Thursday, November 3, 2011

Basic Example of a Great Defense

A basic Example of a great defense. Don't wait for the agency to help you, if you are allegedly accused.
Take of "offense" and
know the Statutes, Policies, etc. particular to your state and your concerns.
Here is a quick story of a case that one was just involved in that was resolved in one day, 7/16/11. Major parts of the information needed are with a blue heading.
The Background of Incidents
Parents are divorced and mom is dropping off the child (age 2) to the father for a visit at McDonalds.  The father has his new girlfriend present and this upsets mom.  She leaves with the child and the father gets into his car to follow her.  The two engage in a verbal argument while they are both in their cars on the street.  The dad's girfriend is in dad's car and records the incident with her cell phone.    During this argument, the mother's car 'taps' the father's car - no damage done to either car. 
The police come and take statements from both parties.  There are no arrests made.  Police DO NOT make a report to CPS and the child is allowed to leave the scene with the mother.
The father files a report with CPS two days later. 
CPS substantiates neglect on the mother for 'causing an accident' with the child in the car.  CPS also cites mother's mental health issues as a factor.
Investigation 
Proof of Mom as a Competent Caretake
During the mother's investigation mother's counselor provides CPS a letter that states she is a competent caretaker, is compliant with her treatment and the counselor has no abuse or neglect concerns. 
The Alleged Statute Violations
Ok now this is the Agencies policy cited in the investigation:
Policy #0000
A child may be found neglected who:
-has been abandoned
-is being denied proper care and attention physically, educationally, emotionally, or morally
-is being permitted to live under conditions, circumstances or associations injurious to his well-being
-has been abused. 
As evidenced by (this was the agencys criteria they felt met the policy substantiating neglect):
--erratic, deviant, or impaired behavior by the person responsible for the childâ’s health, welfare or care; by a person given access to the child; or by a person entrusted with the child’s care which adversely impacts the child
OK - so i go to this 'pre-hearing' with the mother and explain to the states principal attorney that this is a poor substantiation.   
She of course tells me i'm crazy, and that the
state has video evidence.
So i say ok lets see the video
.  The lawyer and the social worker shows the video all with huge smiles on their faces. 
The Defense
SO THEN I EXPLAIN that their awesome evidence shows that the child slept through the entire incident and was not harmed in anyway.   The fact that the child slept through the entire incident was also noted in the investigation by the mother and the father. I then had to REMIND the states attorney that their policy (look above - its the last few words) states the
Repeating the Statute 
 neglect has to ADVERSELY IMPACT THE CHILD. 
  
I then become the person with the big smile, ask for a copy of their video evidence and ask "So tell me again how the child was adversely impacted (blank stairs) and are you sure we are going forward with this hearing?".
 
The Attorney Reply
States attorney, manager, supervisor and social worker leave the room for a few minutes for a pow-wow and come back looking rather somber :(
ALLEGATIONS DROPPED / CASE DISMISSED!!!!! 
SO now this mother could spend the money she saved by representing herself on a civil attorney to sue these b**tards!!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Appellate Court Decisions
In addition, after organizing your thoughts and information, one may want to research Appellate Court Decisions relating to their concerns.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Also, please read Preponderance of evidence (Link: http://nfpcar.org/Legal/legalprint.htm#Preponderance_of_evidence  ), since in Kangaroo court it has come to mean, as far as Proof from Goliath "If it could have happened, it probably did" and too some all the agency needs is 51% proof. A realization, we, when defending ourselves, came to realize when the Prosecution used the trick in questioning.. ie did this or that happen more than 50% or less than 50%.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Your Guide to Defend Yourself
from FPLS
Click on above image to Download
Flyer of this Publication
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~