When I was young, it seemed that life was so wonderful,
a miracle, oh it was beautiful, magical.
And all the birds in the trees, well they'd be singing so happily,
joyfully, playfully watching me.
But then they send me away to teach me how to be sensible,
logical, responsible, practical.
And they showed me a world where I could be so dependable,
clinical, intellectual, cynical.
Now watch what you say or they'll be calling you a radical,
liberal, fanatical, criminal.
Won't you sign up your name, we'd like to feel you're
acceptable, respectable, presentable, a vegtable!
Then at night, when all the world's asleep,
the questions run so deep, for such a simple man.
Won't you please, please tell me what we've learned
I know it sounds absurd, please tell me who I am.
- Supertramp
You know, I was sitting around the house, staring at my computer screen in utter disbelief that this has happened...and then, almost in the same moment, I'm really not suprised at all. I even remember when my wife called me and got to talk to me all of 30 seconds, stating they wouldn't let her call me...and then I slowly came around the block, just in time to catch a few truths scampering by me. I made a grab for 'em. And here you have it:
The Judge is no fool. He knows what he's doing, as do the rest of the players. They're toying with their prey, because they know they can, without someone peeking over their shoulders. Then, either because the court reporter is on their payroll, or the Judge (or a clerk, who knows?) has someway to alter things. I plan on getting copies of each and every hearing...and I'm betting things won't be the same as I remember...kind of like my efilings. Theirs are always listed with their full complete name, as to what they are. Mine only say "Motion". You have to open the cover page to really know what it is.
Worse even, is the up and coming knowledge that they're all going to get away with it too, which is why his Honor, DHS, the D.A., and everyone else that comes along, like the lying sack o' crap drug tester who was there to take a drug test of me after our last hearing (who it's evident has a beneficial finger in DHS's back pocket as well), are simply going to lie, twist facts and fabricate things from sun up to sun down, not because these defendants are neglectful people, or bad people, but because no one can see what's going on, and because Iowa (and the players in our charade, of course) needs money. They could be holding bachelor parties in that court room, and no one would even know about it. As a matter of fact, I'm sure there's only one reason it even slightly resembles a real hearing is this: I'm convinced the foster father doesn't have a clue what's what. I'd have to say he's probably the only neutral player, and I'm sure that the wifey, as well as DHS have him sufficiently bamboozled.
Problem is, there's no one for miles who will properly examine what's up, will talk about it, who considers it to be news of any kind, regardless of the circumstances, or will do anything about it. Why they're doing it is the only thing I know as a fact:
As I've stated more than 1000 times, these people all benefit and profit from these babies being in the system; as well as when the rights are gone; and they're able to suggest an impending adoption as well. BONUS!
Here's a fact I know you'll find real interesting, America...did you know that, in a head to head battle over the termination of the parental rights, that there is, recorded on Westlaw, only 1 case shown where the parent(s) won out, in the state of Iowa. One...single....case. And now I see how as well as why. First they throw you in court before you have any idea the license plate of the train that just hit you, then get her adjudicated, and then they can take a breath...but then, if things start messing up, well they go back into fifth gear and just zoom along at top speed, regardless of what the parents do, moving right on to the termination. The closer they get, and their confidence that you're never going to be able to get an attorney good enough to turn things around in time, the tales get taller in proportion. Their goal now, is that they have to show the world once and for all, no matter how they have to do it, who they have to dig out of the gutters, and no matter who pays for it, or how much; a semblence of reasonableness, for the court's records, and for any federalies who might be auditing, must present itself, or, I'm sure, the whole thing would go South just as quickly. I'm not even surprised anymore really, when they make up stuff these days. Sure it still pisses me off, as it would anyone. It isn't really unlike standing next to someone as they look you in the eye and say you do good work, then turn to another guy a couple of feet away and say everything you do is sub-par. I used to sit in that court room the whole time with my mouth wide open in amazement that anybody could just spit lies with no remorse at all, but then, later, as I would bring what was going on to someone out here in the world, their reaction was always...."What? OMG! They can't do that!!" Then: "No, that's impossible. What you're saying would be illegal. There has to be an explanation..." You know what I mean. The same reaction I've had over what they've said and done...except I'm living the nightmare, so it's real for me. These people mull it over in their heads, and because of their programming that "There has to be more than what this guy is telling me", they dismiss the whole thing as a misunderstanding on my part...and it's on to the next person to try and tell my story again, and usually ending up with the same set of reactions.
Let's move on. So today we'll be filing a few motions again...naturally. I will be highlighting any comments I have to make to address theirs...these do NOT go into the report, but are only for your benefit; and will be like a running commentary when it's something I either don't really need to go into, or don't really feel is worth going on about. After I post this one (then, after it is a "fact of life", I will submit it as a confidential court document with a later time stamp), there will be more to follow. This first one is the rebuttal to DHS' "Report to the Court", another document full to the brim with the usual BULL. This is, of course, the document that got me a bit miffed and caused me to break my favorite waffle iron, to my wife's...and of course to my dismay as well, after I calmed down a bit. It's OK DHS...we can take it out in trade. My waffle iron for my our baby, hows that for (puts on his best Brando face) "an offer you cannot refuse"? Or should I say, an offer you may not be allowed to refuse? We'll see what's what on the 'morrow, eh?
