"The mission of the Attorney General's department is to serve the people of New Hampshire with diligence, independence and integrity by performing the constitutional, statutory and common law duties of the Attorney General as the State's chief legal officer and chief law enforcement officer, to seek to do justice in all prosecutions, to provide the State with legal representation and counsel of the highest quality, to protect the State's environment and the rights of its consumers, and to provide supervision and leadership of New Hampshire law enforcement."
or so it states on their website http://doj.nh.gov/
In an article on 4/9/12; http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120409/NEWS06/704099953 By TED SIEFER
Where all reader conments have been deleted lends support to the following:
This article brings forth the notion that:
Delaney would like the public to believe that asking his office for some accountability is in and of itself a strain. Over the last year, the impact the Redress of Grievance Committee has had, has been little to none on qualifying "the State's effort to protect the health and safety of New Hampshire's children,” because Delaney refuses to be and/or refuses to hold his departments accountable to the public he is suppose to serve. This failure could be because his position is not that of an elected official but an appointment by a NH Governor. Therefore it is unlikely that he will act as AG Coakley of Massachusetts with a Public Integrity Division that addresses: "Corrupt public employees ....Crimes that have a corrosive or harmful effect on public confidence in our government and other trusted institutions, including such crimes as perjury and obstruction of justice." http://www.mass.gov/ago/bureaus/criminal/the-public-integrity-division-folder/ which is why the Redress of Grievance Committee has come into existence and has in the last year been given the power to demand answers, accountability and under the leadership of Speaker O'Brien restore public confidence in areas such as Delany's Division for Children, Youth and Families (DCYF).
Delaney is also quoted as writing his employees are prohibited from responding to allegations against them/their departments activities "due to strict confidentiality rules, which “are important to protect our children and ensure the integrity of our child protection system.” However, and perhaps redundantly it would rather mean that the "Prohibition" is in fact to cover up his departments activities. The House voted last month "to grant subpoena power to committees, with the approval of the Rules Committee and the House speaker. The move was prompted by the grievance committee's efforts to get information from DCYF."
The reference in this article to Delaney and Speaker O'Brien "disputes in recent years" attempts to gloss over the fact that this division is unaccountable to the public they are suppose to serve and and in fact a menace to the children in their care who have been put into the foster care system not for their own benefit; but to benefit drug studies with the State as their warden giving consent, and to collect federal money that when looked at under the NH RSA 169-C can be seen as a multi layering scheme now invested in a non-profit the "Children's Trust Fund":
Most notably the attorney general's refusal to participate and respond, comes after the Federal Government performed Audits that show they are NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL LAW see http://www.acf.hhs.gov/.
Delaney objects to qualifying an answer to “Under what DCYF policy does it state slandering parents and family members is allowed in order to place a child in foster care?” Which perhaps word to create friction in affect means "What practices are in place so that CPSW's are not fabricating evidence to meet their goal of placement?" The "substantial commitment of state legal resources" is used to cover up the fraudulent and/or knowingly malicious acts of individual actors within DCYF. Instead of correcting the many complaints brought to his attention, Delaney continues to engage in rhetoric to keep closed door proceedings that only protect his workers and deny due process to the families and children of NH for ulterior intent.
