Tag Archives: florence family court

The Conspiracy against us is much bigger than we thought!

Posted on by

Here are the simple facts:

1. DHR has little to do with the safety and welfare of children.

2. The more children they have in the system, the more money the make.

3. They have no regard for the families they destroy or the lives they ruin.

4. The entire system is corrupt, so there’s rarely ever any justice.

5. The fact that they are destroying families is a plus for them.

These 5 points sound like they don’t make sense, but to anyone who has had their child stolen, and has been unable to remedy the situation, will tell you first-hand that once they take your child, the odds of you ever getting the child back is small, the scams they run are extensive, the legal maneuverings are dirty, and ultimately, time after time, they win because it’s one big conspiracy with tons of money at stake.

The evil that’s gripped our nation, at this point, is astounding, and in fact, overwhelming. As I write this, we are being invaded by illegal immigrants many of whom are jihadists, from 74 countries world-wide.

While DHR’s throughout the nation disrespect our children and our families, they continue to allow illegal children with unknown diseases and no medical screening into our country to infect our children.

I expect this fall and winter to be the beginning of the fiercest battle in world history, on our streets, here in America. I believe that America, and Americans throughout the country, are at serious risk of the same battle as we’re currently seeing in Israel, in Iraq, and so on.

The illegal invasion of our great country was funded by a $6.5 BILLION bill which went into effect on 10/1/13. So when people say that we should call our congressmen, the sad fact is that THEY are the ones who voted to use OUR TAX DOLLARS to FUND THE DEMISE OF OUR NATION.

I wish I had better news for you, but the facts are that the government has no respect for the family unit, no regard for the safety or well-being of your family and your children, and no concern as to whether or not a real safety issue exists. It’s a matter of money, of control, and of destroying as many families as possible.

The only thing I can suggest is that you prepare at this point for the war that lies ahead. If you are not stocked up on food and water, weapons and ammo, first aid and medicine, communications and meeting areas, you need to get busy TODAY.

Go to preservationteams.com to read up on how to form defensive teams in your neighborhood to protect your lives and property when the time comes. There’s also a general supply list, and a story of a Bosnian survivalist who survived what I believe that we are about to face shortly.

Few recognized the abuse by the social workers, the courts, the government itself. The late Georgia State Senator Nancy Schaefer was one of the brave truth seekers, and she and her husband were murdered as a result of speaking out.

The fact remains that evil has gripped our nation, and not only are our children not safe, and not only are our families not safe, from government intervention, but shortly, they will try to kill us with disease, then with jihad, then with loss of electric, and so on, to achieve their goal of destroying America itself and replacing her with the North American Union, which is a combination of Canada, America and Mexico. Google “petreous after america what” for more information, or feel free to direct your questions to me.

For more information, go to this link:

http://www.dcclothesline.com/2014/08/07/orange-county-cps-latest-facilitate-molestation-disappearing-children/

God bless each and every one of you and may all be safe and survive what’s coming.

Resiliently,

Rob!

 

One Judge with the cahones to DO THE RIGHT THING!

Posted on by

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.

Sholanda Speaks: JUDGE JACKSON MUST GO!

Posted on by

Reprint from Sholanda Speaks:

http://shoalandaspeaks.blogspot.com/2012/07/in-judge-jacksons-courtroom.html#comment-form

In Judge Jackson’s Courtroom

Family Evicted From Home

A Guest Commentary By

Concerned Lauderdale Citizen

“Judge Billy Jackson does not understand how to structure his docket efficiently.”

“Judge Billy Jackson does not know the law.”

You, readers, may decide for yourself if the above comments are true. I only repeat what I have recently heard from others. Ask your own questions, and find your own answers, for you are paying the man’s salary of over $100,000. Would you pay anyone else who is not doing his job adequately?

There are currently cases from Fall, 2011, which still await a ruling from Judge Jackson. There are emergency motions from this past Spring which have not been addressed, as well as current emergencies.

And I have heard a detailed story from a previously credible source which puts Judge Jackson in a very negative light. It seems he is using his authority to hurt families rather than help them.