Chris Bruce's Report
(in complete opposition to DHS's supposed report,
stating as fact their usual skewed viewpoint/version of the truth)
In their 3rd recommendation to the court, naturally, is their intent to file a Termination of rights petition, as expected. Too bad they'll never get their wish...lol
Yada yada drug assessment, yadayada recommendations as a result (drug treatment, naturally)
...and CUT!! Now, remember kids...back in the days of our adjudication hearing, these workers, when asked where they thought I should get their required mental eval, said that I didn't need to do that, that they had all they could ever possibly want or need from my V.A. Records, where I feigned depression to get a service dog, and another time a few years prior to get documentation stating my ADD affliction; which, of course, is the ONLY mental issue I have...and that being a miniscule issue, at best, thanks to my growing out of the worst of it. Their statement that they wish me to get another one might be BECAUSE of that court filed statement, but I doubt it. I doubt it, because they still accuse me of having NOS depression and NOS personality disorder which I imagine is their fancy name for ADD), as well as "Cluster B personality traits". Upon further investigation of THAT BS, the first 3 words of description sounded like me...impulsive, emotional, dramatic, etc., but as they broke it down? Psychobabble, incorrect, at that, to the nth degree. For those of you who might be curious, it would manifest at a young age as hostility and torment of living creatures. So BSey. I LOVE all animals, and would be massively averse to any such behavior...see the FACTUAL blog post entitled "Animal Abuse", at:
http://themightyswordamericas26deadlysins.blogspot.com/2014/05/animal-crueltyabuse.html
Add to that, a pinch of hostility, bullying and the like....except that I was probably the meekest and most friedly kid anyone knew. My mother told me, when I was a baby, I never cried, and was standing in the crib on cue every morning she entered the room, insipid grin already well set in stone on my face...nice try though, kids.
As to other stupid things they say, such as a blatant disregard of other people's property, yep...I set a fire to a school bus once, when I was 11...but only after I rejected the idea, and my evil twin foster brother, same age as me, pushed my hand into the trash bucket where the fire started, as I held the burning match I almost had blown out. That was the shortest stint of foster family in my 3 home career. The first was fine, and the last dandy, thanks. They held onto me like grim death for 3 and 4 years, respectively. The majority of my morals and personality bloomed to their fullest during the 11-15 age period.
Yes, deceit happened, but only AFTER I went home with my mother at the age of 15...and only because my narcissistic brother, who had, up to this point, been the only child and rottonly spoiled (talk about unresolved long-standing mental issues, he would be a much better example, really, if he even is at all...I just call everything HE is by its true definition....ASSHOLE), turned me from moral angel into a lying conniving devil in less than a year's time, in an effort to be rid of me. Oh, and that worked too. I immediately left my mother's home, and proceeded to engage in the deceitful practice of working two jobs and supporting myself. As for other "serious violations of conduct", I don't think I ever received condemnation of anything more than a fifth degree misdemeanor, the last of which occured almost 12 years ago, and was, as most of any MINOR infractions I "committed" were, in my case, complete BS. This B crap, as it reads, is a pre-cursor to an anti-social disorder. This overbearing author has no such affliction.
Finally, practically in vogue to have anymore; is the diagnosis of NOS depression...something I hear mental doctors are quite fond of diagnosing, especially when they can't quite put their finger on anything else. I am, quite simply; by it's FORMER diagnosis, back in my day, before it became popular (probably due to the pills you can take for it, I'm guessing...and due to the fact that my drug use, when it was happening, was always recreational and widely spanned, and I HATED pills, especially pharmacueticals; which, by the way, are well-known to cause a hell of a lot more damage to us humans than ANY of nature's offerings, added to the fact that just about everything they prescribe for depression comes with a host of possible side effects, including suicidal tendancies...no thank you!) probably the LEAST depressed person you folks will ever know. If I'm depressed at all, it's about our system of justice, of that you can be sure. I'd say the way these people are, where deceit is concerned, as well as the levels at which it is greatly practiced in our case, have more of that "Cluster B Personality Trait" than I could ever hope to acheive. If anything, I MAY have more the Histrionic deal, where, as the author of this blog is concerned, I love, not only hearing myself talk (and talk and talk), but enjoy, personally, being the center of attention...oh, but wait..no...I'm afraid YOU, of DHS, unfortunately, are stealing my thunder. Hence my haste will be soon enough in disposing of you out of my life. A couple of disagreements to that diagnosis as well though. First, ever-present, is that I will be DEPRESSED (boy they love this word today!!) when I'm not the center of attention. No, I just try harder. Remember? Over-bearing. and way short of my brother's affliction, Narcissism.
Finally, the thing I absolutely love about these types of diagnoses, are when they either take PERSONALITY TRAITS and turn them into symptoms of their "Illnesses" (not unlike "boys will be boys" becoming ADD at a later date, as well as when they totally describe TRAITS that go against what they said earlier...then expect us to swallow it. They say, now, that people with the Histrionic portion of this tend to be followers...and are succeptible to suggestion. Hate to say it, but I'm usually the leader guys. Earlier, it says that these people like to be the center of attention, which never goes hand in hand with succeptibility. And that's your third strike. If it isn't, there's the flamboyant thing. Gray, black and white are my favorite colors.
So.....that diagnosis and all it entails isssssss OUTTA THERE!! (scratching sound). The number you have dialed has been disconnected, or is no longer in service at this time. Please, check yourself, and try your recommendation again.
As for the wife, she's always had to do the eval, as well as that idiotic cognitive thing, in order for these folks to have a leg to stand on, where her ability to take care of the baby is concerned. I'll say this yet another time...COG NI TIVE A BIL I TY IS NOT, IN ANY OTHER SPECIES ON EARTH, A REQUIREMENT OF MOTHERHOOD. INSTINCT. THAT'S the ticket. Only self-absorbed self-important humans (thank you George C., wherever you are) require these "cognitive abilities", something I guarantee our fore-fathers would have greatly scoffed at them for thinking of, let alone mentioning. Her only real affliction is her meek disposition, and her naivete, which these workers have, as you know, taken FULL advantage of, where the removal was concerned (and let's not forget Daily Maize, who should be, by this time, knee-deep in consideration as a prime candidate for disbarment), and her flippant way of signing documents without asking questions, something DHS workers, of all shapes and sizes, just LOVE. NEEEEEEEXT!!
Blah-de-Blah Parenting classes, aaanddd....CUT!!
Now, I imagine because of DHS's imaginary tale of my latest drug test sequence of events, that now they want random drug testing done, on both parents. Imagine that. Like I didn't know THAT was coming. Idiots.
