FINAL STATUS REPORT - ONE BIG LIE

http://www.scribd.com/doc/12810232/Final-Status-Reportdepandancy-taken-for-NO-REASON-but-Money

14 Points of Fascism

14 Points of Fascism

1.)  Powerful and Continuing Nationalism: Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2.)  Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights: Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3.)  Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause: The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc

4.)  Supremacy of the Military: Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5.)  Rampant Sexism: The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. 

6.)  Controlled Mass Media: Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7.)  Obsession with National Security: Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses

8.)  Religion and Government are Intertwined: Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9.)  Corporate Power is Protected: The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10.)  Labor Power is Suppressed: Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

11.)  Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts: Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

12.)  Obsession with Crime and Punishment: Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations

13.)  Rampant Cronyism and Corruption: Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14.)  Fraudulent Elections: Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

DUE PROCESS IGNORED - ILLEGAL CHANGE OF CUSTODY

Violation of the following:
WIC 300(A) , 361(D)
CAL GOV CODE 820.21(2)(3)
TITLE 42, USC SECT 1983, 14141,
USC TITLE 18, SECTIONS 241, 245(3) 1203, 241, 242, 1001(1)(2)(3), AND 1203(A)
Civil Codes 1569(1)(2)(3), 1570(1)(3), 1571, 1572(1)(3)(4)

DISCUSSION ON CPS PRACTICES - NOTES FOR LAWSUIT

UNLAWFUL REMOVAL
The report CPS generated on January 22, 2008 which states Jenny should stay with her Mother and reunification is set for July 28th. Yet 3 days later, on January 25, 2008 she took Jenny from school. This occurred 43 days after the first removal. Amy listed fraudulent reasons for this second removal. She had not performed any investigations and her claims were based on “here-say”, which is unlawful.

1)No “protective custody warrant” was issued before removal as required by law. There was no “Imminent Danger of serious bodily injury” for minor was in school at the time. WIC 300(a)
2)The message received on my voice mail from the assistant principal, Ms. Donahue at Atascadero High school states Jenny was in school all day on January 25th. They state they had no prior knowledge of a removal by any social worker. Jenny didn’t come home from school that day. Was my daughter “Kidjacked”?
Section 300a of the Welfare and Institutions code states:
Any child who comes within any of the following descriptions is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court which may adjudge that person to be a dependent child of the court:

(a) The child has suffered, or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer, serious physical harm inflicted not accidentally upon the child by the child's parent or guardian. For the purposes of this Subdivision, a court may find there is a substantial risk of serious future injury based on the manner in which a less serious injury was inflicted, a history of repeated inflictions of injuries on the child or the child's siblings, or a combination of these and other actions by the parent or guardian which indicate the child is at risk of serious physical harm.

WIC 361(c) BURDEN OF PROOF
(c) A dependent child may not be taken from the physical custody of his or her parents or guardian or guardians with whom the child resides at the time the petition was initiated, unless the juvenile court finds clear and convincing evidence of any of the following circumstances listed in paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, and, in an Indian child custody proceeding, paragraph (6):
(1) There is or would be a substantial danger to the physical health, safety, protection, or physical or emotional well-being of the minor if the minor were returned home, and there are no reasonable means by which the minor’s physical health can be protected without removing the minor from the minor’s parent’s or guardian’s physical custody. The fact that a minor has been adjudicated a dependent child of the court pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 300 shall constitute prima facie evidence that the minor cannot be safely left in the physical custody of the parent or guardian with whom the minor resided at the time of injury. The court shall consider, as a reasonable means to protect the minor, the option of removing an offending parent or guardian from the home. The court shall also consider, as a reasonable means to protect the minor, allowing a nonoffending parent or guardian to retain physical custody as long as that parent or guardian presents a plan acceptable to the court demonstrating that he or she will be able to protect the child from future harm.
(3) The minor is suffering severe emotional damage, as indicated by extreme anxiety, depression, withdrawal, or untoward aggressive behavior toward himself or herself or others, and there are no reasonable means by which the minor’s emotional health may be protected without removing the minor from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian.
(4) The minor or a sibling of the minor has been sexually abused, or is deemed to be at substantial risk of being sexually abused, by a parent, guardian, or member of his or her household, or other person known to his or her parent, and there are no reasonable means by which the minor can be protected from further sexual abuse or a substantial risk of sexual abuse without removing the minor from his or her parent or guardian, or the minor does not wish to return to his or her parent or guardian.
(5) The minor has been left without any provision for his or her support, or a parent who has been incarcerated or institutionalized cannot arrange for the care of the minor, or a relative or other adult custodian with whom the child has been left by the parent is unwilling or unable to provide care or support for the child and the whereabouts of the parent is unknown and reasonable efforts to locate him or her have been unsuccessful.
Section 361(D) of the Welfare and Institutions code states
(d) The court shall make a determination as to whether reasonable efforts were made to prevent or to eliminate the need for removal of the minor from his or her home or, if the minor is removed for one of the reasons stated in paragraph (5) of subdivision (c), whether it was reasonable under the circumstances not to make any of those efforts, or, in the case of an Indian child custody proceeding, whether active efforts as required in Section 361.7 were made and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful. The court shall state the facts on which the decision to remove the minor is based.
1)Amy removed Jenny even though we complied with the “case plan”. We both completed the mental evaluation; I went to Drug and Alcohol for assessment and both obtained counseling.

