Neglect CPS 14 Parents 12
Fatalities CPS 6.4, Parents 1.5

CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, HAPPILY DESTROYING HUNDREDS OF INNOCENT
FAMILIES YEARLY NATIONWIDE AND COMING TO YOU'RE HOME SOON...

BE SURE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOUR CANDIDATES STANDS ON THE ISSUE OF
REFORMING OR ABOLISHING CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES ("MAKE YOUR CANDIDATES
TAKE A STAND ON THIS ISSUE.") THEN REMEMBER TO VOTE ACCORDINGLY IF THEY
ARE "FAMILY UNFRIENDLY" IN THE NEXT ELECTION...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

A foster child is not necessarily a child who is placed in a home by
social service organizations.
Being called a foster child does not indicate any social service
involvement.
If you read the whole story you will see that no one knows where these
kids came from, the woman had multiple identities, and the children
had not attended school.
I would bet she kidnapped them when they were young and the kids just
THINK they were adopted.- Hide quoted text -

It could be more sinister. They could be the very thing that get's
posted her about children that are being used in some way. Doubtless
there has to be occurances, given how evil humans can be at times.

And it could become even more gruesome...organ harvesting. It has gone
on in parts of the world, and people coming here, or even our own more
corrupt citizens could be into it.

'Donors' aren't recycled.

But of course, it has to be a CPS scheme, right Denn...oh, 'scuse,
Greegor?

Kane

Sure, it could be something more sinister, but at the rate that
children disappear without a trace, and end up with some nut that
wants to be a mother but can't conceive, I'd say that the best bet is
that she just stole them from somewhere and has been on the run all
these years trying to escape scrutiny that would eventually lead to
the story being revealed.

I wonder what the deal is with the adults that were found? It would
be interesting to find that they were under this woman's care since
they were children as well.

Crazy people in this world.

Well, and I'd rather this were true, than the alternative I'm thinking
of, maybe it was CPS or DHS, and this lady has been skipping 'round
the country collecting kids and adults for foster care and
collecting...though the out of state addy might be a problem. Though
she could use a forwarding service..oh ****..wait, krp, greg, dennis,
fs, don't you EVEN think of using that info for you own moneymakin'
scheme. 0;]

And if it is DHS then I'm reduced to having to say, once again, HANG
EM ALL, everyone involved an proved a party to this.

But shucks, never did say CPS was perfect, despite lies here to the
contrary.

0:]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:27:33 -0700, Greegor
wrote:

On Jul 24, 9:34 am, "0:-" wrote:
On Jul 23, 11:16 pm, Greegor wrote:

Hey Donald!
Is it the ABUSE or bad PR for the Child Protection INDUSTRY that ticks
you off?

Hey Dennis, why do you ask?

Now you think I'm Dennis??

Because you two are joined at the hip, as evidenced by your desire to
keep Dan from helping folks fight CPS?

Is it the ABUSE or the bad PR for the CPS INDUSTRY that ticks you off

I'll answer for Donald, since he's not here today.

And it's my post you responded to.

It the abuse and the bad PR for an agency that is charge with doing a
job they are unresourced to do properly.

And I'm not ticked off.

Just laughing at how insipid your attacks are. And how obvious.

You know after all these years, that your bull****, "fight cps at
every turn until you force them into submission" is not only a total
crock of ****, but proven again and again a way for parents to lose
their children, if not permanently in some case for years and years
while they destroy their fortunes for many years to come fighting
through the courts and appeals.

But YOU, little ****ant, are on record here and in parent's rights
support groups, as having told someone (who may speak up from time to
time RRR R R about you you crummy little scum) to get the law changed
by showing up in court with evidence of having broken it.

And she had just GOTTEN HER CHILDREN AWAY FROM CPS.

You are on record as having advised people to force the state to take
them to trial so they could invoke their "civil rights," the ones
you've claimed they have but have failed repeatedly and conclusively
are NOT their rights at all as are usually presented in MOST CASES
THAT SHOW UP HERE.

YOu are a dangerous little twit and if I'm "ticked off," it's that
you, never a parent, always a boyfriend, who for six years has stood
in the way of Lisa getting her daughter back for the sole motive of
being able to sue the state, are willing to come here and try to lab
rat people into LISA's and her daughter's shoes. Lost to each other
all this time.