Then we have the English skill set of Katie Gosch to consider, as she says "This case plan be adopted, and will be complied to by all parties". Really? All parties? I don't remember adopting this plan, personally...No, I don't think I DO comply to that "case plan"...matter of fact, I don't think any of us are due to adopt or comply to much of anything, thank you very much. I think you'll be throwing our daughter back at us before long, along with your blessings and congratulations, if I have anything to say about it. It will be a very long time, too, before I ever open my door for a re-visit either. Not without the Judge present, as I watch him sign his name to the order, to ensure that no deceit on the part of the adjoining SW Worker is present.
Now we get to the meat & potatoes of this little gem. This is where we start tearing into the bones of the defendants.
This case started for us on July 17th. The reporter, someone who had been here for almost 2 weeks of time, including the initial period before the child was born, around 5 days, and was not with us at all for this interaction, mostly because her and her husband were fleeing our trying to get harrassment charges filed on them; as well as had to be forcibly removed from our property, because they didn't care for the fact that I wanted them to find somewhere else to live because we wanted to bring our daughter home. It was because she was not able to get back at me, personally, that she chose, instead to pick on my wife, someone who not only doesn't deserve this sort of thing, but hasn't done a thing wrong herself, or to anyone else for that matter.
In her vindictiveness, this ungrateful reporter, who had effectively sucked us dry of money and food by the time this baby had arrived, called DHS to lie to them about who they were to us, as well as their supposed role in our lives, in order to call their attention to these parents. They ALLEGED that we were dealing drugs, though this has yet to be proven beyond the scope of this SW's report of what the reporter says, and is not so; thereby is still, to this date, as it started...alleged. As to the mother's knowledge of my drug dealing, there was no drug dealing, so there wasn't, by default, any knowledge, either. And of course, any other concerns were, at the time of the interview, again, just that...alleged concerns...nothing more. There was little to no proof of any of this, as reported by this worker, and, thanks to the evidence provided as Exhibit #34, the recording of the mother's illegal removal, as well as countless lies told on her assessment, it's pretty easy to see that lies become this worker, and that her testimony on the stand, as well as in her assessment and on the order, should be regarded as fabrication, considering, if only, the amount of falsity and deceit employed and used to have this mother sign her baby away, first into Safe Haven (used only because the worker employed at Methodist mentions that she asked about it....once), and then, as she states she has no choice but to put the baby into foster care, the mother then shows this to be, again, against her wishes as well as her being under legal duress at the signing of this order.
Be it known that this signature, in the judge's spot on the order, has been officially determined to not be the signature of his Honor, Judge William A. Price, but that permission has been granted to this worker to forge his Honor's signature with his OK in such an instance, which to me not only constitutes a measure of fraud, but of forgery as well. This is shown as truth, per Exhibits 35-38, the official orders of this judge, which are all stamped. This worker left to get a judge's signature on the order during normal business hours and, more than likely, during a lull in the judge's business, so his usual stamp should be expected to be on this official document as well as they are on the orders. The signature shown is decidedly different than his Honor's stamped version with glaring differences in their execution. Note also that, in accordance with the recording, that forgery becomes this worker, in that she tells Liz that she will read the order to her, then have Elizabeth sign each line with her initials, something the mother always does when asked to do so, yet signs these lines with X's instead, to indicate that she does understand and agree to all that's read...even though the worker obviously and with full knowledge skips reading nearly 2/3's of the order...including her lies that she states as reasons to remove our daughter, most of which are still, to this day, either easily dismissed, an outright or twisted falsehood, a complete reason with important parts ommitted, or a blog post segment framed for the author, by both DHS and this worker, as well as the DA, so as to guess the time frame this reason begins and ends for him, claiming this as evidentiary and truthful, as well as the interpretation of the words he uses and their context; and like they've known him all their lives, and know EXACTLY this phrase's meaning as it comes from the brain of this author.
It has been shown, and is documented and researched, that the typed sentence or paragraph loses over 67% of its meaning when it comes in as a typed text message only; and grouped of its own. Isn't it possible then that the same amount of meaning can be lost in a longer blog post; or completely, when considering only 5-10 words used to state a lack of bond with the father in the middle of one sentence amidst a myriad of sentences contained in one of a 171 blog posts, all dated different days?? You are not only lacking things that go without saying: body language, history, inflection, facial expressions, hand motions, eye contact, tone, volume...after which you should, by all reason, forego a go at figuring this out yourself, and simply just ask what the author means by what he says; under normal circumstances; then proceeds to box these words off of the rest of the post in an effort to judge what this defendant feels then, at that moment, due to other circumstances that are, more than likely temporary. The law decided, whenever, that if it's out there as public statement, it can be used against you; but I say unless you have a doctorate in psychology or psychiatrics, you have no right to determine, or even guess, or claim to be fact, ANYTHING, where the thoughts of feelings of someone for however long those thoughts or feelings might last. Yet this worker, eliminating all sentences, word groups, paragraphs and posts around this one that would normally be considered to explain or indicate that maybe there's more to this group of words that you would NORMALLY consider. in order to relay an overall theme with which to prepare or explain to the reader the reasons behind the authors feeling this way at this time; this department, in its usual fasion, in order to accomplish its twisted agenda, chooses only to single out one segment of one sentence in one paragraph in order to prove their false truth and find the defendants guilty of whatever they might be alleging. This is really no different than claiming that, when the author wrote, in his blog, "The dog loves to play, and his favorite trick is playing dead", and, in editing the sentence, claim that the author was factually stating that "The dog is dead", meaning the author is guilty of the dog's death...arrest him!; because of the surrounding words that you choose to eliminate, and only want to consider, in order to prove your alleged wrong.
I present to this court, as well, the lack of any known degree these caseworkers and social workers might have that might be considered a right with which to assess, for instance, a need for drug assessment, drug treatment, mental capacity to function as a parent; or badger and accuse the same as being drug addicts or mental cases. I refer to the exhibits presented, numbered"", #, that show the mother, via Primary Healthcare, received a prescribed inhaler filled with "", which has been shown to prove a false positive, in patients who use it, for methampetimines. So where is your proof of this mother as a user of meth now, I wonder? I feel, if naught else, that this department duly owes the mother an apology, to be presented immediately.