ALIENATING MINOR WITHOUT JUST CAUSE
Section 362.1(1)(A)  States:

Subject to subparagraph (B), for visitation between the parent or guardian and the child. Visitation shall be as frequent as possible, consistent with the well being of the child.

Subparagraph (B) basically states the child will be safe and consistent with 3030 of the family code

ARGUMENT:
My daughter has been continually alienated from me from the start. The return date kept being extended while she was shuttled around into 5-6 foster homes. There was never any reunification attempts. They planned on transferring custody from the start based on FALSE charges. Again, tests proved the allegations were FALSE, yet CPS failed to return my daughter.

Section 300b of the Welfare and Institutions code states:

“…the court shall give deference to the parent’s or guardian’s medical treatment, non treatment, or spiritual treatment…and shall not assume jurisdiction unless necessary to protect the child” - I was sick with Anemia when they took my daughter yet they refused to allow me to seek medical treatment before making court dates and giving me a "case plan" to follow which was impossible to follow. *Medical tests prove this fact. This is probably why my house was broken into - to remove the proof.


CAL GOV GODE 821.21 SECTIONS 2 & 3

820.21. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, the civil immunity of juvenile court social workers, child protection workers, and other public employees authorized to initiate or conduct investigations or proceedings pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 200) of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code shall not extend to any of the following, if committed with malice:
(1) Perjury.
(2) Fabrication of evidence.
(3) Failure to disclose known exculpatory evidence.
(4) Obtaining testimony by duress, as defined in Section 1569 of
The Civil Code, fraud, as defined in either Section 1572 or Section
1573 of the Civil Code, or undue influence, as defined in Section
1575 of the Civil Code.
(b) As used in this section, "malice" means conduct that is
Intended by the person described in subdivision (a) to cause injury
To the plaintiff or despicable conduct that is carried on by the
Person described in subdivision (a) with a willful and conscious
Disregard of the rights or safety of others.

Argument:

Amy Sensenbach originally took Jenny on 12/9/07 over the door incident. She returned her on 12/14/07. She took Jenny again from school 43 days later without good cause. She did not have a “protective custody warrant and no other incidences occurred. She removed minor solely on “hearsay and then went on a Witch hunt” against the mother to justify the removal. She omitted facts and misled the Court. She failed to disclose exculpatory evidence and the removal was not done properly.

TITLE 42, USC SECT 1983, 14141,
Sec. 1983. - Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia 

TITLE 18 – CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
PART 1 –CRIMES
CHAPTER 55 KIDNAPPING
Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, seizes or detains and threatens to kill, to injure, or to continue to detain another person in order to compel a third person or a governmental organization to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the person detained, or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished by imprisonment for any term of years or for life and, if the death of any person results, shall be punished by death or life imprisonment.
Section 2235. Search warrant procured maliciously Whoever maliciously and without probable cause procures a search warrant to be issued and executed, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year.
Section 2236. Searches without warrant
Whoever, being an officer, agent, or employee of the United States or any department or agency thereof, engaged in the enforcement of any law of the United States, searches any private dwelling used and occupied as such dwelling without a warrant directing such search, or maliciously and without reasonable cause searches any other building or property without a search warrant, shall be fined for a first offense not more than $1,000; and, for a subsequent offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
        This section shall not apply to any person -
          (a) serving a warrant of arrest; or
          (b) arresting or attempting to arrest a person committing or
        attempting to commit an offense in his presence, or who has
        committed or is suspected on reasonable grounds of having
        committed a felony; or
          (c) making a search at the request or invitation or with the
        consent of the occupant of the premises.

