IT'S FEBRUARY NOW/ Part 425 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

The court did communicate with the Baynes mid afternoon yesterday but of course they were out. What the Baynes learned after they returned home yesterday from their afternoon visitation with their children was this. The Baynes have told me that the Judge's decision will be ready no later than the end of February 2011.

Yes! You read that correctly. But you weren't ready for it were you? Neither were the Baynes. We were not expecting that. Disappointed is not an adequate descriptor for the way that this news impacts the Baynes and their immediate family and certainly none of their supporters. After three and one half years, this is dreadful.

Alright so let's look at this. Judge Thomas Crabtree is an intelligent and a good man. Yes I believe that. I also believe that he is a responsible man and a good judge of both character and truth as it pertains to distinguishing evidence from collateral and unsubstantiated content. We have yet to hear his decision. It is coming. I am confident that he fully understands how this delay affects Paul and Zabeth. Further, when Judge Crabtree spoke at the end of the last day in court, his proposed date for delivering a ruling was a projection rather than a firm commitment. The date of the 19^th was mentioned in his comments as an outside date and we naturally have hung on to that. Not mistakenly mind you, as verified by the court communication today on the 19th. This time the forecast carries the element of commitment. I surmise that Judge Crabtree regrets dragging this on longer yet. Therefore his message is firm as to time. (Click here and Read Ray Ferris' explanation among today's comments).

Well then, why has he given himself more time. Some of you will be quick to recite your inane conspiracy theories once again so I feel compelled to speculate too. It could be that having been newly appointed as the Chief Justice of B.C. he found that the transition and the obligations are more demanding than he anticipated. It may be that in his personal review of all of the CFCSA/Bayne case material he found that he requires more time to write exactly and precisely. Why the concentration on precision? Because his decision will reach beyond the Bayne Family reunion to speak to the way cases are being managed, people are being treated by the Child Protection network of social workers in this province. His decision will require the attention of the Ms. Du Toit, Ms. Polak and Ms. Turpel-Lafond. It has the potential for affecting the lives of countless other people.

I'll tell you what. That makes a great deal more sense than surmising some grand collusion between the judicial system and MCFD. Further, when Paul and Zabeth last evening through tears, considered the possibility that the delayed decision might help other parents eventually, they said that their pain for another month would be worthwhile if that were the outcome. That is the character that will be unmistakable to Judge Crabtree.

And if this Fraser Valley MCFD Team makes further overtures into involvement in the newborn Bayne child's life before this decision comes down, this may not only be unwise but also be career altering for some people when the press and when the Ministry in Victoria have to sort this out. I am aware of journalists clamouring to jump all over this story.

So many people were anxious to hear good news for the Baynes yesterday that there were over 2000 hits to this site in that 24 hour period. Good for you. You care. I do too.

PAINT IT IN DARK SHADES / Part 376 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Social workers with the Ministry of Children are programmed with authority to enter your premises without warrant when they suspect abuse or neglect. This corresponds with our democratic script for the mandated agencies that superintend our lives with law enforcement and social welfare. Within that fabric is child welfare and protection. When actual abuse or neglect occurs in a home, parents may be compelled to submit to court ordered supervision by MCFD. While this will be temporary and could be ongoing, the MCFD may seek to permanently remove children from parental care as they have done with the Baynes and the Continuing Care Order application upon which Judge Crabtree is presently deliberating. First they have removed the Bayne children to long-term care yet with regular contact with parents, but MCFD (Fraser Valley Region) hopes that the Judge will award permanent custody to MCFD with the intent of having these children adopted.

Lily Marneffee, 'Yellow Splash'

people's perception of MCFD

In this specific case, the wretched nature of this design and all of the decisions and actions to achieve the goal, paint child protection in British Columbia with dark shades of silence, concealment, fear, antagonism, chaos and bereavement. It's all about perception. The finished landscape of MCFD may not be accurately portrayed in greys and blacks because there may be actual promising bursts of cheerful orange and hopeful greens but I can't see them at the moment. Nor, I suspect, will an entire BC population see anything but black when the media dip their brushes into the red pot of frustration and anger and come up painting the clear blue of truth as this chapter concludes. May the Baynes' children be returned to them, and may that same good future be the experience of the countless other moms and dads whose children would be far better off in their family home than in a foster home but are caught in a bureaucratic trap.

THE LAST STAND / Part 331 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Call this installment One. The last day in Court was yesterday. Finally! I do not envy the Judge. Although perhaps he thinks he has an easy task on this one. 

Paul and Zabeth invited me so I was present at the home assessment session in Baynes' home on Tuesday afternoon when two social workers visited. They appeared to be satisfied with the place then and on Wednesday in court the assessment report was discussed. The children have their first six hour visit in the home on Saturday, supervised yet nonetheless, a wonderful opportunity to be a family in a home environment where the two boys will recognize so many familiar items.

I was also in attendance in court on Wednesday at the final episode of Finn Jensen's Summation for the Ministry application. We met in a small court room with nine chairs.

Jensen began at 9:30 and he concluded by 12:30 pm. He concluded with a statement to his honour Judge Crabtree, that the Director, meaning Bruce McNeill was asking for the Judge to rule that the children were still in need of protection and therefore to award a Continuing Care (Custody) Order for all three children.

First Afghan War, January 1842, 4500 British and Indian troops against 30,000 Afghans and Ghilzai tribesmen

He had built up to this of course over three days of Summary presentation and today, the last day, he put the finishing touches on a compendium of what he said was a large body of medical evidence that supports an acceleration/deceleration (Shaken Baby) non accidental cause for the sequence of serious injuries sustained by Baby B in autumn 2007. This is in contrast to what he terms a small body of response material from the Baynes.