Your a prick, little man, and you may, one day, manage to tick me off
badly enough.

Until then enjoy yourself.

0:]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:07:53 -0700, Greegor
wrote:


Cops: Fla. Woman Kept 9 Handcuffed At Home
5 Foster Children, 4 Adults Were Malnourished And Handcuffed Together,
Police Say
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n3079793.shtml

CBS/AP) A woman has been charged with keeping four malnourished
teenagers and five adults, some mentally disabled, in her home and
handcuffed together, police said Thursday.

When Judith Leekin, 62, would leave her home she bound the teenagers,
ages 15 to 17, and adults together, police spokesman Deputy Robert Vega
said.

"They were not allowed to leave the home," Vega said.

Some of the children were found with marks on their wrists, as well as
scars and burns. Two of the teens had less than a fourth-grade
education, while another is illiterate, authorities said.

"We have no idea how these kids came into her custody. We have no idea
where these kids came from and no idea who they are," Vega said.

It also was not clear how long they had been with Leekin. She was
charged Wednesday with five counts of aggravated child abuse, one count
of tampering with a witness and one count of possession of a fictitious
driver's license/identification, authorities said. She was being held on
a total bond of $435,000.

None of the children ever attended school or visited a doctor while in
Leekin's care, Vega said.

The investigation began when police were called to a supermarket July 4
because Leekin had apparently left an 18-year-old girl there, Vega said.
The girl told police Leekin was her adoptive mother and that she had
been living with her since she was 5, Vega said.

Leekin told investigators the girl had left a year ago, denied the abuse
allegations and said she lived in the home with her son, a court record
said.

During a search of her home, authorities found handcuffs, zip-ties and a
surveillance system. A fictitious birth certificate also was found for
one teen.

"We found more than one of the people under her care suffering from
malnutrition," Port St. Lucie Police Captain Scott Bartal told the
Scripps Treasure Coast Newspapers at a press conference Thursday. "We
were able to verify that they were restrained using handcuffs and
plastic ties."

Detectives were trying to determine the real identities of the nine
people found in the home. They were placed in the care of the Department
of Children & Families, Vega said.

"We are very saddened by the situation," Lorrene Egan, district 15
operations manager for DCF told The Palm Beach Post.

Leekin had several identities and Social Security numbers, and
authorities were trying to verify her identity, Vega said.

Authorities investigated Leekin in 1999, but the case was closed when
she left the area, police said.

Leekin's Miami attorney, Mario Garcia Jr., told The Post it was
premature to comment on the case.

"We are doing our own investigation to determine what is and is not
true," he said. "We don't have any comment because we don't have any
information at this point."

"We found more than one of the people under her care suffering from
malnutrition," Port St. Lucie Police Captain Scott Bartal told the Port
St. Lucie News at a press conference Thursday. "We were able to verify
that they were restrained using handcuffs and plastic ties."


Dragonsgirl Betty wrote
Sure, it could be something more sinister, but at the rate that
children disappear without a trace, and end up with some nut that
wants to be a mother but can't conceive,

That is a concept bears much more discussion in
relation to the entire Child Protection INDUSTRY.

- Motivation for reports
- Motivation for Foster/Adopters
- Rationalization for removing kids to ""better"" homes

I'd say that the best bet is
that she just stole them from somewhere and has been on the run all
these years trying to escape scrutiny that would eventually lead to
the story being revealed.

I wonder what the deal is with the adults that were found?

Some mentally disabled, the article said.

But it didn't say if they were mentally disabled BY the
situation or before they came into it.
It also didn't say whether they had a disabled legal status before
now.

The other adults were probably mentally and
educationally stunted so badly they were like cult victims.

It would be interesting to find that they were under this
woman's care since they were children as well.

Crazy people in this world.

It appears this was most likely a scam run on human services.

There are those here that are just sure it couldn't have been done to
them.

Fact is a good scam artist LOOKS for people that are supposed to be
immune to them. More likely to trust the system to catch them.

Bureaucracy is exactly what they look for.

