"Few things are so deadly as a misguided sense of compassion." Charles Colson
The Redress of Grievance Committee's right to subpoena sealed records comes with responsibility and should be viewed by a small committee to protect the child's privacy and one of those viewers better be a seasoned family law attorney!
http://www.nhinsider.com/press-releases/2012/6/19/nhdp-icymi-house-committee-trying-to-subpoena-confidential-c.html reported:
"The vote to subpoena the records was 9-3, along party lines, ... a Rep. ... said his understanding is the subpoena is intended to uncover "exculpatory evidence that basically proves that a complainant is a fit father" from the guardian ad litem assigned to the case."
Number 1. Exculpatory evidence is meant to prove innocence and occurs in criminal charges the case they reference is civil.
Number 2. Looking solely at one source in any case is hardly going to define someone as a fit parent - it would have to be collaborative to make a valid ruling as such it must be cross referenced on all the sources. Meaning:
1. - Read the sealed GAL report check for unbalanced reporting example stated fact versus whether or not they actually viewed what was reported as a fact, without a disclosure of who else might have relayed it?
2. - Confirm the GAL's sources therapist etc.;
3. - Confirm the GAL's investigative skills did they document conversations as they had them?
4. - Did the GAL's investigative skills demonstrate that he/she reviewed the therapist's actual record with the child to be sure their verbal disclosures mirror their written disclosures about what the child said had alleged to have said to them? NO?
5. - Then go back and cross reference the GAL's disclosures of what the therapist said is it what that the therapist disclosed? is it in their notes with the child? or her notes of a call with the GAL? If not than it may be shown that the therapist lied and you have a case to plead fitness;
6. - If they do not match then you have to find our who lied - check the GAL record did he/she simply record conversations and document them in a way a DCYF worker or as an investigator would; if not than it may be shown that the GAL lied you have a case to plead fitness;
7. If all sources and back up, check out = you have an unfit parent;
8. Please be aware the above is just a sample of the crossreferencing that would need to be done in this case to ascertain a compelte and accurate investigation.
Reviewing sources, distinguishing whether or not they are a primary source, secondary and/or that their records to support are in place; is a responsibility: all the source's should be subpoenaed to be appropriately reasoned; with out it, all you can hope to gain is your opponents opposition - and rightfully so, because you do not know what your doing or looking for to support and/or discredit either side.
"With great power comes great responsibility" this appears to have originally been used by Voltair in French "Œuvres de Voltaire, Volume 48". Lefèvre, 1832); as well as Thomas C. Hansard, ed (1817) in Parliamentary Debates stated the phrase was already a cliché as a UK Member of Parliament in 1817 and the sentiment is also found in Luke 12:48: "from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked" (NIV).
If your going to take on something do it thoroughly, completely and the right way.
The Redress of Grievance Committee's right to subpoena sealed records comes with responsibility and should be viewed by a small committee to protect the child's privacy and one of those viewers better be a seasoned family law attorney!
http://www.nhinsider.com/press-releases/2012/6/19/nhdp-icymi-house-committee-trying-to-subpoena-confidential-c.html reported:
"The vote to subpoena the records was 9-3, along party lines, ... a Rep. ... said his understanding is the subpoena is intended to uncover "exculpatory evidence that basically proves that a complainant is a fit father" from the guardian ad litem assigned to the case."
Number 1. Exculpatory evidence is meant to prove innocence and occurs in criminal charges the case they reference is civil.
Number 2. Looking solely at one source in any case is hardly going to define someone as a fit parent - it would have to be collaborative to make a valid ruling as such it must be cross referenced on all the sources. Meaning:
1. - Read the sealed GAL report check for unbalanced reporting example stated fact versus whether or not they actually viewed what was reported as a fact, without a disclosure of who else might have relayed it?
2. - Confirm the GAL's sources therapist etc.;
3. - Confirm the GAL's investigative skills did they document conversations as they had them?
4. - Did the GAL's investigative skills demonstrate that he/she reviewed the therapist's actual record with the child to be sure their verbal disclosures mirror their written disclosures about what the child said had alleged to have said to them? NO?
5. - Then go back and cross reference the GAL's disclosures of what the therapist said is it what that the therapist disclosed? is it in their notes with the child? or her notes of a call with the GAL? If not than it may be shown that the therapist lied and you have a case to plead fitness;
6. - If they do not match then you have to find our who lied - check the GAL record did he/she simply record conversations and document them in a way a DCYF worker or as an investigator would; if not than it may be shown that the GAL lied you have a case to plead fitness;
7. If all sources and back up, check out = you have an unfit parent;
8. Please be aware the above is just a sample of the crossreferencing that would need to be done in this case to ascertain a compelte and accurate investigation.
Reviewing sources, distinguishing whether or not they are a primary source, secondary and/or that their records to support are in place; is a responsibility: all the source's should be subpoenaed to be appropriately reasoned; with out it, all you can hope to gain is your opponents opposition - and rightfully so, because you do not know what your doing or looking for to support and/or discredit either side.
"With great power comes great responsibility" this appears to have originally been used by Voltair in French "Œuvres de Voltaire, Volume 48". Lefèvre, 1832); as well as Thomas C. Hansard, ed (1817) in Parliamentary Debates stated the phrase was already a cliché as a UK Member of Parliament in 1817 and the sentiment is also found in Luke 12:48: "from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked" (NIV).
If your going to take on something do it thoroughly, completely and the right way.
The Redress of Grievances Committee has access to attorneys who can make sure any investigation is done lawfully. If there is indeed abuse going on in the family courts, it should rightfully be investigated. It is dangerous to believe the family courts can police themselves. The Redress of Grievances Committee may be new, but its members represent an important balance of power which must be restored.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comment and while I agree with investigation of family courts; I also believe in a child's right to privacy hence the safe guards above. The Redress Committee needs to triple check the fact patterns of any given case and be above reproach when demanding accountability from others; and get ALL THE REAL EVIDENCE not just a limited selection,to prove either way the fittness issue in that matter. This particular case file is public record and my recommendation comes after researching it an unbiased Attorney's review coupled with discussion with lay people versus untrained research analysts are two different things.
ReplyDelete