Vincent Davis: Good morning. This is Attorney Vincent Davis and you’re on the talk radio show Get Your Kids Back Now. This show is dedicated to keeping families together and to fighting the tyranny of CPS and DCFS social workers. A secondary purpose of the show is to educate parents and relatives or to at least show them where to get the necessary information for their fight. The final purpose of the show is to remind the people that change can be effectuated at the ballot box at the state and federal levels. Let us unite, vote and elect those who will make the necessary changes.
Good morning. It’s Saturday, September 10th, 2016. And for our show today I’m going to be focusing on a couple of items, as well as taking calls from the listeners. The first thing that I want to mention today is on Monday, September 12th, 2016, there is going to be a trial starting in the Los Angeles Superior Court. The name of the case is Duval vs. the County of Los Angeles, and a number of social workers that are — that work for DCFS.
This case involves — this case is being brought by Attorney Shawn McMillan of San Diego, one of the gurus in suing social workers throughout the state of California. In this case, Shawn has amassed a track team of former — I believe, former Gerry Spence Trial Lawyers College attorneys and several attorneys who are graduates of the college and who also are members of the — and experts at the trojanhorsemethod.com. And these attorneys are expert trial attorneys, and I’m not sure what the county is thinking about in this case. They haven’t settled the case with these — with Ms. Duval and her attorneys, and I think they’re going to be pounced on starting on Monday. I really don’t think the county has really thought about this case and thought about what they’re up against. They probably don’t know. I’m a spectator to the case, although I know Mr. McMillan and I know some of the attorneys that are going to be assisting him on his trial team. And let me tell you, they’re armed and ready to go.
The case involves a woman who was — whose children were taken from her, and the county alleged that she had Munchausen syndrome by proxy. For those of — that you don’t know, Munchausen syndrome is recognized or — sometimes recognized in the DSM, the diagnostic mental disorder manual, as a person who treats a child — it’s a psychological illness that shows itself where a person treats a child for medical problems that the child doesn’t actually have.
Many years ago, I was involved in a Munchausen syndrome by proxy case. I represented the father, and the alleged perpetrator in the case was the mother. And there’s typical — the typical Munchausen syndrome case usually involves the perpetrator being a woman, who‘s involved in the medical profession, and they treat children for diseases or for illnesses they don’t have. In this particular case, I would have to say, at the beginning I really didn’t believe, you know, this type of syndrome would exist. But as the case progressed and as video evidence against things that I saw, I firmly believe that this is an issue of possible child abuse.
But getting back to the lawsuit. In this particular case, it appears that the social workers never had any evidence to substantiate that Ms. Duval had Munchausen syndrome by proxy, took her children away from her and, I think, gave the child to the father. I forget if the case involves one child or more than one child, but basically gave the kid to the father who Ms. Duval did not get along with and apparently still not — does not get along with, and she never regained custody of her child. And even to this day, she is having difficulties, from what I understand in the family law court, getting custody back and getting visitation.
So, it’s an important case, in my opinion, and — because it involves a woman who went to the juvenile court, lost her children on — or child on false allegations, and never got her child back. And I think that if Mr. McMillan and his trial team prevail in this case, it’s going to send a message not only to DCFS here in Los Angeles County, but statewide and perhaps nationwide that when social workers do something and they take their — take people’s children away from them, that they may have to answer for their actions in a civil courtroom.
The second thing — so, good luck to Shawn and that trial team. Shawn has been asking folks on Facebook, by the way, to attend that trial for moral support. And so he has invited the public to go and to watch that trial. You can get the details of the department. I think it’s 83 or Department 87 in the Los Angeles Superior Court, at 111 North Hill Street in Los Angeles, California. And I think the zip code is 90012. But you can find Shawn on Facebook by just searching for his name. Shawn, S-H-A-W-N, McMillan, M-C-M-I-L-L-A-N, hope I’m spelling that right, Shawn, and you can find his public invitation to attend that trial for support. Monday starts jury selection, and I think that it’s something for everyone to see in the public, lawyers, parents, family members, to go down and watch this trial, watch our system of justice in action, and watch the county and social workers from Los Angeles County be held responsible for actions that they did to this poor woman.