And you ****ants, greg et al, pretend that CPS is remiss in some way
because they didn't catch them.

YOU would, if YOU were in charge, still be paying this women AFTER she
was caught you are so stupid.

But what they hay, it's not your money, is it?

Which is more unethical. Setting up a mother and daughter to lose each
other for over six years, so one can sue, or getting kids from CPS
using many identities that appear rock solid to collect support money?

As a tax payer, I'd prefer to hang both from the bars, rather than
waste money putting them inside.

Have you shared all your sentiments here with the state of Iowa, Greg?

Arguments about intent go a long way to defeating bull**** in court.

YOu got the guts to stand behind your accusations voiced here IN
COURT?

I'll be watching for the court transcript.

Or I'll be anticipating it.

Haven't made up my mind. Goes to the safety of Don and his family.

Now ask me if that's a threat, and watch how fast you get an answer.
....

BINGO...here's my answer. You bet your sweet Dennis ass.

0:]
..

Kane wrote
It appears this was most likely a scam run on human services.

There are those here that are just sure it couldn't have been done to
them.

Fact is a good scam artist LOOKS for people that are supposed to be
immune to them. More likely to trust the system to catch them.

Bureaucracy is exactly what they look for.

And you ****ants, greg et al, pretend that CPS is remiss in some way
because they didn't catch them.

YOU would, if YOU were in charge, still be paying this women AFTER she
was caught you are so stupid.

But what they hay, it's not your money, is it?
off topic snipped
or getting kids from CPS
using many identities that appear rock solid to collect support money?

In other words there are other news stories.
The other shoe dropped.

Is that what you're saying Kane?
The CPS agencies provided these ""kids"" is that right?

Have you got a news story link on that?

off topic ego trip bluster and distraction snipped

On Jul 24, 5:57 pm, "0:-]" wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:27:33 -0700, Greegor
wrote:

On Jul 24, 9:34 am, "0:-" wrote:
On Jul 23, 11:16 pm, Greegor wrote:

Hey Donald!
Is it the ABUSE or bad PR for the Child Protection INDUSTRY that ticks
you off?

Hey Dennis, why do you ask?

Now you think I'm Dennis??

Because you two are joined at the hip,
as evidenced by your desire to
keep Dan from helping folks fight CPS?

I didn't get Dan kicked out of FightCPS.
Neither did Dennis.

Dan got himself kicked out of various
Family Rights groups, including one
long before I ever heard of Dan Sullivan
or the problems with CPS.

Is it the ABUSE or the bad PR for the CPS INDUSTRY that ticks you off

I'll answer for Donald, since he's not here today.

You are Donald L. Fisher of Oregon.

And it's my post you responded to.

It the abuse and the bad PR for an agency that is charge with doing a
job they are unresourced to do properly.

And I'm not ticked off.

Make up your mind! You also said you were! Further down...

Just laughing at how insipid your attacks are. And how obvious.

You are Donald L. Fisher, a former Oregon employee and contractor.
How ""obvious"" is that?

You know after all these years, that your bull****, "fight cps at
every turn until you force them into submission" is not only a total
crock of ****, but proven again and again a way for parents to lose
their children, if not permanently in some case for years and years
while they destroy their fortunes for many years to come fighting
through the courts and appeals.

As opposed to preaching submission to what they want!
Who needs advice on how to submit to their whims?

But YOU, little ****ant, are on record here and in parent's rights
support groups, as having told someone (who may speak up from time to
time RRR R R about you you crummy little scum) to get the law changed
by showing up in court with evidence of having broken it.

A law against recording interactions with government agents?
Which she had ALREADY broken according to her own story.
Do you want parents so terrorized they blindly submit?
Is that what you want Kane?

And she had just GOTTEN HER CHILDREN AWAY FROM CPS.

She also testified in front of legislators on voting day!

