One Judge with the cahones to DO THE RIGHT THING!

Could this be the end of secrecy in ‘child protection’?

Sir James Munby, an unusually humane and intelligent judge, is bent on rolling back the blanket of secrecy that has concealed many horror stories from public view

Sir James Munby says orders to remove children from their parents ‘are among the most drastic any judge in any jurisdiction is empowered to make’

Sir James Munby says orders to remove children from their parents ‘are among the most drastic any judge in any jurisdiction is empowered to make. By Christopher Booker 6:15PM BST 07 Sep 2013

To the ever-growing number of us who have been trying to expose the corruption of our state “child-protection” system as one of the most shocking scandals in Britain today, there is no question that a judgment published last week by Sir James Munby, now the most senior judge in our family courts, is a very significant legal landmark. For several years I have been explaining here how this system could not have gone so horrifyingly off the rails, with thousands of children being removed from their families for no good reason, if it had not been able to hide its workings from public view behind such a wall of secrecy, going way beyond what our lawmakers in Parliament intended.

In the name of concealing the identity of the children, which all statute law is concerned to protect, not only has this been widened out into a ban on reporting anything that goes on in our family courts (along with a similar ban on aggrieved parents saying anything to anyone about what is happening to them), but it has also been made a punishable offence to reveal the names of judges, local authorities, social workers or anyone involved in a case. I am even not allowed to indicate, however vaguely, in which part of the country a case is taking place. All this is supposedly in the cause just of protecting the identity of a child.

It is the groundswell of anger building up over how this secrecy prevents either parents or journalists from revealing what too often appear to be terrible travesties of justice that Sir James Munby, the recently appointed President of the Family Division, has decided to face head on, by issuing his carefully considered judgment in the case of “Baby J”. The immediate issue was that the father of four children removed by Staffordshire county council had infuriated the social workers by going wild with rage on Facebook, publishing not only the names and pictures of his children, but also those of social workers – along with a volley of abuse at the people he saw as having destroyed his family.

Before ruling on an application from the council for a complete ban on all this, Munby devoted most of his 26-page judgment to the more general question of whether the secrecy imposed on such cases has gone too far. Since the abolition of the death penalty, he says, the kind of orders a judge has to make on whether children should be removed from their parents “are among the most drastic any judge in any jurisdiction is empowered to make”. When a young mother is forced to lose her child, she and the child may have to live with the consequences of that decision for, respectively, 70 or 90 years.

In light of this, says Munby, “public debate and the jealous vigilance of an informed press have an important role to play in exposing past miscarriages of justice and in preventing future miscarriages”. He emphasises that if confidence in the system is to be “maintained or, if eroded, restored”, it is vital that its workings should be as open to public view as possible. The answer to criticism of “secret courts” must be “more speech, less enforced silence”.


Protecting children 03 Sep 2013 Sir James goes on to consider other issues, such as those raised by the increased readiness of anguished parents to tell their stories on the internet, ruling that these should be subject to the same restrictions as are applied to reporting in the press. But when he finally comes to ruling on the council’s application for a complete ban, he strikes out all the items not referring directly to the identity of children or their parents, allowing the naming of Staffordshire, social workers, “expert witnesses” and pretty well everything else.

This is such a startling challenge to prevailing practice that we will have to watch carefully to see how widely Munby’s principles are now followed. Clearly, this unusually humane and intelligent judge is bent on rolling back that blanket of secrecy that has been used to conceal so many countless horror stories from public view. But I recall one recent case in which a mother described her agony when her newborn child was snatched from her arms while she was breastfeeding. She quoted to the court an earlier Munby judgment, in which he trenchantly ruled that such an action was clearly in breach of “the imperative demands of the European Convention on Human Rights”. The only comment from the bench was “other judges can do what they like, but this is my court”. Now Munby is head of the family courts, we shall see whether his fellow judges accord him more respect.

Adoption madness:
The itch to give children that have been removed from their natural parents to gay couples for adoption (rather than, as in several cases I have followed, to responsible and loving grandparents), is getting into ever more of a tangle. Last week we had the story of the 87-year-old vicar who refused to christen a child because both the lesbian adoptive parents insisted on being described in his parish register as the child’s “mother”. A more “modern-minded” priest was found who was quite happy for the child to be recorded as having two “mothers”.

At least this tale did not have such a tragic outcome as one widely reported in South Africa in April, when two lesbians were tried for the murder of their four-year-old adopted son. An employee of the couple testified that the crime had been committed when the women became increasingly angry at the boy’s refusal to call one of them “daddy”. The more dominant of the partners was sentenced to 25 years for beating the child to death, the other to 22 years for being a “passive participant” in his murder.


Clearly, this is a world wide problem. But as the saying goes, “All it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.” People like Judge Billy Jackson of the Lauderdale County Family Court, Denise H Burch of Burch law group, supervisor sarah hendershot, district attorney chris connolly, commissioner nancy buckner, DHR workers labrisco cook and patricia miller, DHR florence alabama and Family court florence alabama, should all be 100% ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES for participating in this “farce for profit.” It is hoped by my wife, Kathleen Raskin, aka Kathey Raskin, and by me, Robert M Raskin, aka Rob Raskin, that our children and our families become safer as a result of the integrity of people like the honorable James Munby as opposed to the DIS-honorable Judge billy jackson and his cast of lying cowards who steal children for a living under the guise of trying to be helpful to the children and to their families.