In order to punch this father's buttons, once again, is a statement that the mother consented, with her signature, the removal of our child. I present that removal as NOT consented to in any fashion, considering, once again, the recording in Exhibit #34. The order was not obtained, it was fraudulently implemented, as shown in this Exhibit, again.
Now, these parents choose to present that the portion of this report that refers to our missing visits and "doctors appointmentS" only refers to a period of one week, and not just one week, but the first week following the removal of our daughter, a very traumatic experience, as it would be for ANY parent. In this week we lost our daughter (illegally done), our "unstable housing" (that was very stable for us for over a year and a half, regardless of federal and state definition of this being unstable. If you're in a true apartment, and you're served with an emergency eviction good in 3 days, there are, then, only 2 days difference in your eviction period in which to claim the apartment more stable, right? And what else is there to claim this apartment to be more stable then? It all comes down to what you choose to define it as. Just because it caries the name "extended stay Hotel" only makes it unstable because that's what whoever passed the law sees it as, often without further investigation as to its stability); our reputations and our dignity, all in the same week; causing these defendants, who were already destitute and indigent, with only a signle bus pass available, to be immediately in need of shelter and transportation in order to accomplish what DHS expected us to do, with no further offer of assistance.\There was, missed, only a single doctor's appointment, and to expect the distraught and traumatized (as well as indigent) parents to immediately follow this schedule under the circumstances was asking entirely too much.
We present, as well, that the hair test that these workers had, unbeknownst to us, "stipulated" of us in order to appease their allegations of drug use and drug dealing (according to the SW's claim, in fact, on Exhibit #, as one of her reasons to hold the baby at Methodist with her "concerns"), is ridiculous. These workers, on the date of our interview, simply asked if we wouldn't mind doing so, and informed us at that time, that the business would be available to visit at 11 a.m. the next morning. If his Honor should so note, the mother was picked up by these workers the next morning at 9:51 a.m., shown in this worker's assessment, dated complete on , and shown in defense's exhibit # that this worker then details all times following this pickup time as being with the mother at Methodist with our daugther and with them, until well after 2 p.m.; yet states that these parents did not follow DHS's ONLY stipulation of us, again, unbeknownst to these parents, as mandatory within the time frame given, and impossible for the mother to honor, since she was present with these workers at the hospital. Note also, that the worker states the mother's earnest, to immediately take her test, which, under normal circumstances with a reasonable subject, would be looked upon as a defendant more than likely innocent of any wrongdoing, or it would have been agrued not needed, or more likely fought against doing, where this "mandatory and ordered DHS Stipulation" was concerned, as would be done by a guiltier party. This father also had it in his mind to accomplish this the same day, in order to clear his reputation, yet upon hearing of this mother's situation, sought to hold out, only because of his immediate distrust of the mother's ordeal up to that time as being a legitimate and legal way of handling our situation. And, of course, considering the condtion and professionalism levels of this facility, upon hearing the mother's experience, I trusted it even less, especailly after hearing that the mother's test, the first one, had been botched by these "Professional testers", even though the differences of her fake and real hair were as different as night and day.
The father only held out in opposition, not because he knew he MIGHT be found to be ONLY SLIGHTLY dirty for drugs (which, by the way, he was, and is hardly sdurpirsedl\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\, but because of the suspiciousness and wrongness of the actions of this department; and had, per the findings of the tests we finally did, after his honor ordered it; willingly, to prove our innocence. Imagine both of our surprise at the results, which these defendants do claim as falsified; as well as meant to insure DHS' appropriate suspicions and hold the child in their custody. With the exception of homelessness, this court has yet to prove these parents of any legitimate or legal wrongdoing, save these results, and even if they were legitimate results, show nothing more than recreational use, and only in the father. This father maintains that, if you put pictures in front of the mother containing the drug itself, as well as pictures of the items used to enjoy this drug, that she wouldn't even recognize them as such, for she has, never in her life, even seen this drug, or how it's used for recreational purposes...because she has NOT used anything besides marijuana EVER; and proof of this is evident in that the cord stadt test results which show her and the child clean at birth, and would have been tainted with her inhaler prescription, regardless.
As to the fact that Mrs. Bruce stating that her and Mr. Bruce had ended their relationshiop in a fight, this is an incomplete fact, and a later occuring fact, not considered in question posed to the mother, was not related purposefully, in order to throw off the prosecution, where a place to find Mr. Bruce in order to arrest him for publishing court documents was concerned. Ommited was only the fact that we had, within hours of said fight, reconciled, and Mr. Bruce, who had, in effect, received help from Shelby, the representative who had been sought for help before the removal (although the worker, in her assessment claims that "no help was sought of the community, regardless of the mother's knowledge of these helpful agencies, considered acknowledged and known only because of her receipt of brochures offered by the social worker at Methodist, suggesting that all brochures given to all persons containing whatever content is, factually, always read and retained by all as well) to initially obtain this apartment, had provided it and the father had signed it's lease; and a change of address, not concerned by either the trier of fact or the prosecution, chose to recognize this as fact...therefore, none of these indicated, nor were recognized as possible, nor were addressed in question, therefore, the mother chose not to reveal it without being asked to, nothing more. She was advised by the father, to of course answer truthfully should the question set arise, however, the order of "Only say what you have to and nothing more" was also advised, and the need for that fact to be discovered never presented itself, thereby clearing the mother of any possibility of purjury.