You are on record as having advised people to force the state to take
them to trial so they could invoke their "civil rights," the ones
you've claimed they have but have failed repeatedly and conclusively
are NOT their rights at all as are usually presented in MOST CASES
THAT SHOW UP HERE.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain"

http://www.netstate.com/states/mottoes/ia_motto.htm
Iowa State Motto
Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain
Adoption:1847

State mottoes may be said to reflect the character and beliefs of the
citizens of the state, or more accurately, the citizens of the state
when they were adopted. State mottoes can help us gain insight into
the history of a state. [What is a motto? ]

Adoption of the Iowa State Motto

Great Seal of the State of Iowa
Like many state mottoes, the Iowa motto was adopted as an element of
its state seal. Iowa officially entered the Union on December 28,
1846. During the new state's First General Assembly, in 1847,
legislation was passed to designate an official state seal to
authenticate official state papers. The motto, Our Liberties We Prize
and Our Rights We Will Maintain, was determined by a three-member
committee of the Iowa Senate. They suggested the motto and its
placement on the official state seal.

The Great Seal of Iowa and, with it, the state motto, Our Liberties We
Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain was adopted by the First General
Assembly on February 25, 1847.

About the Iowa State Motto
It's considered that this motto is at least partially in response to
the difficulties that Iowa ran into establishing statehood. The motto
makes the clear statement that the liberties of the Iowa citizenry are
very important and that they are willing to defend them.

Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain is also
displayed on Iowa's flag.

YOu are a dangerous little twit and if I'm "ticked off," it's that
you, never a parent, always a boyfriend, who for six years has stood
in the way of Lisa getting her daughter back for the sole motive of
being able to sue the state, are willing to come here and try to lab
rat people into LISA's and her daughter's shoes. Lost to each other
all this time.

The state has had many opportunities to rectify their egregious wrong.
Instead several workers have committed NEW perjury. My favorite
is the caseworker who UNDER OATH testified about an e-mail
that threatens to roll her up in a rug (as in dead body) if she shows
up at my door. Miraculously this e-mail was not mentioned in
any of the regular agency reports, ever. It was also not produced.

Your a prick, little man, and you may, one day, manage to tick me off
badly enough.

You're just flatulent again.

Until then enjoy yourself.

Thanks Donald!

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:36:13 -0700, Greegor
wrote:

Kane wrote
It appears this was most likely a scam run on human services.

There are those here that are just sure it couldn't have been done to
them.

Fact is a good scam artist LOOKS for people that are supposed to be
immune to them. More likely to trust the system to catch them.

Bureaucracy is exactly what they look for.

And you ****ants, greg et al, pretend that CPS is remiss in some way
because they didn't catch them.

YOU would, if YOU were in charge, still be paying this women AFTER she
was caught you are so stupid.

But what they hay, it's not your money, is it?
off topic snipped

Look at the coward at work. R R R R R RR R . no shame at all, have
you Greg.

or getting kids from CPS
using many identities that appear rock solid to collect support money?

In other words there are other news stories.
The other shoe dropped.

I believe I said that.

Is that what you're saying Kane?


Well if I just read the post I just wrote, yes, I'd have to say I just
said that. I presume you read that post where I said that so redunancy
in questioning rules here, right?

The CPS agencies provided these ""kids"" is that right?

I didn't say that. I said it was likely her source. On the other hand,
she may have gotten them almost anywhere. She originate out of country
as some of the kids did. They could have traveled in with her and
still be used as welfare claims. It would be very cruel to deny the
children the support, and almost impossible, what with her moving
about so freely, to discover how she actually used the money.

I can think of many con scenarios, having studied them in prison
populations, and here as well.

One would to be unavailable until a new worker came on the job and
with that kind of money hire an actor or two. Seriously...or have
relatives stand in for the kids with some pocket money for supporting
the facade.

I've heard that CPS doesn't do a fingerprint check on kids every time
workers change.

She had a video system to see who was at the door. She didn't have to
open until she had the stage set to cover her ass.

And welfare fraud units were cut to the bone about ten years ago,
right along with caseworkers. You know, when they dumped so many
people off the ADC and welfare roles.

She might never have been caught up with.

I was MUCH relieved at how she was caught. At least she had some shred
of humanity and when the 18 year old wasn't paying off, she didn't
have her dispatched and dumped somewhere.

The girl was practically unidentifiable. At least her body would have
been. The records obviously were badly flumoxed.

I can't wait for your creative manipulation of the facts and you smart
little innuendo by silly remarks to make this CPS fault.

If you aren't perfect it's all your fault, right?