The second thing I want to talk about this morning is a organization that I’m helping to found. We literally just put up a construction page for the website. And the name of the organization is familylivesmatter.org. Familylivesmatter.org. And it is a website geared to three things. But the main thing is it’s geared to — is to organizing people on a national level, on a state level and on a local level. And we want to organize these people to help them make recommendations to each other with respect to voting, and that’s voting for federal legislators, in Congress, at the House of Representatives and the Senate levels. Also voting for state legislators who make laws that affect people and families in the juvenile courts throughout the county, and also to vote in or out local judges who are making decisions about families and about children in the juvenile court system.
In 1990, an organization was started in Los Angeles and it was called Rock the vote. And you can look it up on Wikipedia for its history and explanation of what it’s done. But what it has done, and I believe familylivesmatters.org can do, is it can effectuate the change that we need in the laws and in the judges to help us keep families together. I’m in the trenches every day in juvenile court as is my law firm, and the things that I see every day are things that — I’m just not going to stand around and watch anymore, as I have done so in the past. It’s time to make a change and keep these families together.
Oh, right now I’m going to take a call because it’s starting to back up on the board here. The first call is from area code 619, ending in 14.
Good morning. You’re on with Attorney Davis.
Male: Hello, Mr. Davis. How are you?
Vincent Davis: Good. Good morning. Did you have a story to tell or a question to ask?
Male: Well, actually, I spoke with you last week and I was — say thank you for the advice that you had given me. I was really — quite a story to tell and — but we went over it already last week that I was interested in McMillan because want to think that you had mentioned — but I spoke with you last week that you felt that — well, [0:10:46 inaudible] CPS worker lies or when there’s false allegations or false report that, you know, they’re going to sue them. And I guess — that I don’t have my son and he gets to spend the night with me. I was the non-offending parent and I’ve had no dirty drug tests or had any reason for them to not give me at least unsupervised visits, yet mom has had two months of I guess screen test now. She’s been granted unsupervised visits, and I think that’s great. I just don’t understand that as the non-offending parent why I wasn’t — or I’m not given that same opportunities, and I was wondering if you have an opinion on that as the reasons.
Vincent Davis: I do. I do have — I do have an opinion on it. My opinion is tempered by the fact that — of course I haven’t reviewed your legal file — but based upon the fact that you’ve told me, you’re supposed to have custody of the child —
Vincent Davis: if you’re — not in the court. I don’t know who‘s representing you in the juvenile court, if you have a private attorney or a court-appointed attorney, but this is something that you should immediately speak to your attorney about, so that you can file the appropriate motions or petitions to get the child placed with you. Let me ask you this. Is the child currently in foster care?
Male: Yes, he is.
Vincent Davis: Okay. So, you know, what you have to do is you have to talk to your attorney immediately and get these things on filed so the child can be placed with you or placed with a friendly family member, because — I mean, I don’t want to alarm you, but — I mean, if you leave the way things are, you and the mother could possibly lose this child and lose custody of this child forever.
Male: I’m not aware of that. You’re right.
Vincent Davis: And if you’re non-offending — If you’re non-offending, there’s no reason why the child should be placed out of your care. You know, I vaguely remember speaking to you on the radio. Are you the gentleman that has the case in San Diego, East County in front of Judge [0:13:09 inaudible]?
Male: Yes, sir, I am.
Vincent Davis: Okay. So I vaguely remember talking to you. And have you talked to your attorney since last week since we talked?
Male: I’ve left a few messages, but I’ve had no response from her. I never get a response from her or the [0:13:30 inaudible] for that matter, yeah. And it’s very strange, yeah, the whole situation. I just — I don’t understand really what’s going on, and I agree with you that things need to be done immediately and that’s just — every time that I try to do things that even in the past, as soon as I — you know, initially, they — when my son was first taken, the first social worker said, you know, I need to go and test today. “If you don’t go test today, a drug test, that will — no test today, you’ll be considered dirty.” I went, I took that test, it was clean. And they — and she said, “In four days you’ll be going to take a DNA test and so will the baby.” I went took the DNA test. They didn’t send the baby for a DNA test. They waited until two days before the next court date before they did, therefore the results weren’t in. And subsequently, when the results did come in, it was at the continued court date, 20 minutes before the hearing, and it’s been that kind of a railroad show ever since.