Support your state legislators who get paid a $100 a year and are going out of their way to protect your interests; write to your congressional state representatives to give them added support in their efforts to demand accountability! https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
In an article on 4/9/12; http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120409/NEWS06/704099953 By TED SIEFER
Where all reader conments have been deleted lends support to the following:
This article brings forth the notion that:
Our government... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. Author: Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis
Attorney General Michael Delaney of NH was quoted in the above article as "criticizing a recently established legislative committee for asking questions and demanding answers from his staff" the redress of grievance committee has been looking into NH Citizens complaints for almost 5 years now; and has been trying to restore public trust and confidence in our public institutions, by following up numerous on citizen complaints, a great majority against the Attorney General's office for covering up their employees fraudulent activities.Delaney would like the public to believe that asking his office for some accountability is in and of itself a strain. Over the last year, the impact the Redress of Grievance Committee has had, has been little to none on qualifying "the State's effort to protect the health and safety of New Hampshire's children,” because Delaney refuses to be and/or refuses to hold his departments accountable to the public he is suppose to serve. This failure could be because his position is not that of an elected official but an appointment by a NH Governor. Therefore it is unlikely that he will act as AG Coakley of Massachusetts with a Public Integrity Division that addresses: "Corrupt public employees ....Crimes that have a corrosive or harmful effect on public confidence in our government and other trusted institutions, including such crimes as perjury and obstruction of justice." http://www.mass.gov/ago/bureaus/criminal/the-public-integrity-division-folder/ which is why the Redress of Grievance Committee has come into existence and has in the last year been given the power to demand answers, accountability and under the leadership of Speaker O'Brien restore public confidence in areas such as Delany's Division for Children, Youth and Families (DCYF).
Delaney is also quoted as writing his employees are prohibited from responding to allegations against them/their departments activities "due to strict confidentiality rules, which “are important to protect our children and ensure the integrity of our child protection system.” However, and perhaps redundantly it would rather mean that the "Prohibition" is in fact to cover up his departments activities. The House voted last month "to grant subpoena power to committees, with the approval of the Rules Committee and the House speaker. The move was prompted by the grievance committee's efforts to get information from DCYF."
The reference in this article to Delaney and Speaker O'Brien "disputes in recent years" attempts to gloss over the fact that this division is unaccountable to the public they are suppose to serve and and in fact a menace to the children in their care who have been put into the foster care system not for their own benefit; but to benefit drug studies with the State as their warden giving consent, and to collect federal money that when looked at under the NH RSA 169-C can be seen as a multi layering scheme now invested in a non-profit the "Children's Trust Fund":
[RSA
169-C:39-c repealed by 2010, 195:3, effective on the date that the New Hampshire
Children's Trust certifies to the secretary of state, the state treasurer, and
the director of the office of legislative services that the trust has been
formed as a private New Hampshire voluntary corporation and has been qualified
by the Internal Revenue Service as a section 501(c)(3) entity.]
169-C:39-c New Hampshire
Children's Trust Fund. – Most notably the attorney general's refusal to participate and respond, comes after the Federal Government performed Audits that show they are NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL LAW see http://www.acf.hhs.gov/.
Delaney objects to qualifying an answer to “Under what DCYF policy does it state slandering parents and family members is allowed in order to place a child in foster care?” Which perhaps word to create friction in affect means "What practices are in place so that CPSW's are not fabricating evidence to meet their goal of placement?" The "substantial commitment of state legal resources" is used to cover up the fraudulent and/or knowingly malicious acts of individual actors within DCYF. Instead of correcting the many complaints brought to his attention, Delaney continues to engage in rhetoric to keep closed door proceedings that only protect his workers and deny due process to the families and children of NH for ulterior intent.
Support your state legislators who get paid a $100 a year and are going out of their way to protect your interests; write to your congressional state representatives to give them added support in their efforts to demand accountability! https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
AG Delaney want's the citizen's of NH to believe that specific questions are being asked about specific families. That is NOT the case. The Redress Grievance Committee want's question's answered pertaining to the Protocols DCYF is supposed to follow and why these Protocols have NOT been followed. This has nothing to do with CONFIDENTIALITY!
ReplyDeleteThe department of labor operates with the express blessing and force of the attorney generals office,indeed,theese liars have embeded theese illigitament practices within every check point of the three branches here in nh.the fluid collusion has obvious ramifications for the redress of grievance has clearly been a tell tale sign of how government is available to the highest bidder and can somehow deny its sublects the flawless remedy to oversight,that is decide to remove the only effective preliminary tie breaker,and that is redress of gievance.Mrs norelli has ties to theese criminals and has effectivly allowed redress from preforming this critical function of truth to hold theese other agencies accountable.The flagrant corrution in nh is a stench that even salt water cannot hide,the only hope is that if high tide returns theese worthless corpses will,God willing,be washed out to sea and get the hell out of our country.
ReplyDelete