This page demonstrates the links and comparisons between the MCFD/Family Court System and the Criminal Justice and Provincial Court System and in particular the investigation practices.
Connections with the Police and Criminal Justice System
1. Many parents are suspected by MCFD of abuse of children but investigation by the police finds no reasonable grounds for continuing the investigation. However MCFD still treats the parent as if he or she is guilty of an alleged offence or minimally of being an unsafe parent and therefore subjects the parent to supervised access and other limitations which are tantamount to a sentence without trial.
2. Some parents are actually charged with an offence such as assault on a child but charges are subsequently dropped or if tried, are acquitted in the Provincial Court. In such cases, MCFD may still treat the parents as guilty or unsafe and continue to malign their character and competency in Custody/Care Court hearings. Every avenue is pursued by MCFD to prevent a previously acquitted parent from securing the return of a child.
Comparisons between the two Court systems
Both Criminal and Provincial/MCFD/Family Courts have an adversarial approach in that the frequently displayed primary motive is to win the case. Upholding truth and justice appears to be of secondary importance. It might be said that justice is a power game to be won or lost. The objective seems not the discovery of the truth but rather to case win. However, in the absence of truth there is no justice.
1. The Criminal Court, while adversarial, is typically open to the public and media to insure that justice is witnessed and affected, whereas the MCFD/Provincial/Family Court is often concealed.
2. The MCFD/Family Court system tends to be far less accountable than the Criminal Court, having a pervasive secrecy and privacy which tends to conceal practices which may be unprofessional. The MCFD/Provincial Court while technically open, permits few non-family supporters to attend defended hearings and the media is typically excluded. 3. In the Criminal Court a conviction must meet the burden of proof which is guilt beyond reasonable doubt while in the MCFD/Family Court a ruling is determined on the balance of probabilities which is a much lower standard.
4. The 'Child, Family and Community Services Act' for the sake of child protection, allows procedures and actions by social workers and police which would be fundamental breaches of human rights if conducted for any other purposes. Parental rights and responsibilities and children’s needs and wishes are often frequently disregarded when a child has not been harmed but is considered likely to be at risk and therefore is removed, often with force (police). Stated another way, freedom to live as a family unit has been destroyed when no parent has actually committed any crime.
Very well put, once again.
ReplyDeleteIf MCFD, its lawyers, social workers, and so on, really believed what they were doing was moral, just, and in the best interests of children, they wouldn`t have any need for secrecy. The fact that they are so vigilant in hiding the truth shows that they know that having the truth revealed is very dangerous for them. They know they are guilty. They must live in a certain state of fear, given the fact that what they are doing is so unjust and, frankly, cruel to the most innocent and defenceless of victims, children.
Tomorrow,Monday at 9.15 AM Judge Crabtree will have seen all the evidence and has received the director's three day diatribe which passed as a final summary. He has received the Baynes' final submission on less than 20 pages. Hopefully he has taken the time to read it. He will let it be known approximately when he will deliver his written verdict. Probably not less than 8 weeks and not more than twelve. He must be a slow writer. I could write the following words "The director has failed to make a clear and compelling case that that the court should make continuing care order and the children will be returned unconditionally to their parents immedately" in a couple of minutes. Never mind all that. Will he be able to deliver his verdict so the kids can be home for Christmas? Are you joking? One cannot rush the true course of justice. Good heavans! We are only just getting into our fourth year. Be reasonable.
ReplyDeleteEven if he has not finished, the judge could make life a lot nicer for the Bayne family if he allowed some unsupervised time together. Especially on Christmas Day. All you Bayne friends keep your fingers crossed.
THE PROCESS OF GETTING MY CHILDREN BACK
ReplyDeleteIt seemed like for years, I hit a dead end in respect to my case.
It was dismissed before court, at the highest court of appeal, it all didnt seem real.
I have exhausted all options which I could appeal, how is anyone at that point suppposed to feel?
I took my case to the Legislative assembly
and I was granted a further review this was denied, I felt like a part of me had died inside, and when my son's father comitted sucicide.
The MCFD and their response was that is really to bad, when reality is my son will never get to have a relationship with his dad.