Have you got a news story link on that?

Tons of them. Seven at last count.

You know how to find news articles surely? Her name is right there.

First you place the cursor at the first letter of the string you want
(you know what 'string' means, right) and you depress the left key on
your mouse, then you drag the cursor to the right ... wait, aren't YOU
the computer expert here?

Help Doan, he's going to need it.


off topic ego trip bluster and distraction snipped

Gee what courage you have, Greg.

0:]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:04:57 -0700, Greegor
wrote:

On Jul 24, 5:57 pm, "0:-]" wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:27:33 -0700, Greegor
wrote:

On Jul 24, 9:34 am, "0:-" wrote:
On Jul 23, 11:16 pm, Greegor wrote:

Hey Donald!
Is it the ABUSE or bad PR for the Child Protection INDUSTRY that ticks
you off?

Hey Dennis, why do you ask?

Now you think I'm Dennis??

Because you two are joined at the hip,
as evidenced by your desire to
keep Dan from helping folks fight CPS?

I didn't get Dan kicked out of FightCPS.
Neither did Dennis.

Of course not. You complained, using the First Amendment but they just
wouldn't listen to you and your desire to keep Dan there, right?

Dan got himself kicked out of various
Family Rights groups,

No he didn't. He spoke up and defended against proven family breakers,
such as "TPR has a good side," "force the state to take you to trial
so you an invoke your Constitutional rights," and "If you don't like
the recording limits laws as I do not, do as I have NOT done, and take
incriminating evidence into the court room and challenge the law with
it putting your money, your freedom, and especially your children on
the line in MY cause."

including one
long before I ever heard of Dan Sullivan
or the problems with CPS.

Well, I'm pleased to hear it, Greg. It tells me that Dan hasn't been
putting on a goodie goodie act to impress anybody and he has his
personal convictions about what works and doesn't, and afer proving
his over and over again, will NOT back down from antiGovernment nutsos
such as you that go to stalk your prey, families, at such places.

"TPR has a good side" INDEED. You little sneaky sick creep. Phony.
FRAUD.

Is it the ABUSE or the bad PR for the CPS INDUSTRY that ticks you off

I'll answer for Donald, since he's not here today.

You are Donald L. Fisher of Oregon.

That's all you have got left in your arguments?

Can't defend what you and other family devouring ****ants have done?

Let's see your "TPR has a good side" argument in defense of it.

How about 'get yourself arrested just after getting your children back
from CPS.'

Or, "force the state, in the earliest stages of the game, to take you
to trial...after all I KNOW your civil rights have been violated...and
you can disregard any definitions of that but mine....I'm the one
giving legal advice and telling you you have the best odds my way,
even if I do NOT know the details of your case."

That about right, Greg? Want to correct me and quote, precisely what
you did say?

And show where it differs from my paraphrase?

And it's my post you responded to.

It the abuse and the bad PR for an agency that is charge with doing a
job they are unresourced to do properly.

And I'm not ticked off.

Make up your mind! You also said you were! Further down...

Oh, you mean that if I say I'm not ticked off, I must not be if I am
not under different circumstances.

What a great flash of logic there, boy.

I think I understand better how you can, without conscience, tell
people to risk their children with your bull**** nonsense advice.

It's just that crasy schoolboy logic, right? Fun stuff for you? Yuk
yuk yuk. You one of the Tappitt Brothers now? Click, or Clack?

Just laughing at how insipid your attacks are. And how obvious.

You are Donald L. Fisher, a former Oregon employee and contractor.
How ""obvious"" is that?

Quite, and no proof, and the sure ignorance that if you proved I was
you'd create an instant folks hero out of Don.

You are about as effective as you are trying to sell you, "force them
to take you to trial," bs. Anybody bought that yet from you? I've seen
a few laughs over it.

**** you people are stupid. The risks you'll take for little flights
of ego and the chance you can cut families out of the herd
unencumbered, to slaughter them for CPS.

You amaze me, and I've worked with some very hard cases, ****heel.

You know after all these years, that your bull****, "fight cps at
every turn until you force them into submission" is not only a total
crock of ****, but proven again and again a way for parents to lose
their children, if not permanently in some case for years and years
while they destroy their fortunes for many years to come fighting
through the courts and appeals.