Under the section of Child Well-being, there was, regardless of her "low birth-weight" never any apparent reason for this concern, considering the Exhibit #, also filed by the prosecution, according to tests done on the systems of the child, all stating that the child is a "healthy pink" and all responses normal as well as her system checks. The only true concern of any of these doctors is a dimple mentioned in the same reports, located on her posterior, and later found to be of NO concern. Other than this, the alleged "starvation", claimed by Dr. Joyce, was a fabrication, as proven by Methodist's website description of a "Primary Reflex" as "The Sucking Reflex", stated in their own words as "inherent in ALL newborns". This information is shown in defense's exhibit #36. The mother had, in fact, just fed the child prior to her leaving home, a regular amount in feeding as well, until the child was full.
Where it addresses the biological father here, was purely an attempt by DHS to raise indignance in the father, by pushing buttons they knew would highly upset him, as is and has been, since the beginning of this case, their wont. This of course, goes towards proving that permanency belongs to others, where the child is concerned, which has always their true intent, not the "reunification of the family, as they often state, usually right before advising this father of their intent to ask for his termination of parental rights, because of his alleged drug use and drug dealing, and "Unresolved and long-standing mental issues", another pair of buttons they enjoy pushing, and often too. The father presents, as well, that as of the date of the last hearing on December 18th, this father's birthday, usually a reason for celebration, this department, upon hearing that the father was now interested in giving in and accepting services (although it went against all he knew to be right here), for the mother and child's benefit; was again accused of these mental issues, as well as drug abuse, approached by a Polk County Sherriff about his "borderline threats" (which have been nothing but a threat to their positions, and posed as such again and again in many blog posts, and any real harm disavowed as a possibility as well), and, essentially, accusing the mother once again as being unfit, due to her refusal to accept her services as well. This father then gritted his teeth, not only against that, but also to WILLINGLY submit to a field drug test, the sequence of which, told by DHS was, once again, lied about as to their version of events, utilizing their chief testing crony to lie about those events as well. This person even went as far as blocking a possible entrance, while we waited from this defendant to be able to provide a first sample, like he was legally able to do so, even though the father had, more than once, been quite willing to take this test, and regardless of his NOT having any right to detain this defendant, since it was obviously not ordered by a judge that he be willing to execute this force, or that the defendant participate in this test. Again, this should more than prove false DHS's side of the story, or the father would have rejected this test as needing to be done by anyone, especially when it was, early on, discovered that this man was in charge of all of DHS' testing, and was, more than likely, responsible for the falsification of the original results as well; and was also in full knowledge that this test was not needed to be done because there was no official order to do so.
So DHS, with a report of this man's criminal record, so obviously showing this man to be a habitual drinker and drunk driver, as opposed to this father's laughable criminal history and legal ties to the child, as well as his being married, still, to the biological mother, when Mr. Shaver, because of his actions had no intent of ever following up with the mother after taking advantage of her and leaving her to fend for herself, and in more than ready position to take on caring for this child, regarldess of this departemts claims to the contrary, are, because Mr. Shaver is, at the last moment, wanting to take responsibility and jump through DHS's hoops is considered a more appropriate guardian, with his being a single parent, and his obviously irresponsible actions in judgement, where his drinking is concerned. DHS knew full well, that in presenting this, that the father would be greatly angered, and feel very slighted by this, which spurred them to report it so completely as they did, and knew that, in his anger, he might do something stupid, as he did, as presented in their voicemails to this court, all recorded around the time the father read this, as well as all lies and situations incited against this father. Any reasonable person, after 5 and a half months of this particular brand of craziness and lies would have blown up equally.especailly after fully discovering, upon listening to ALL of the recording, exhibit #, that the initial removal was done nearly 100% illegally, and with malice against these defendants for no apparent reason or concern to be shown, by anyone involved. Equally, after reading through all of the relevant Iowa Code and discovering that no relief can be sought at all concerning this illegal removal, served only to fuel this father's righteous anger even further. This department latches on to this weakness, as well as the apparent weaknesses of the mother, in order to prove these parents unfit to care for their child, deceitfully and callously, with no surprise found by this defendant.
Yes, deceit happened, but only AFTER I went home with my mother at the age of 15...and only because my narcissistic brother, who had, up to this point, been the only child and rottonly spoiled (talk about unresolved long-standing mental issues, he would be a much better example, really, if he even is at all...I just call everything HE is by its true definition....ASSHOLE), turned me from moral angel into a lying conniving devil in less than a year's time, in an effort to be rid of me. Oh, and that worked too. I immediately left my mother's home, and proceeded to engage in the deceitful practice of working two jobs and supporting myself. As for other "serious violations of conduct", I don't think I ever received condemnation of anything more than a fifth degree misdemeanor, the last of which occured almost 12 years ago, and was, as most of any MINOR infractions I "committed" were, in my case, complete BS. This B crap, as it reads, is a pre-cursor to an anti-social disorder. This overbearing author has no such affliction.
Finally, practically in vogue to have anymore; is the diagnosis of NOS depression...something I hear mental doctors are quite fond of diagnosing, especially when they can't quite put their finger on anything else. I am, quite simply; by it's FORMER diagnosis, back in my day, before it became popular (probably due to the pills you can take for it, I'm guessing...and due to the fact that my drug use, when it was happening, was always recreational and widely spanned, and I HATED pills, especially pharmacueticals; which, by the way, are well-known to cause a hell of a lot more damage to us humans than ANY of nature's offerings, added to the fact that just about everything they prescribe for depression comes with a host of possible side effects, including suicidal tendancies...no thank you!) probably the LEAST depressed person you folks will ever know. If I'm depressed at all, it's about our system of justice, of that you can be sure. I'd say the way these people are, where deceit is concerned, as well as the levels at which it is greatly practiced in our case, have more of that "Cluster B Personality Trait" than I could ever hope to acheive. If anything, I MAY have more the Histrionic deal, where, as the author of this blog is concerned, I love, not only hearing myself talk (and talk and talk), but enjoy, personally, being the center of attention...oh, but wait..no...I'm afraid YOU, of DHS, unfortunately, are stealing my thunder. Hence my haste will be soon enough in disposing of you out of my life. A couple of disagreements to that diagnosis as well though. First, ever-present, is that I will be DEPRESSED (boy they love this word today!!) when I'm not the center of attention. No, I just try harder. Remember? Over-bearing. and way short of my brother's affliction, Narcissism.