Vincent Davis: Well, this is what I want you to do. Do you live near in a courthouse?
Male: Yes, I do. Yes, I do.
Vincent Davis: Okay. So on Monday I want you to take you ID, your picture ID and I want you to go to the clerk’s office in that courthouse for the juvenile court. And I want you to ask for a copy of your file, which you are entitled to. You know, I’ve heard from a lot of people in different counties in California, especially the smaller counties, that when they go and they ask for their file, a copy of their file, that the court refuses to give them a copy. And if that happens to you, you need to call me immediately. But I want you to get a copy of your file, then I want you to take it King Kose or someplace, have it scanned, and I want you to email it to me, with a note asking me to review it and, you know, reminding me that we spoke on the radio show. And then you and I need to have a free consultation where I’m going to tell you exactly what you need to do so that you can get custody of your child. Okay?
Male: Yes, sir. I’ll do that, Mr. Davis. Thank you very much. I certainly will.
Vincent Davis: All right. Thank you. Bye-bye.
Male: Thank you. Bye-bye.
Vincent Davis: You know, I come across these cases. Sometimes I hear people tell me, “I’m non-offending and I don’t have my child.” And, you know, although I haven’t reviewed the case file — I mean, if the guy is telling the truth and he’s non-offending, he’s supposed to have custody of — because this is America, and there’s no reason for him not to have his child that I could think of, unless there’s something he’s not telling me.
So I’m going to take the next call. The next call is from area code 719, ending in 47.
Good morning. You’re on with Attorney Vincent Davis. Good morning.
Melinda: Oh. Hello. Can you hear me?
Vincent Davis: I hear you loud and clear. Did you have a story to tell or a question to ask?
Melinda: Hello. Can you hear me? Hello, sir?
Vincent Davis: I can hear you loud and clear. Yes, I’m here.
Female: Okay. My name is Melinda, and I came across your show. I just want to let you know that it was very interesting that you started up the call or the show talking about Munchausen syndrome by proxy. I recently enjoyed the return of my children after them having been removed from my husband and I after two and a half years. And the allegations were entirely false. It was something that happened at the hospital, at the Children’s Hospital in Colorado Springs and — But anyway, I would like to — I guess the thing that really gets me right now is that how we were able to get the kids back in the end was we signed an agreement with my sister. DHS at one point — at a certain point after 18 months steps out of it is what they said. And we weren’t sure what to do, and then, you know, I showed it to an attorney friend of mine here in Florida, which is where I live now, and he looked at it and she said, “All that you and your sister have to do is come an agreement to return the kids to you.” And we ended up signing an agreement that said, “We, the parties, agree that it’s in the best interest of the children to return home to their biological parents and relocate to Florida.” And that’s what we did and we got our kids back and it just — it was so easy and — I don’t understand why it was so easy.
We were bankrupted in the process of trying to get our kids back amidst these false allegations. I mean, we spent thousands of dollars on psychological evaluations, et cetera. And now I have met many friends who have actually lost their kids, and I’m not sure what the mechanism was that permitted us to get our kids back that way. I’m not sure if it’s because we refused to sign their consent and release form at the very — we refused to sign any of the paperwork from the very outset. And I’m just wondering, what is the importance of the consent and release form? They tried to jail me at a certain point for refusing to sign that form. And — so obviously there was something very important about it. But I feel like it was — our refusal to sign that paper is part of what allowed us to get our kids back. I mean, we didn’t even have the paper notarized that have the kids return home to us. We just signed it amongst ourselves and they gave the kids back to us.
Vincent Davis: That’s very interesting. Now, do you — you mentioned you — at this time you were having a case in Colorado?
Female: Yes. And you said something about, you know, the corrupt is — I just want to take them, you got that also — I ended up finding that the judge that was involved our case had a direct business relationship with one of the doctors who testified against me. And they said that I — you know, that I have Munchausen syndrome by proxy. Also, I was not in the medical field, but I ended up becoming very educated about my son’s condition. And I also had a blog where I wrote about — I wrote about the situation and I exposed the players and the judges and the case workers because — I am an investigative journalist, and I found lots of things about these — you know, the people that were involved. But — like I found out that the judge in our case was actually also practicing law in Telluride at the same time that he was sitting as the judge. And when I said these things, they made sure that I had almost no opportunity to make any of my statements on the record.