Since the legislative assembly I tried to get a judical reveiw This imformation the MCFD never had.
I fought my case from 1997 until 2007 and these are my thoughts
Allegations were made that I neglected my older son, and a their was consequent fear I had a deficit in judgment, this gets the MCFD's foot in the door.
The MCFD are really swift if you get my drift.
The MCFD said I was mentally Handicapped to find something that would fit to make their agrument legit.
The MCFD use a medical doctor so they can keep your child a little longer, and make their agruement stronger and to get the CCO Order.
The MCFD will lie and they will rip you apprat until you cry and pry into your life and if you say they caused you grief or strife there never accounable and they will tell you to get a life.
The director always uses the CCO Order and if you say well I object and usually the response is dispesing of your consent...
Meaning they can adopt your child without it.
If you give them positive reports such as your house is safe and clean, the MCFD get twice as mean where's that report we never seen!
So you want access to your kids there away or you can expect there will bedlays it is sad but these are the games the MCFD plays.
The MCFD will deny you access there is nothing you can do at this point it is hopeless
Regarding their actions I think their the ones who need to be assesed.
If you get to see your child the MCFD will say
in the name of the child's best interest 1 hour per week one day.
If you complain they will say you are being a pain and tell the judge your your child would be at risk in your care if you try and appeal
the MCFD can't be found no where!
For years they have been abusive not to mention so intrusive all in the name of the child's best interst,how they do decive this tangled web they weave.
I dont know what else to say accept I realized it comes to putting it down in writing;
For the Record; no matter what you heard
In spite of the pain, I got back up on my feet again.
I said mom and dad this is my decsion now
I made it this far with out them some how
because MCFD destroys families my mom and dad never supported me,
Never the less I goot past my fears dried my tears my rage and tears and let them know I m still fighting I think Ive made that clear,
Ive been told to give up and to let it go
because it has been so many years you can't
force your children to see you,
accept it there is nothing else you can do.
I just said no!
I won't give up,
I take back my power!
I keep fightig because I love my children that much!
Ray, what makes you think Judge Crabtree will take 8 to 12 weeks to deliver the verdict? Has he given any indication that he may take this long?
ReplyDelete7:48 PM ANON
ReplyDeleteI will take the liberty of answering.
I was in court the day that Judge Crabtree indicated that given his other demands as Chief Justice and his timetable for the next months, he would be from 8-12 weeks before being able to deliver his ruling in a court appearance.
8:27 PM Anon
ReplyDeleteI am familiar with your story and your statements here are further substantiation for my post today.
8:27 PM ANON
ReplyDeleteOn this occasion I have chosen not too publish the Director's name, that you mentioned in your postscript.
I am appalled at these contrived delays.
ReplyDeleteRay, can you elaborate on the total time MCFD AGREED to allow the Baynes to live with their two boys in the grandparents home? Was it several months?
Also, there was a comment by someone speculating that Bethany's femur break occurred a couple of weeks before the removal, and was caused by doctors or technicians struggling to straighten the little girl before scans were done. Finn is trying to pin this on the parents to bolster the SBS claims.
In this case, the judge made a couple of precedent setting rulings, lifting the usual publicity ban and forcing Mr. Humany to reveal his source that was maligning Paul Bayne, for the reason the report had nothing to do with the children. Humeny included the derogatory information in the risk assessment, but nothing that spoke positively of the Baynes.
ReplyDeleteI note Finn Jensen stated the Baynes "did not cooperate" in the risk assessment (as if to suggest the Baynes refused to reveal their parenting strengths and community support for that blank 'family strengths' page in Humeny's 'Comprehensive' Risk Assessment.)
The press could be all over this case as it drags on, but this is curious this is not happening.
This case is being watched all over the world. Whatever ruling Judge Crabtree makes, it will go down in history.
ReplyDeleteYou have written a good analysis of what is wrong with MCFD court. My husband has not been able to work since this started as we have a situation wherein MCFD considers him a better parent than me and it is mandated this way. It is all kind of strange. I am to travel to receive 'services', yet the more 'services' I receive, the harder it is to manage our family. So our parenting gets worse, the more 'services' we get. Fortunately, I got my kids back!!! And only one is still in care.
ReplyDelete