Finally, the thing I absolutely love about these types of diagnoses, are when they either take PERSONALITY TRAITS and turn them into symptoms of their "Illnesses" (not unlike "boys will be boys" becoming ADD at a later date, as well as when they totally describe TRAITS that go against what they said earlier...then expect us to swallow it. They say, now, that people with the Histrionic portion of this tend to be followers...and are succeptible to suggestion. Hate to say it, but I'm usually the leader guys. Earlier, it says that these people like to be the center of attention, which never goes hand in hand with succeptibility. And that's your third strike. If it isn't, there's the flamboyant thing. Gray, black and white are my favorite colors.
So.....that diagnosis and all it entails isssssss OUTTA THERE!! (scratching sound). The number you have dialed has been disconnected, or is no longer in service at this time. Please, check yourself, and try your recommendation again.
As for the wife, she's always had to do the eval, as well as that idiotic cognitive thing, in order for these folks to have a leg to stand on, where her ability to take care of the baby is concerned. I'll say this yet another time...COG NI TIVE A BIL I TY IS NOT, IN ANY OTHER SPECIES ON EARTH, A REQUIREMENT OF MOTHERHOOD. INSTINCT. THAT'S the ticket. Only self-absorbed self-important humans (thank you George C., wherever you are) require these "cognitive abilities", something I guarantee our fore-fathers would have greatly scoffed at them for thinking of, let alone mentioning. Her only real affliction is her meek disposition, and her naivete, which these workers have, as you know, taken FULL advantage of, where the removal was concerned (and let's not forget Daily Maize, who should be, by this time, knee-deep in consideration as a prime candidate for disbarment), and her flippant way of signing documents without asking questions, something DHS workers, of all shapes and sizes, just LOVE. NEEEEEEEXT!!
Blah-de-Blah Parenting classes, aaanddd....CUT!!
Now, I imagine because of DHS's imaginary tale of my latest drug test sequence of events, that now they want random drug testing done, on both parents. Imagine that. Like I didn't know THAT was coming. Idiots.
Then we have the English skill set of Katie Gosch to consider, as she says "This case plan be adopted, and will be complied to by all parties". Really? All parties? I don't remember adopting this plan, personally...No, I don't think I DO comply to that "case plan"...matter of fact, I don't think any of us are due to adopt or comply to much of anything, thank you very much. I think you'll be throwing our daughter back at us before long, along with your blessings and congratulations, if I have anything to say about it. It will be a very long time, too, before I ever open my door for a re-visit either. Not without the Judge present, as I watch him sign his name to the order, to ensure that no deceit on the part of the adjoining SW Worker is present.
Now we get to the meat & potatoes of this little gem. This is where we start tearing into the bones of the defendants.
This case started for us on July 17th. The reporter, someone who had been here for almost 2 weeks of time, including the initial period before the child was born, around 5 days, and was not with us at all for this interaction, mostly because her and her husband were fleeing our trying to get harrassment charges filed on them; as well as had to be forcibly removed from our property, because they didn't care for the fact that I wanted them to find somewhere else to live because we wanted to bring our daughter home. It was because she was not able to get back at me, personally, that she chose, instead to pick on my wife, someone who not only doesn't deserve this sort of thing, but hasn't done a thing wrong herself, or to anyone else for that matter.
In her vindictiveness, this ungrateful reporter, who had effectively sucked us dry of money and food by the time this baby had arrived, called DHS to lie to them about who they were to us, as well as their supposed role in our lives, in order to call their attention to these parents. They ALLEGED that we were dealing drugs, though this has yet to be proven beyond the scope of this SW's report of what the reporter says, and is not so; thereby is still, to this date, as it started...alleged. As to the mother's knowledge of my drug dealing, there was no drug dealing, so there wasn't, by default, any knowledge, either. And of course, any other concerns were, at the time of the interview, again, just that...alleged concerns...nothing more. There was little to no proof of any of this, as reported by this worker, and, thanks to the evidence provided as Exhibit #34, the recording of the mother's illegal removal, as well as countless lies told on her assessment, it's pretty easy to see that lies become this worker, and that her testimony on the stand, as well as in her assessment and on the order, should be regarded as fabrication, considering, if only, the amount of falsity and deceit employed and used to have this mother sign her baby away, first into Safe Haven (used only because the worker employed at Methodist mentions that she asked about it....once), and then, as she states she has no choice but to put the baby into foster care, the mother then shows this to be, again, against her wishes as well as her being under legal duress at the signing of this order.
Be it known that this signature, in the judge's spot on the order, has been officially determined to not be the signature of his Honor, Judge William A. Price, but that permission has been granted to this worker to forge his Honor's signature with his OK in such an instance, which to me not only constitutes a measure of fraud, but of forgery as well. This is shown as truth, per Exhibits 35-38, the official orders of this judge, which are all stamped. This worker left to get a judge's signature on the order during normal business hours and, more than likely, during a lull in the judge's business, so his usual stamp should be expected to be on this official document as well as they are on the orders. The signature shown is decidedly different than his Honor's stamped version with glaring differences in their execution. Note also that, in accordance with the recording, that forgery becomes this worker, in that she tells Liz that she will read the order to her, then have Elizabeth sign each line with her initials, something the mother always does when asked to do so, yet signs these lines with X's instead, to indicate that she does understand and agree to all that's read...even though the worker obviously and with full knowledge skips reading nearly 2/3's of the order...including her lies that she states as reasons to remove our daughter, most of which are still, to this day, either easily dismissed, an outright or twisted falsehood, a complete reason with important parts ommitted, or a blog post segment framed for the author, by both DHS and this worker, as well as the DA, so as to guess the time frame this reason begins and ends for him, claiming this as evidentiary and truthful, as well as the interpretation of the words he uses and their context; and like they've known him all their lives, and know EXACTLY this phrase's meaning as it comes from the brain of this author.