Judge Jackson gave a mother and her children only hours to vacate their home under threat of eviction by sheriff. They had to leave behind almost everything they owned because there was so little notice from the court. The mother had previously followed every court order and was not prepared for this decision because she was waiting for the judge to rule on competing orders.

Judge Jackson allowed a deadbeat dad to move back into the house who has not complied with court orders for more than five years. Judge Jackson has known for many months that the deadbeat dad has refused to provide court ordered life insurance for the mother and the children. The mom had suggested to the court that their marital home might secure the dad’s life insurance obligation to her and to their kids, and she was waiting for the judge to decide. But the judge denied her request at the exact same time that he ordered her and the kids to vacate their home. Judge Jackson also knows that the kids have never spent a night with their dad in five years, and they refuse to live with him.

The deadbeat dad is also in contempt of court on other issues, both present and past. But Judge Jackson has refused for many months to even set a date in court for the trial to address the deadbeat dad’s contempt of court. Apparently, the dad has been in contempt of court before on several things. This particular deadbeat dad also stalked and threatened the mom and had a Protection from Abuse order enforced against him by Judge Jackson.

Yes, readers, you read correctly. Judge Jackson is aware that the mother is in compliance with court orders and always has been while the deadbeat dad is not in compliance with court orders and never has been. Judge Jackson ordered a mother and her children out of their home with only hours notice, so they are now homeless. But the deadbeat dad now has two homes.

And Judge Jackson has done nothing to secure the court ordered life insurance for a mother and children. The deadbeat dad might fall over dead at any minute, and it would be Judge Jackson’s fault alone that they did not have their mandated life insurance. I remind you readers that Judge Jackson has refused for months to even set a court date.

What is Judge Jackson doing? According to what I am hearing, he has some explaining to do. I am concerned about the mom and her children, even if Judge Jackson is not. I will follow up to let you know what happens in this case.

*****

We’ll add to the above commentary that we have heard complaints concerning the circuit court clerk’s office and its inability to schedule, rather than Judge Jackson’s. The same was said of Judge Jimmy Sandlin’s court. What is the truth? We have no idea, but hope the problem, no matter its roots, can be corrected as quickly as possible.

HOW TO SUE THE OFFENDING COUNTY!!!

Posted on by

County loses $4.9 million lawsuit challenge over lying social workers
April 21st, 2011, 1:45 pm · · posted by Kimberly Edds, Staff Writer

The County of Orange lost its battle in the U.S. Supreme Court Monday to overturn a record-setting $4.9 million judgment awarded to a Seal Beach woman, after two county social workers lied to a juvenile court commissioner in order to take away the woman’s two daughters.

It took Deanna Fogarty-Hardwick 6 ½ years to regain custody of her children.

The jury award given to Fogarty-Hardwick included damages against the two social workers. The Supreme Court also upheld $1.6 million in attorneys fees for Fogarty-Hardwick’s attorneys, but that could end being as much as $3 million, Fogarty-Hardwick’s attorney Shawn McMillan said.

The county and the two social workers will also be responsible for paying interest which has accrued on the $4.9 million jury award over the last four years, bringing the grand total close to $9.3 million, McMillan said.

Fogarty-Hardwick’s attorneys had offered to settle with the county for $500,000.

Orange County Social Services social workers Marcie Vreeken and Helen Dwojak filed false reports and held back evidence which would have cleared Fogarty-Hardwick, an Orange County jury found. Vreeken would later be promoted, according to county records.
A third social worker was found not liable.

According to court papers, Vreeken threatened that if Fogarty-Hardwick did not “submit” to her will, she would never see her children again. The social workers also tried in 2000 to coerce Fogarty-Hardwick to sign a document saying she was a bad parent by threatening to take her daughters away, Fogarty-Hardwick alleged.

She refused. A county commissioner ordered Fogarty-Hardwick’s daughters, 6 and 9, taken from their mother and put in Orangewood Children’s Home.
The girls were later put in foster care.