This is the kind of case in which the injuries to the child are unexplained. He said that the Baynes' explanation for the injuries was unsatisfactory. He told the Judge that it was the Director's obligation in this kind of case to effectively demonstrate a balance of probabilities. He was fully confident that this had been convincingly conveyed, that is that the balance of probabilities fell to the Director's position that the risk has not been eliminated and that Zabeth's testimony should not be accepted. He asserted that the Baynes have not worked with the Director (eg. The social workers) or participated as parents in the risk assessment. He questioned their ability to sustain themselves financially and suggested that at the time of Baby B's injuries the parents had been stressed by joblessness and were isolating themselves and not accepting help and even suggested they are in a similar position today and that the potential risk remains.

I digress from the court report for the moment to say that some of what Jensen said here is not merely disputable, it is also inaccurate or incomplete. We are speaking about a three year period. During the past several weeks there have been overtures by the Ministry to talk with the Baynes (a little - too late) and the Baynes have declined during these final days before a case conclusion. In declining they knew they were opening themselves to this precise criticism of not working with the Ministry but they listened to their advisors. After three years MCFD is at the end of this long delayed hearing designed permanently to take from the Baynes, THEIR CHILDREN, and now mcfd wants to talk. During the first year and one half there were meetings and while the meeting invitations suggested an agreeable, even promising agenda, the meetings were invariably designed to elicit a confession from them. This persisted until the Baynes' trust in MCFD eroded and hope of cooperation by the Ministry evaporated too. Paul and Zabeth have been employed at menial labour to be sure, but adequately providing for their needs and confident to be able to support their family. They live in a comfortable family rental home with adequate facilities for all their children and large yard outside for the children to play. Please recognize once more that they work evenings doing custodial work, because visitation with children is scheduled for day hours and they have not missed one of those opportunities but even asked for more. If there was normalcy to their home lives, other job opportunities with better income would be considered. That is a reasonable expectation.  Further, there are many families who make a go of it on less than a professional's standard of living and have learned how to shop and to live with less. And to infer that joblessness for a term was sufficient to trigger violence against a baby is pure invention. That is a guess-assessment of a man and a woman who are unknown to the guess-assessor who certainly did not know them at all in 2007. They are certainly not in a similar position today. If job stress were sufficient reason to suspect risk, then no one in that court room would be risk-free. Nor were the Baynes isolating themselves back in 2007. That is a lawyer's statement based upon a social worker's report of a collateral witness' opinion. But the couple's own testimony counts as certainly as does such an hypothesis and they said they were disassociating merely from one couple for reasons that were stated in court as interpersonal issues and having nothing whatsoever to do with the nurture and well-being of the Bayne children, or desiring to withdraw from society. It makes a person think that everyone associated with MCFD would be better judges of character if they were employed as border guards. "And what was the purpose of your trip?"

I'll tell you more tomorrow.

Zabeth and Paul Bayne – Part 44 – The Bayne Campaign for Justice

I WISH I UNDERSTOOD THE LACK OF CONCERN

I have been an organizational CEO. I know the stimulus of a high purpose. I thrived on the motivation of providing services that improve something for someone else. I know what it is like to have a roomy office and the electronics that empower me through connection and information. I know the satisfaction of having executive and administrative assistants outside my door efficiently completing tasks to which I assigned them or exercising initiatives as part of the team. I know the sense of pleasure that accompanies good performance reviews. I know the exhilaration of travel, of seeing new places and faces, of being recognized and called to speak to captive audiences. I know the autonomy of leaving the work day and ignoring all attempts to draw my attention away from personal relaxation.

So I know why the executive leaders of the Ministry of Children and Family Development in Victoria do not relate to the predicament of one British Columbia family. Responsibilities for MCFD are delegated down a lengthy chain of command. When the primary players at MCFD come to the office each day they focus on big picture policy matters and reports and speech writing and perhaps photo opps rather than individual family cases. That’s understandable. Those details belong to others down the command line.

However, when networks like CBC and Global TV air news hour segments that call a specific case into question with respect to MCFD conduct, evidence and decisions, then you would think that those occupying the high chairs in Victoria would think they should review the case files. Such a news story broke last spring with respect to Paul and Zabeth Bayne and their contest with MCFD. MCFD has had custody of their three children for two years. MCFD should have resolved this within three months. MCFD will say this long delay is entirely the Bayne’s fault. MCFD will say that the Baynes have failed to cooperate. That failure consists of not admitting to shaking their infant daughter which is something of which they were not guilty. RCMP after arresting and interrogating dropped all charges of wrongdoing against the Baynes.

In Spring 2009 then Minister of MCFD Tom Christensen as well as Premier Campbell were briefly interviewed and both said they would give it some attention. Perhaps they did.
Perhaps Christensen’s successor Mary Polak has read the file documents too. Perhaps the Deputy Minister Dutoit has as well. If that has not prompted an internal QUIZ SHOW then that is what I don’t understand. The MCFD position birthed and sustained by the Fraser Valley chapter of this frequently criticized Ministry should be causing the chief honchos in Victoria to sweat. This entire case against a loving family is founded on ethereal arguments based on suspicion and a need of evidence. I don’t understand that.

This MCFD wrong-headedness has injured this BC family in so many ways, caused children to question their parents’ love for them because of the separation; compelled them to hire solicitors whose fees have devoured their asset in a home; required a visitation schedule that has compromised the Baynes’ day jobs; caused them to focus all their energy into recovering a family they should never have lost.

It is time to fix this. I understand this. Strong leadership can do this.

Sign this Petition. 450 people have already signed. Do not make an ONLINE BAYNE CAMPAIGN DONATION at this petition site. Once you sign, exit the site. Your signature will still appear.