As opposed to preaching submission to what they want!

Why yes, now that you mention it. If the agency has your ass cold, and
you are guilty, would you recommend going for a trial to use the
Constitution, for the next four years or so, while your children
languish in foster care?

Or doing the service plan with the kids at home?

Ever see either Dan or myself say to "submit" if you are innocent?
Submit to what, Greg?

I've seen Dan ask you this question and you still haven't answer...and
it's years old now.

He has said, and I paraphrase, if there's a demand in the service plan
and it doesn't pertain, why would you sign it?

People that first come here to ascps and do NOT have their children
ALREADY HAVE submitted, which you proceed to rub their noses in rather
than speak supportively to them...except to invite them to the clown
car you and your asshole buddies ride to nowhere, and noknowwhere.

You show me a post where someone has come here, with their children at
home, asked for advice and where we have said, "force them to take you
to trial."

You seem to have that attitude no matter at what stage they are.

And it's not YOUR ass on the line.

YOU haven't fought and won, Greg. NEVER.

You have lost, for Lisa and her daughter. Six long years of her
childhood now...most of it, really. It's hard to call a middle teen a
child in a mother's eyes.

Come on, let Lisa come and beat up on me. I want her to read what you
post here. And know about it.

Who needs advice on how to submit to their whims?

No one.

But people do need advice on how to use the service plan to their own
advantage against CPS.

Nothing being at the shelter hearing where the worker, as you claim,
is lying and saying, "well MS and MR Jones seem somewhat resistent to
the service plan your honor," and you reply with, "Oh we started
parenting classes two weeks ago, and have our own psych eval from a
qualified psychologist in this state."

Now is there, Greg?

Some folks would very much benefit by that strategy, others by
different ones.

You think you know how to create read faces, little kiddie?

You aren't even in our league, and I'm not telling you a tenth of the
proven tactics that can do it all without a lot of threatening and
high risk of ****ing a judge off and canning your ass, as you
suggested and do so at every opportunity.

Your advise, 'don't sign they'll use it against you.'

Yeah, they won't use not signing against you, no sir eeeeeee.

If they got yah, they got yah little man, just like they had Lisa for
having a thug in her home with a vulnerable little child he seemed to
have a huge urge to do shower thingies with.

Even use it to punish her, with 'aversive" therapy.

But of course that's your civil right and you said so and they gave
the child back and you're just kidding us about it being six years
now, right?

But YOU, little ****ant, are on record here and in parent's rights
support groups, as having told someone (who may speak up from time to
time RRR R R about you you crummy little scum) to get the law changed
by showing up in court with evidence of having broken it.

A law against recording interactions with government agents?

Yep. What possible business is it to someone just weeks out of
recovering her children from CPS to appear in ANOTHER court case, and
do a challenge of the law by producing evidence she just violated it?

Which she had ALREADY broken according to her own story.

So ****ing WHAT YOU IDIOT. Were you telling her she HAD TO GO FIGHT IT
so she wouldn't be charged?

No, you were all, it's a bad law, you should challenge it, now weren't
you Greg?

Do you want parents so terrorized they blindly submit?

To what, NOT WALKING INTO COURT ANNOUNCING THEY BROKE A LAW THEY AND
YOU ESPECIALLY DIDN'T LIKE?

Yeah, Greg, I want them to SUBMIT to keeping their ass OUT of a court
room and admitting to a crime. So sue me.

Is that what you want Kane?

So, because there is a law they don't like this, just after getting
their child back is a perfect time TO PROVE THEY WILL NOT SUBMIT TO A
LAW UNRELATED TO THEIR OWN CASE?

Tell me, would you have suggested that woman's case who it was, do the
challenge with evidence while the court was sitting on whether or not
to take HER children?

Gee you sure love and support families and their rights, right?

What next, you want her to drop her drawers and **** on the judged
desk to prove she can't be intimidated?

And she had just GOTTEN HER CHILDREN AWAY FROM CPS.

She also testified in front of legislators on voting day!

You can sit there and dodge like that when you are confronted with YOU
having invited and advised someone else that may have not liked a law,
to go challenge it in court with positive concrete evidence of having
broken it?