Fogarty-Hardwick gave her ex-husband full custody in 2002, hoping to protect her daughters. She was then allowed two supervised visits a month for two years. She eventually won 50-50 custody in 2006.

Fogarty-Hardwick sued the county in 2002, arguing the Social Services Agency and its two social workers violated her civil rights. A jury ruled against her.

She sued again, arguing this time county’s policies violated her constitutional rights, including her Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

Fogarty-Hardwick’s accused the county of violating her constitutional rights by removing her children without making a finding of imminent danger or serious physical injury; interviewing her daughters without a parent present; holding her children without cause; fabricating evidence; and failing to properly train employees about parents’ constitutional rights.

An Orange County jury voted 10-2 in 2007 in favor of Fogarty-Hardwick and awarded her $4.9 million.
The county appealed the judgment.

In the Fourth District Court of Appeal opinion, Justice William Bedsworth wrote, “the evidence adduced at trial obviously caused both the jury and the judge to conclude not only that something seriously wrong was done to Fogarty-Hardwick in this case, but also that the wrongful conduct was not an isolated incident.”

“Despite Fogarty-Hardwick’s complaints, and the concerns expressed by others about the handling of this dependency case, SSA did not investigate the situation or consider assigning different social workers to the matter. Neither of the social workers involved was disciplined. Instead, Vreeken was promoted to supervisor in 2001,” Bedsworth wrote.
The Watchdog is looking into whether Vreeken and Dwojak still work for the county.

“What the county and these social workers did to her was horrendous and she deserves to be compensated in full measure,” McMillan said.
“It’s a big deal for a private citizen to take on the government all the way to the United States Supreme Court,” McMillan said. “(Fogarty-Hardwick) poured her whole life into this case. She provided a valuable service to Orange County and to other parents for having the tenacity to stick with it.”

So what does it mean to us, the victims of people like DHR Social Worker Labrisca Cook, GAL Attorney Denise H Burch, Judge Billy Jackson, DHR Supervisor Sarah Hendershot, DHR Commissioner Nancy Buckner, and all of the deceitful, manipulative, horrible people that assist in the “Farce” known as “Family Court” on a daily basis?

It means that we now have a blueprint for success! Following the very same formula as Fogarty-Hardwick.

Specifically:

Sue the county in which the offense occurred, claiming that DHR policies violated your constitutional rights, including your Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

Fogarty-Hardwick’s accused the county of violating her constitutional rights by removing her children without making a finding of imminent danger or serious physical injury; interviewing her daughters without a parent present; holding her children without cause; fabricating evidence; and failing to properly train employees about parents’ constitutional rights.

An Orange County jury voted 10-2 in 2007 in favor of Fogarty-Hardwick and awarded her $4.9 million.

If every one of us sue the offending country, we can not only make a huge statement, we can also bankrupt the county, causing them to shut down and forcing them to rebuild from the ground up. This shake up is the equivalent of a revolutionary war, where the entire government ends up forfeiting their power and their operation.

We tried to play nicely. We made complaints to every available entity. Nobody wants to hear it. Everyone covers for each other like sick, depraved little thieves. Nobody cares about the children that are hurt, or the families that are destroyed. Totally unqualified people attack innocent families every day and get away with it.

And it happens all throughout the country. But in Orange County, Fogarty-Hardwick successfully sued the county and won a $4.9 MILLION judgement, which was upheld in the Supreme Court.

We still have a meeting with Congress in February 2013, but in addition, we’re interviewing attorneys right now.

Whether you have an interest in being part of a class-action suit, or whether you prefer to sue individually, the Fogarty-Hardwick case has created a blueprint for what points of law to sue on and for there to now be Supreme Court case law on the matter.

So since Alabama did not want to take any steps to correct a situation that has been complained about hundreds if not thousands of times, over and over and over for the last 10 years, and now that there is a Supreme Court case to follow, let’s all do our best to successfully sue the State of Alabama, and force each county to pay out so much in judgments that they ultimately go bankrupt and can no longer operate their hate agencies or employ their thugs!

Until Next Time,

I’m Rob!