Bullies – Pushing Public Corruption to New Limits!

You know, I was thinking. When the “horrible 5” – Denise Burch, Labrisco Cook, Billy Jackson, Sara Hendershot and Chris Connolly, go home tonight, I wonder what would happen if they said to their spouse, or to their children:

Today I had a little old lady arrested because I am so small, and so petty, that I get a mild level of satisfaction over taking advantage of the sick, the meek, the poor and the elderly. Would their spouses or their children be proud of them?

I wonder if someone were to stand up in their respective churches on Sunday, and say: “This is what Denise did,” or “This is how Billy Jackson ruled,” I wonder if the congregation would look highly upon them, or wonder where they went so wrong.

I think that they think that they can do whatever they want with no repercussions. But I’ve learned in life that there are 3 universal truths:

1. What you put out in life is what you get back.
2. The truth always comes through, and
3. The cream always rises to the top.

Well “H-5” your day is coming. Everyone will know how you have conducted yourselves, how you are conducting yourselves now, and there will be judgement for your actions.

Just know that as my grandfather used to say: “People scratch their behinds and think nobody sees.” I assure you, we are watching, we see clearly, and we’re taking notes. So keep on acting corrupt, outrageous, unreasonable and downright mean. The documentation of each of these events simply shows how small each of you truly are.



Courier Journal wimps out……won’t run our ad!

Tom over at the Courier Journal won’t run our ad any more. He says it’s starting to feel like a “vendetta.”

Asking others if they’ve had what they feel is unfair treatment that resulted in the loss of their child, or their parental rights, is an HONORABLE endeavor. After all, if a child is taken without just cause, and if parental rights are terminated without just cause, and if nobody speaks up and says “ENOUGH!” then why would anyone ever expect the practice to stop?

For those who have had a child taken with no just cause, who now cannot see their child and/or have been swindled somehow out of their parental rights so the child is gone from their lives, the loss is mourned every single day just as if they were kidnapped, or in the case of lost parental rights, as if  they’re gone forever.

The monsters that take these children just so they can benefit, at the expense of the child and their family, should be ashamed of themselves. But to not run the ad because it “feels like a vendetta?” REALLY?

Why not just say: “I was walking down the street, and the weirdest thing happened. I LOST MY BALLS!”

So chalk one up for the “Good Ole Boys” network. They stopped an ad from running.  Wowie! BIG victory! Like there’s no other way to get our point across in Croney-ville.

We’re well organized, well funded, and your feeble attempts to slow us down are comical. In my humble opinion, your time would be better served finding a good criminal lawyer, but hey, what do I know. You keep trying to stop our ad as if that’s going to help you somehow.

DHR Labrisco Cook, Guardian ad litem Denise H Burch, Judge Billy Jackson, DHR Supervisor Sara Hendershot, and Commissioner Nancy Bruckner, together, collectively, You STOLE OUR NIECE, and we WANT HER BACK, ALONG WITH AN APOLOGY and the REINSTATEMENT OF THE GUARDIANSHIP RIGHTS THAT YOU HAD NO RIGHT TO TAKE AWAY!!!


We’re stepping it up a notch or 2:

Since our niece was never returned to us, since there’s been no apology for trampling our rights or for putting our niece in harm’s way, we’re finding out some interesting things that would be better off left unsaid at the moment.

Suffice to say however, that we’ve heard each of your heartfelt stories, and those with eyes can clearly see the pattern: Manufacture a reason, take custody of the child, put the child into the system, everybody makes money.

I know it’s hard to have patience when your heart hurts every day, but this a marathon, not a sprint, and not a day goes by without some work being done to bring those who steal children with no just cause, who stand to profit at the expense of innocent families, to justice.

We never able to have a conversation with the governor or the commissioner or the director of DHR, after being mistreated in every way possible.

So, since the good-ole-boy network closed ranks, after stealing our niece and sending her away, we will continue to fight for justice, and as we are able, we will gladly keep you informed of our progress.

But don’t think for a second that these bastards will get away with stealing children forever, and don’t think for a second that they won’t have to answer for the manner in which they conduct themselves.

Until next time,

I’m Rob!


When you’ve done so much wrong for so long of a time, there comes a time when you make the realization that you’re way past the point of no return. And that’s where the offenders should be. When asked, what will their answers be for taking children with no just cause? For leading the parents on a wild goose chase only to never return their children to them? For coercing people into signing away their parental rights while being verbally told that they can apply to get them back later? For moving their children many hours away to make it difficult to impossible to see them? From continually changing the requirements to get their children back, making it ultimately impossible? To not allowing anyone in the family to take custody of the children? To manipulate the children into thinking that their parents don’t want them anymore?