But on the day that they were about to jail me for contempt of court for refusing to sign those documents, I sat on this thing and I said that I had discovered a business relationship between him and one of the doctors. And then I also said, — oh, I didn’t say anything about knowing that he was also practicing as an attorney in Telluride, but he stepped down off of the bench. He just stepped down off of our case, or recuse himself. He ended up all of a sudden retiring the very next month.
And so I’m just curios to — I mean, it just seems like a lot of it was for show, a lot of it was smoke and mirrors, and a lot of it — I mean, I want to be — I’ve always aspired to become an attorney. But now — I’m 49 years old now, and I am driven to become an attorney. Because it seems like it was all contract law. It all seems like it — when it came down to it, it was contract law. And if I had known how to defend myself from a contractual position, then none of this would have even happened. So I — I’m just curious to hear what you have to say about that.
Vincent Davis: Well, I have to preface what I have to say with the fact that I’m a licensed attorney in the state of California. I’m not licensed in Colorado, so of course I’m — it’s illegal for me to give you legal advice. But I can tell you what I think. I think that you probably got your children back because you wrote a blog and you just — you, you know, disclosed a lot of things. You brought a lot of things to light that people didn’t think were going to come to light. And I think that judge — that’s no coincidence that that judge stepped down off of this case and then retired a month later.
You know, I don’t know — I have some relatives that live in Denver, but I don’t know anything about Colorado law. What I would suggest that you do is that you talk to an attorney in Colorado. There is a possibility that you may — you and/or your children may have substantial rights that have been violated and that you have civil rights action, at least under federal law, to sue some folks and perhaps be compensated for the loss of your children for two and a half years. You know, and if you were accused of Munchausen syndrome by proxy and if you didn’t go — undergo any treatment and they suddenly gave your children back after two and a half years, something is wrong. Something is very funny about that.
Female: They didn’t give my children back. My sister and I — I mean, they allocated parental responsibilities to my sister. And then they transferred it to a domestic relations case. And then the domestic relation case opened and closed without any further action from my sister and me. It was turned into not a case that was from DHS or the state of Colorado against me and my husband, who had been married for 25 years, by the way, and they told my husband at a certain point, “If you will divorce your wife, we will give the kids back to you.” And it was all — it’s just always craziness. It was so crazy that — at any rate, we are so afraid of ever spending time in a courthouse again. I mean, I would never take legal action against them or try to sue them in court without knowing that I had either the legal background to actually be able to represent myself or that I have the money to retain an honest attorney. The attorney that we had, the court-appointed counsel that we had was so corrupt. It was — that was crazy, all the things that I found out that these people were involved in, and there’s just a very ugly situation. But in the end, it was just an agreement between my sister — they — the domestic relations case, they designed it so that it was a case that was my sister versus me.
And when I was able to explain to my sister that all we needed to do was come to an agreement, that it was in the kids’ best interest to return home to me — to return home to my husband and me, we decided to stay — I mean, I was able to enroll them in school, I — I don’t know what happened for the past two and a half years. It just seemed like it was all for show, and I don’t understand why some people have their parental rights actually severed, and what mechanism allows them to sever it, and it just seems like in the end it comes down to that initial consent and release form.
And I — my question specifically is about the consent and release form that they give you to sign at the very beginning. If you sign that, you are consenting to the services — to receive their services and you are releasing them of all liability. And — that the way that they have it written is like “I consent to –” they make it sound like it’s an information-sharing. “I consent to allow you and I release this information.” That’s not what a consent and release form actually is. And so I — just so curious to hear what you have to say specifically about the consent and the release form at the very beginning. What does that enable the courts to do to you from that point? Because it’s in a civil courtroom. It was never in a criminal courtroom. I feel like parents would have more of a chance to defend themselves in a criminal court than in the civil court because they just —
Vincent Davis: Well, let me answer your question because I — you know, I can’t say anything about Colorado law. I don’t know anything —
Vincent Davis: about a consent and release form. They don’t have that in California.
Female: Huh. Okay.