FRAUD – TITLE 18
PART 1 – CRIMES
CHAPTER 47 – FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS
Section 1001. Statements or entries generally
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully -
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party's counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to -
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2)any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.
(3)

The appeals stated I did not get DUE PROCESS. Judge Garrett who heard the appeal ignored this and gave custody to the father. This case was flawed from the very beginning. CPS ignored this fact. They also ignored my daughters pleas to go home. All they wanted was the MONEY

LETS REFORM CPS AND STOP THE CORRUPTION

I wonder how much money they made off Jenny

SEND YOUR STORY - JUSTICE AWAITS!

Dear Friends,

Change is coming! Please send your story to
http://change.gov/page/s/yourstory

The main points could be (use your own
words or feel free to use the following):

A new form of pernicious violence against women and children is
rampant in our country.

1. Across the country, family courts are removing children from
parents (mostly mothers) who are trying to protect them from physical
and sexual harm. Even nursing infants are torn from their non-abusive
mothers. Courts are placing these children in the custody of the very
parents whom the children insist are abusing them. Protective pare
nts are bankrupted trying to protect their children from batterers
and molesters, who use family courts to obtain custody of their
victims and avoid prosecution. The right of parental access trumps
the right of child safety.

2. Family courts have become lawless star chamber proceedings with no
due process or checks and balances. Courts have unfettered power with
no effective oversight that would ensure that children are safe from
physical and sexual harm. Appeals are ineffective because they are
lengthy, prohibitively expensive, and do not address child safety
concerns.

3. Because of our government's complete lack of responsiveness to
these violations of child safety, a petition was filed with the Inter-
American Commission on Human Rights. Older children are speaking out
about their court-ordered abuse, which in some cases is comparable to
third world rape and torture camps.

4. We need Federal hearings and investigation to bring this hidden
problem to light,20to return the children to their protective
parents, and to hold accountable the perpetrators and the systems
that enable and order their abuse.

5. In my case (a few sentences of the most egregious events in your
case. You can even provide photos and videos.)
If you include the names, county, state of those who harmed your
child, there is always a concern about retribution if the court
somehow finds out. You could always state that you fear retribution
and are using a pseudonym, which is a powerful and accurate statement.

Here is a great article that might help if you want to add more
information.
http://www.justicewomen.com/help_family_law.html#one

A few other websites you could add to your email are:
www.leadershipcouncil.org,
www.stopfamilyviolence.org,
http://kathleenrussell.com/ThisYearsWork2.htm,
www.courageouskids.net,
http://ca3cacaca.blogspot.com,
www.distinctioninfamilycourts.com,
www.batteredmotherscustodyconference.org,
www.protectiveparents.com,
www.mothers-of-lost-children.com,
www.thelizlibrary.org,
www.canow.org,
http://www.jfcadvocacy.org,
www.protect.org,

Thank you for your strength and courage and don't be shy about naming names. These people who broke the law need to be prosecuted. Shame on CPS for hurting children.

Grand Jury in SLO refuses to hear testimony - Father's Rights Activist suspected in tampering with case

Well here's the sad facts: The Grand Jury in San Luis Obispo has now refused to hear our testimony !!! CPS gets off from committing fraud - AGAIN.

We originally had a hearing scheduled for Oct 20, 2008. They agreed to let me testify by telephone since I do not want to return to California due to Police harassment. The Jury admonished me to secrecy, which I fully complied with. During my conversation with a Grand Juror I was asked to put them in touch with a certain person who is covering CPS cases throughout the US. I won't mention this persons name encase the Jury decides to change their mind, however, the confident is a father's rights activist who is not personally involved with my case.