It has been shown, and is documented and researched, that the typed sentence or paragraph loses over 67% of its meaning when it comes in as a typed text message only; and grouped of its own. Isn't it possible then that the same amount of meaning can be lost in a longer blog post; or completely, when considering only 5-10 words used to state a lack of bond with the father in the middle of one sentence amidst a myriad of sentences contained in one of a 171 blog posts, all dated different days?? You are not only lacking things that go without saying: body language, history, inflection, facial expressions, hand motions, eye contact, tone, volume...after which you should, by all reason, forego a go at figuring this out yourself, and simply just ask what the author means by what he says; under normal circumstances; then proceeds to box these words off of the rest of the post in an effort to judge what this defendant feels then, at that moment, due to other circumstances that are, more than likely temporary. The law decided, whenever, that if it's out there as public statement, it can be used against you; but I say unless you have a doctorate in psychology or psychiatrics, you have no right to determine, or even guess, or claim to be fact, ANYTHING, where the thoughts of feelings of someone for however long those thoughts or feelings might last. Yet this worker, eliminating all sentences, word groups, paragraphs and posts around this one that would normally be considered to explain or indicate that maybe there's more to this group of words that you would NORMALLY consider. in order to relay an overall theme with which to prepare or explain to the reader the reasons behind the authors feeling this way at this time; this department, in its usual fasion, in order to accomplish its twisted agenda, chooses only to single out one segment of one sentence in one paragraph in order to prove their false truth and find the defendants guilty of whatever they might be alleging. This is really no different than claiming that, when the author wrote, in his blog, "The dog loves to play, and his favorite trick is playing dead", and, in editing the sentence, claim that the author was factually stating that "The dog is dead", meaning the author is guilty of the dog's death...arrest him!; because of the surrounding words that you choose to eliminate, and only want to consider, in order to prove your alleged wrong.
I present to this court, as well, the lack of any known degree these caseworkers and social workers might have that might be considered a right with which to assess, for instance, a need for drug assessment, drug treatment, mental capacity to function as a parent; or badger and accuse the same as being drug addicts or mental cases. I refer to the exhibits presented, numbered"", #, that show the mother, via Primary Healthcare, received a prescribed inhaler filled with "", which has been shown to prove a false positive, in patients who use it, for methampetimines. So where is your proof of this mother as a user of meth now, I wonder? I feel, if naught else, that this department duly owes the mother an apology, to be presented immediately.
In order to punch this father's buttons, once again, is a statement that the mother consented, with her signature, the removal of our child. I present that removal as NOT consented to in any fashion, considering, once again, the recording in Exhibit #34. The order was not obtained, it was fraudulently implemented, as shown in this Exhibit, again.
Now, these parents choose to present that the portion of this report that refers to our missing visits and "doctors appointmentS" only refers to a period of one week, and not just one week, but the first week following the removal of our daughter, a very traumatic experience, as it would be for ANY parent. In this week we lost our daughter (illegally done), our "unstable housing" (that was very stable for us for over a year and a half, regardless of federal and state definition of this being unstable. If you're in a true apartment, and you're served with an emergency eviction good in 3 days, there are, then, only 2 days difference in your eviction period in which to claim the apartment more stable, right? And what else is there to claim this apartment to be more stable then? It all comes down to what you choose to define it as. Just because it caries the name "extended stay Hotel" only makes it unstable because that's what whoever passed the law sees it as, often without further investigation as to its stability); our reputations and our dignity, all in the same week; causing these defendants, who were already destitute and indigent, with only a signle bus pass available, to be immediately in need of shelter and transportation in order to accomplish what DHS expected us to do, with no further offer of assistance.\There was, missed, only a single doctor's appointment, and to expect the distraught and traumatized (as well as indigent) parents to immediately follow this schedule under the circumstances was asking entirely too much.
We present, as well, that the hair test that these workers had, unbeknownst to us, "stipulated" of us in order to appease their allegations of drug use and drug dealing (according to the SW's claim, in fact, on Exhibit #, as one of her reasons to hold the baby at Methodist with her "concerns"), is ridiculous. These workers, on the date of our interview, simply asked if we wouldn't mind doing so, and informed us at that time, that the business would be available to visit at 11 a.m. the next morning. If his Honor should so note, the mother was picked up by these workers the next morning at 9:51 a.m., shown in this worker's assessment, dated complete on , and shown in defense's exhibit # that this worker then details all times following this pickup time as being with the mother at Methodist with our daugther and with them, until well after 2 p.m.; yet states that these parents did not follow DHS's ONLY stipulation of us, again, unbeknownst to these parents, as mandatory within the time frame given, and impossible for the mother to honor, since she was present with these workers at the hospital. Note also, that the worker states the mother's earnest, to immediately take her test, which, under normal circumstances with a reasonable subject, would be looked upon as a defendant more than likely innocent of any wrongdoing, or it would have been agrued not needed, or more likely fought against doing, where this "mandatory and ordered DHS Stipulation" was concerned, as would be done by a guiltier party. This father also had it in his mind to accomplish this the same day, in order to clear his reputation, yet upon hearing of this mother's situation, sought to hold out, only because of his immediate distrust of the mother's ordeal up to that time as being a legitimate and legal way of handling our situation. And, of course, considering the condtion and professionalism levels of this facility, upon hearing the mother's experience, I trusted it even less, especailly after hearing that the mother's test, the first one, had been botched by these "Professional testers", even though the differences of her fake and real hair were as different as night and day.