What’s gonna be their answer when they are under investigation, under oath, for thousands of children over many, many years? And what of the Court? What is the Court’s answer going to be? The Court is suppose to be fair and impartial. The Court is suppose to be part of the SOLUTION, not part of the problem. What is the Court’s answer going to be when asked why they made unilateral decisions based on hearsay only? Why they didn’t give the parental side the courtesy, the respect of being heard? Why was the Court so quick to make decisions that negatively impacted so many? What’s their answer going to be? Here’s my guess. My guess is that there will be NO answer. They’ll probably take the 5th so as not to incriminate themselves.

They get up each morning and go to work as if it’s a brand new day, not realizing that their world as they know it has already begun to cave. I’ve heard so many of you complain about how hearbroken you are that your children have been taken from you, as has our niece, and I want you to know that the spotlight is about to be turned on, and the rats will be scurrying for cover.

For what they have done for these last 10 years or so, which is to literally steal children from their homes, scar them for life, and destroy so many honest families, for the almighty dollar, is unconscionable. And yet, every day for all these years, they schemed and plotted and colluded and thought they were oh-so-smart. Well, everyone who eventually gets caught thinks they were so smart, so powerful, so above the law, that they won’t ever get brought to justice. Remember the role that Jack Nicholson played in a few good men? At the end, Tom Cruise GOT HIM, didn’t he?

Well, in our niece’s case, my wife Kathey and her attorney gave DHR Labrisco Cook, GAL Denise Burch, and Judge Billy Jackson every possible opportunity to correct their errors. In fact, we filed motion after motion after motion after motion. And yet, through sheer arrogance, they all stuck together like little thieves smiling at how much power they had. Well let’s watch and see how much longer they’ll all be smiling, because Judgement Day is coming, and I’m thinking that they have no answer for the questions that they’re going to be asked, on behalf of every innocent family that has had a child ripped from them with no just cause and never returned. Stay tune – and sleep well knowing that the noose is slowing starting to tighten – and they have no idea…….yet. But they will…..


You know, I just verified that Alabama really is one of the 50 States that comprise the United States. I thought I’d double check, because I’ve been watching the most out of control system I have EVER seen! It AMAZES me that DHR, the Guardians ad litem, and the Family Court Judges, have such an incredibly blatant disregard for CIVIL RIGHTS, but even MORE importantly, for COMMON DECENCY!

If you read through the 50 or so complaints on this site, which is up about a month as of this blog entry, you see the same or similar stories from unrelated people. Over and over the theme is that they’ve been in effect, kidnapping/stealing children in a variety of ways including listening to hearsay, making things up, intimidation, and flat-out lies.

The bottom line is that they often rip the children from their homes, often with no legitimate reason, and then they work on keeping the children, moving them far away from their parents/guardians, denying them the right to see the children, and ultimately adopting the children out. It’s the same complaint, over and over and over, and we have amassed HUNDREDS upon HUNDREDS of complaints thus far.

We want you to know that we hear your cries for help, and we want you to know that we are taking every possible aggressive legal action to bring the offenders to justice.

In our case, not only did we lose our niece, but our niece lost contact with her sister, her Aunts, uncles, cousins and everyone she’s known for the last 10 years.

I don’t know how the people that are responsible for this atrocity can sleep nights. I assume that they are not good, church-going people. If they are, then they have an awful lot to learn.

It is my hope that one day, the offenders are incarcerated for all of the harm that they have caused to the children and their families, and that the State of Alabama pay dearly for their arrogance.

When we started out, we contacted everyone we could from DHR to Governor Robert Bentley to say that changes need to be made and cases including ours need to be looked into.

It all fell on deaf ears. The good-ole-boy network wouldn’t hear of it.

Well, you all hang in there because I’ve made it my mission to see to it that the proper authorities review what’s occurred and take the necessary corrective action.

And as a final note, Denise, Billy, Labrisco, Sara, and Nancy, if you’re reading this: The First Amendment applies to people living in Alabama just like in the other 49 states. You can’t steal our children and then tell us to shut up! IT WON’T WORK! WE’RE NOT SHUTTING UP ANY MORE! STOP STEALING OUR CHILDREN!

Violation of Numerous Laws may lead to Investigation, Indictments!

Helpful Laws Courtesy of

On June 10, 2011, the Supreme Court of Alabama issued an opinion in Ex parte E.R.G. and D.W.G. that quotes the Supreme Court of the United States, that it is clear the U.S. Constitution, “requires that a prior and independent finding of parental unfitness – by clear and convincing evidence – must be made before the court may proceed to the question of whether an order disturbing and limiting a parent’s ‘care, custody, and control’ of his or her child is in that child’s best interests.”

The E.R.G. Court also quotes a long line of law, including U.S. Supreme Court Justice Scalia’s dissent in Troxel v. Granville that, “recognizes that the right of parents to make decisions regarding a child’s care, control, education, health, and religion, as well as with whom the child will associate, is a fundamental right that arises “as an inherent consequence of the parent-child relationship independent of any case law, statute, or constitutional provision.”

The Troxel Court said, “The Due Process Clause – of the U.S. Constitution 14th Amendment – does not permit a State (judge) to infringe on the fundamental right of parents to make child rearing decisions simply because a state judge believes a “better” decision could be made.”

Those who violate the sanctity of family must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.