Man you ARE practicing law without a license, and about the worst
there is.

She hadn't even been CHARGED with a privacy violation offense. Why
would she bring it up unless she was a nut and wanted to risk her
kids?

You aren't going to answer.

You've shut down Mr. "She also testified in front of legislators on
voting day!" and just don't wish to talk or think about what a
thoroughgoing thug you are.

Playing at being a Parent's Rights Advocate. ****, you stink you foul
piece of garbage.

You are on record as having advised people to force the state to take
them to trial so they could invoke their "civil rights," the ones
you've claimed they have but have failed repeatedly and conclusively
are NOT their rights at all as are usually presented in MOST CASES
THAT SHOW UP HERE.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain"

And Greg is here to get you to put the noose around you and your
children's neck and jump for him.

He's Damion and holy in his own special way.

Greg, did YOU admit to a crime in court when you went?

If not why not? There are plenty you don't like, and a lot directly
related to your case.

YOu could have at least done the right thing, so later when you did
the "tape recording trick" you had some history to cite.

YOU could have ****ed on the judges desk at least, right? Show your
great courage in defying bad law, those ol' non Constitutional civil
court law thingies.

You didn't even defy a civil law, let alone a criminal one such as you
advised someone else to do.

I hope you are proud of yourself and can remain blind to what you are.
If you actually came out of that stupor and got straight with yourself
I don't think you could resist cutting your throat when you realized
what you've tried to get others to do, and managed to get Lisa to do.

http://www.netstate.com/states/mottoes/ia_motto.htm
Iowa State Motto
Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain
Adoption:1847

State mottoes may be said to reflect the character and beliefs of the
citizens of the state, or more accurately, the citizens of the state
when they were adopted. State mottoes can help us gain insight into
the history of a state. [What is a motto? ]

Gee that's so nice. I'll give that message to your "TPR's have a good
side," victim while she languishes in jail, and prepares for a final
good bye to her children.

Would you go to jail for for defending your state motto? If not then
how can you possibly hold your head up as a patriot and use the motto
for defense of your claim that we must break laws to change them?

I once stood, on a quite Sunday, in the Quad at my alma mater,
chatting up a lovely girl, who happended to be jewish, though I was
unaware of it at the time. How I missed that Star of David little
medallion..well, she was well built, as they say, and I was probably
distracted.

Alone came a nice neat appearing young man with a book under his arm,
and I thought to myself, well there goes the mood, eh?

He approached, and after the usual launching into the kind of canned
tripe you have below, in it's style and your use of it to numb your
mind so you can continue doing something other than think, he finally
noticed and pointed out her star. 'Christ killer' were the next words
he spoke and then I did, from very very close to his nose.

And I very calmly asked how a God he worshiped could allow Vietnam,
and bigotry, and poverty, and children dying in agony.

And was he prepared to ask God personally for an answer, because he
might be meeting him sooner than expected.

He screeched like you do, squeaky little sputters as he turned and
ran, screaming back at us over his shoulder, "spawn of the devil,
SPAWN OF THE DEVIL, DEMON DEMON."

You been indoctrinated son, and you are showing us just how far gone
you are with drivel such as this used to hide from the hard questions,
like how do you justify using others to do the work YOU have refused
to do yourself.

Where do YOU get off asking others to risk losing their OWN children
when you have not lost yours....you weren't her father. You were her
abuser.

I expect much more screeching from you now, but not a coherent word in
defense of your willingness to ask others to take these kinds of
risks, when they do not have to.

You want to tell someone already facing TPR to kick out the jams,
well, you just might be right. I think they should study up on the
constitution and plan to use it NOW.

But if they just lost their children? FORCE THE STATE TO TPR THEM.

You are cracked. Badly.

Now stop your screaming that I'm the devil incarnate and justify your
abuse of parents that come here, and your coercion in trying to get
them to go to trial and to break the law and announce it in court, and
you ****ing idiocy, "TPR can have a good side."

YOU never faced one or the prospect of one.