Almost immediately after having contact with this individual the Grand Jury called back stating they needed additional time. My contact told me they were gathering evidence on other cases to determine whether a full investigation was warranted. I was told to gather other cases similiar to my own which involved the same individuals so this information could be presented. I contacted other families and obtained their statements and sent a link to my website which had tape recordings and text messages my daughter had sent me. Included was her message to the Grand Jury. This contact did not accept the link which invited them to my online account that held the evidence. This information was supposed to be given to the Grand Jury because I did not want my location to be disclosed until my case was resolved for fear of retalliation.

Suddenly now the Grand Jury tells me they are not going to hear my case. They told me not call back ..........so how is that for justice????

NO REASON WAS GIVEN FOR CANCELLING OUR HEARING !!

When I confronted this contact the phone suddenly went dead ......

Could it be that a Father's Right Activist actually destroyed my daughter's testimony and chances of returning home ???

It seems that once again CPS escapes justice. I'm beginning to think there isn't anyone who cares about children in this "Child Protection Racket". All of the evidence has been ignored and the Grand Jury has yet to review the evidence, tapes and text messages my daughter wrote to me.

I wonder just who is profitting off my child. One has to wonder just how deep this corruption runs.....

My daughter calls The Grand Jury "DARTH VADER". She tells me no one cares.

Stay tuned because this Mother ain't givin up that easy...........

MORE LOCAL NEWS:

Next door (Santa Barbara) is being investigated

http://fu4crf.blogspot.com/2008/11/grand-jury-investigates-child-welfare.html

Alex Jones Chews out CPS Socio-worker

ALEX JONES CHEWS OUT SOCIO-WORKER

Article about CPS of San Luis Obispo-Social Disservices

http://archive.newtimesslo.com/index.php?p=showarticle&id=1944

Here are some excerpts from this article that refers Director Lee Collins of San Luis Obispo Child "Protection" Services:

"Manipulated reports. Destroyed or discarded case information. Vindictive action against parents. Poor investigations. Even poorer background searches into licensed caregivers. The villainously creative practice of backdating documents."

"the preexisting friendship between Edge and Collins indicates that the appointment proved somewhat of a hookup."

"critics maintain that certain systemic barriers prevent the true enforcement of any real accountability within the department."

"the threats and blatantly vindictive decision-making finally trickled out." "the department holds lordship over its own documents."

"While conducting its own internal investigation with all mechanisms fully at the department's discretion Social Services has 90 days, by law, to review a case. This gives them plenty of time to cook up stories,"

"I know how they work. I've seen them do it."

"Certain social workers continue to twist documentation right under his nose, and the supervision system at Social Services often rewards such behavior".

"a "blacklist" system that prevents concerned employees from making positive changes. "fear and intimidation prove typical forms of influence or motivation within Social Services."

"Favoritism runs throughout the department, and if you dare speak up against a wrong and it sparks a nerve in the wrong person you are marked to be gotten ridden of"

"A source inside the San Luis Obispo County Employee's Association reported an extremely disproportionate number of grievances filed against Social Services".

"Most of the workers at Social Services are completely disillusioned by Collins' actions," said one department employee.


The Article goes on to state: 
Collins explained that the proper removal or demotion of several popular but grossly underperforming caseworkers prompted questioning and contempt among certain staff circles. "I wish I could send a memo to everyone, but I can't. Meanwhile, the guy who got fired got to tell his side of it, and the mythology starts to take off," Collins said. "The concept that I'm stifling dissent is laughable," he continued.  Mr. Collins is a cocky wordsmith. There are many complaints against his agency by former Social Workers who are fired if they don't perform.

Following the 2003 grand jury report, Social Services installed a stewardship program to mitigate potential employee grievances. However, no such mechanism yet exists to curb the foul play reported by the subsequent grand jury. In that regard, several recent case files reviewed by New Times cast doubt on the total reversal of a few dubious CWS practices. These cases rehash many of the problems illuminated by the 17 stories reviewed by the grand jury. Every family contacted declined to share specifics. Several cited potential CWS retribution as a motive to remain off the record.


THE SOURCE OF THIS ARTICLE CAME FROM SUE MC MEANS,  VETERAN OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND WHO WORKED THERE FOR 20+ YEARS

A copy of this article can be found at: http://metafocus.net/~freeed/wikka.php?wakka=SocialDisservices