The father only held out in opposition, not because he knew he MIGHT be found to be ONLY SLIGHTLY dirty for drugs (which, by the way, he was, and is hardly sdurpirsedl\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\, but because of the suspiciousness and wrongness of the actions of this department; and had, per the findings of the tests we finally did, after his honor ordered it; willingly, to prove our innocence. Imagine both of our surprise at the results, which these defendants do claim as falsified; as well as meant to insure DHS' appropriate suspicions and hold the child in their custody. With the exception of homelessness, this court has yet to prove these parents of any legitimate or legal wrongdoing, save these results, and even if they were legitimate results, show nothing more than recreational use, and only in the father. This father maintains that, if you put pictures in front of the mother containing the drug itself, as well as pictures of the items used to enjoy this drug, that she wouldn't even recognize them as such, for she has, never in her life, even seen this drug, or how it's used for recreational purposes...because she has NOT used anything besides marijuana EVER; and proof of this is evident in that the cord stadt test results which show her and the child clean at birth, and would have been tainted with her inhaler prescription, regardless.
As to the fact that Mrs. Bruce stating that her and Mr. Bruce had ended their relationshiop in a fight, this is an incomplete fact, and a later occuring fact, not considered in question posed to the mother, was not related purposefully, in order to throw off the prosecution, where a place to find Mr. Bruce in order to arrest him for publishing court documents was concerned. Ommited was only the fact that we had, within hours of said fight, reconciled, and Mr. Bruce, who had, in effect, received help from Shelby, the representative who had been sought for help before the removal (although the worker, in her assessment claims that "no help was sought of the community, regardless of the mother's knowledge of these helpful agencies, considered acknowledged and known only because of her receipt of brochures offered by the social worker at Methodist, suggesting that all brochures given to all persons containing whatever content is, factually, always read and retained by all as well) to initially obtain this apartment, had provided it and the father had signed it's lease; and a change of address, not concerned by either the trier of fact or the prosecution, chose to recognize this as fact...therefore, none of these indicated, nor were recognized as possible, nor were addressed in question, therefore, the mother chose not to reveal it without being asked to, nothing more. She was advised by the father, to of course answer truthfully should the question set arise, however, the order of "Only say what you have to and nothing more" was also advised, and the need for that fact to be discovered never presented itself, thereby clearing the mother of any possibility of purjury.
Under the section of Child Well-being, there was, regardless of her "low birth-weight" never any apparent reason for this concern, considering the Exhibit #, also filed by the prosecution, according to tests done on the systems of the child, all stating that the child is a "healthy pink" and all responses normal as well as her system checks. The only true concern of any of these doctors is a dimple mentioned in the same reports, located on her posterior, and later found to be of NO concern. Other than this, the alleged "starvation", claimed by Dr. Joyce, was a fabrication, as proven by Methodist's website description of a "Primary Reflex" as "The Sucking Reflex", stated in their own words as "inherent in ALL newborns". This information is shown in defense's exhibit #36. The mother had, in fact, just fed the child prior to her leaving home, a regular amount in feeding as well, until the child was full.
Where it addresses the biological father here, was purely an attempt by DHS to raise indignance in the father, by pushing buttons they knew would highly upset him, as is and has been, since the beginning of this case, their wont. This of course, goes towards proving that permanency belongs to others, where the child is concerned, which has always their true intent, not the "reunification of the family, as they often state, usually right before advising this father of their intent to ask for his termination of parental rights, because of his alleged drug use and drug dealing, and "Unresolved and long-standing mental issues", another pair of buttons they enjoy pushing, and often too. The father presents, as well, that as of the date of the last hearing on December 18th, this father's birthday, usually a reason for celebration, this department, upon hearing that the father was now interested in giving in and accepting services (although it went against all he knew to be right here), for the mother and child's benefit; was again accused of these mental issues, as well as drug abuse, approached by a Polk County Sherriff about his "borderline threats" (which have been nothing but a threat to their positions, and posed as such again and again in many blog posts, and any real harm disavowed as a possibility as well), and, essentially, accusing the mother once again as being unfit, due to her refusal to accept her services as well. This father then gritted his teeth, not only against that, but also to WILLINGLY submit to a field drug test, the sequence of which, told by DHS was, once again, lied about as to their version of events, utilizing their chief testing crony to lie about those events as well. This person even went as far as blocking a possible entrance, while we waited from this defendant to be able to provide a first sample, like he was legally able to do so, even though the father had, more than once, been quite willing to take this test, and regardless of his NOT having any right to detain this defendant, since it was obviously not ordered by a judge that he be willing to execute this force, or that the defendant participate in this test. Again, this should more than prove false DHS's side of the story, or the father would have rejected this test as needing to be done by anyone, especially when it was, early on, discovered that this man was in charge of all of DHS' testing, and was, more than likely, responsible for the falsification of the original results as well; and was also in full knowledge that this test was not needed to be done because there was no official order to do so.
So DHS, with a report of this man's criminal record, so obviously showing this man to be a habitual drinker and drunk driver, as opposed to this father's laughable criminal history and legal ties to the child, as well as his being married, still, to the biological mother, when Mr. Shaver, because of his actions had no intent of ever following up with the mother after taking advantage of her and leaving her to fend for herself, and in more than ready position to take on caring for this child, regarldess of this departemts claims to the contrary, are, because Mr. Shaver is, at the last moment, wanting to take responsibility and jump through DHS's hoops is considered a more appropriate guardian, with his being a single parent, and his obviously irresponsible actions in judgement, where his drinking is concerned. DHS knew full well, that in presenting this, that the father would be greatly angered, and feel very slighted by this, which spurred them to report it so completely as they did, and knew that, in his anger, he might do something stupid, as he did, as presented in their voicemails to this court, all recorded around the time the father read this, as well as all lies and situations incited against this father. Any reasonable person, after 5 and a half months of this particular brand of craziness and lies would have blown up equally.especailly after fully discovering, upon listening to ALL of the recording, exhibit #, that the initial removal was done nearly 100% illegally, and with malice against these defendants for no apparent reason or concern to be shown, by anyone involved. Equally, after reading through all of the relevant Iowa Code and discovering that no relief can be sought at all concerning this illegal removal, served only to fuel this father's righteous anger even further. This department latches on to this weakness, as well as the apparent weaknesses of the mother, in order to prove these parents unfit to care for their child, deceitfully and callously, with no surprise found by this defendant.