:}


Adoption of the Iowa State Motto

Great Seal of the State of Iowa
Like many state mottoes, the Iowa motto was adopted as an element of
its state seal. Iowa officially entered the Union on December 28,
1846. During the new state's First General Assembly, in 1847,
legislation was passed to designate an official state seal to
authenticate official state papers. The motto, Our Liberties We Prize
and Our Rights We Will Maintain, was determined by a three-member
committee of the Iowa Senate. They suggested the motto and its
placement on the official state seal.

The Great Seal of Iowa and, with it, the state motto, Our Liberties We
Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain was adopted by the First General
Assembly on February 25, 1847.

About the Iowa State Motto
It's considered that this motto is at least partially in response to
the difficulties that Iowa ran into establishing statehood. The motto
makes the clear statement that the liberties of the Iowa citizenry are
very important and that they are willing to defend them.

Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain is also
displayed on Iowa's flag.

YOu are a dangerous little twit and if I'm "ticked off," it's that
you, never a parent, always a boyfriend, who for six years has stood
in the way of Lisa getting her daughter back for the sole motive of
being able to sue the state, are willing to come here and try to lab
rat people into LISA's and her daughter's shoes. Lost to each other
all this time.

The state has had many opportunities to rectify their egregious wrong.
Instead several workers have committed NEW perjury. My favorite
is the caseworker who UNDER OATH testified about an e-mail
that threatens to roll her up in a rug (as in dead body) if she shows
up at my door. Miraculously this e-mail was not mentioned in
any of the regular agency reports, ever. It was also not produced.

Your a prick, little man, and you may, one day, manage to tick me off
badly enough.

You're just flatulent again.

Until then enjoy yourself.

Thanks Donald!

snipped

Dragonsgirl Betty wrote

Sure, it could be something more sinister, but at the rate that
children disappear without a trace, and end up with some nut that
wants to be a mother but can't conceive,

That is a concept bears much more discussion in
relation to the entire Child Protection INDUSTRY.

Lets pretend for a second that this is the scenario for sure.
I just have to ask, exactly what does a woman who kidnaps a bunch of
kids have to do with DFS?
People are crazy like that.
But DFS can't do a thing about that.


- Motivation for reports
- Motivation for Foster/Adopters
- Rationalization for removing kids to ""better"" homes

I'd say that the best bet is
that she just stole them from somewhere and has been on the run all
these years trying to escape scrutiny that would eventually lead to
the story being revealed.

I wonder what the deal is with the adults that were found?

Some mentally disabled, the article said.

But it didn't say if they were mentally disabled BY the
situation or before they came into it.
It also didn't say whether they had a disabled legal status before
now.

The other adults were probably mentally and
educationally stunted so badly they were like cult victims.

It would be interesting to find that they were under this
woman's care since they were children as well.

Crazy people in this world.

"Dragon's Girl" wrote in message
oups.com...
snipped

Dragonsgirl Betty wrote

Sure, it could be something more sinister, but at the rate that
children disappear without a trace, and end up with some nut that
wants to be a mother but can't conceive,

That is a concept bears much more discussion in
relation to the entire Child Protection INDUSTRY.

Lets pretend for a second that this is the scenario for sure.
I just have to ask, exactly what does a woman who kidnaps a bunch of
kids have to do with DFS?
People are crazy like that.
But DFS can't do a thing about that.

True.

Why is this in the foster NG?

The dads rights NG?

The spanking NG?

There needs to be a nut job NG.

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:04:17 -0400, "Dan Sullivan"
wrote:


"Dragon's Girl" wrote in message
roups.com...
snipped

Dragonsgirl Betty wrote

Sure, it could be something more sinister, but at the rate that
children disappear without a trace, and end up with some nut that
wants to be a mother but can't conceive,

That is a concept bears much more discussion in
relation to the entire Child Protection INDUSTRY.

Lets pretend for a second that this is the scenario for sure.
I just have to ask, exactly what does a woman who kidnaps a bunch of
kids have to do with DFS?
People are crazy like that.
But DFS can't do a thing about that.

True.

Why is this in the foster NG?

The dads rights NG?

The spanking NG?

There needs to be a nut job NG.

Well, one start a group of their own on Usenet.

But I don't think may people would be attracted to a
alt.dennisgregkrp.nutso newsgroup, do you?