Vincent Davis: There’s no such — you know, they don’t have that particular tool or document in the beginning of a juvenile dependency case in California. And I’m not familiar with Colorado law. But I want to thank you for calling from Florida about your Colorado case. It’s good to know that people from around the country are listening and are — you know, it’s somewhat comforting in a weird way that — knowing that these CPS and DCFS cases are going straight all over the country. And we’re not alone —-
Female: I really admire you for doing what you’re doing because I know that families all around the county are unable to find an attorney that will listen or that is even able to recognize. If they are able to recognize, they’re ignoring the mass injustice that’s going on and the laws that are not being followed. And I am 106% in support of your endeavors. And I know that you’re trying to set up a blog and — a website. I would be happy to help with that in — anyway, I’d like to say that I have a blog that’s been up since 2009, and I have exposed —-
Vincent Davis: Why don’t you give us — why don’t you give us your blog address so that we can all look at it?
Female: It is spydrasweb, it’s S-P-Y-D-R-A-S-W-E-B.blogspot.com. Spydrasweb.blogspot.com.
Vincent Davis: That information, and I’ll be checking your blog out, and keep listening.
Female: If you want to comment in — the comments are — I check the comments before they actually go up there, and if we are able to possibly make contact somehow outside of this forum, that’d be great.
Vincent Davis: Oh, possible. Grab a pen —
Female: I don’t need legal help anymore, but — Okay. Yeah, I do have a pen.
Vincent Davis: Grab a pen and I’ll give you my contact information.
Female: Okay. I got it.
Vincent Davis: Let me know if — Okay.
Female: I have a pen.
Vincent Davis: My office phone number is 888-888-6582. 888-888-6582, and you can email me directly at V as in Vincent, @vwdlaw.com. That’s firstname.lastname@example.org.
Vincent Davis: Thank you for call, ma’am, and please keep in touch with us. Bye-bye.
Female: Thank you.
Vincent Davis: Okay, I’m going to take another call right now. Let’s see. It’s from area code 619, ending in 83.
Good morning. You’re on with Attorney Vincent Davis.
Female: Good morning.
Vincent Davis: Did you have a story or a question?
Female: I have both, actually. I’ve pretty much gone through the situation of having [0:30:34 inaudible]. And this was a few months ago and I actually was very persistent as far as, you know, following up with — you know, didn’t return calls. They just tried to kind of like avoid the communication with me, and at that time I wasn’t able to see my daughters for 30 days, and their father wasn’t allowing me to speak to them over the phone either. So I was trying to call them to report that. Because he wasn’t really following, you know, what they had given him. And everything ended up getting closed out with this — well, everything got closed out. Two of them were closed as unfounded. The other one was closed as inconclusive, regarding emotional. And basically the father is having — you know, my daughter is just [0:31:34 inaudible] in order to try to gain custody in a civil case that we have going on right now. And on Monday and Tuesday I was supposed to go back to court, and I just received a subpoena last minute yesterday, saying that they’re having the worker come to the civil court as a witness. And I’m a little bit concerned about, you know, how that would go, what are my rights.
Vincent Davis: Okay. So what are — what city and state are you in?
Female: I’m in [0:32:14 inaudible], or San Diego, California.
Vincent Davis: Okay. And you’re going to a family law case in San Diego, correct?
Female: It’s really — it’s in [0:32:25 inaudible] separately working on this, start of the case.
Vincent Davis: Okay. But that’s in San Diego County, right?
Female: Yeah. Uh-hmm. Yeah.
Vincent Davis: Okay. So, a social worker can be subpoenaed to the family law case to testify either for or against you. Some social workers come and they claim that they can’t testify under Welfare and Institutions Code section 827. But that’s not actually correct, and the family law judge can make them testify. And if you didn’t subpoena the social worker, the other side did and the reason why they’re hoping that the social worker will come in and testify to the investigation she did about allegations of child abuse that were made against you, and probably made against you by the father.
So, it’s great that two of the allegations were determined to be unfounded, because you and your attorney can bring that out on examination or cross examination of the social worker, and it’s pretty good that the third allegation was found to be inconclusive, so that there was no evidence of child abuse found against you. So the three alternatives the social worker has is unfounded, inconclusive, and conclusive. So —
Vincent Davis: it sounds like that you’re in a pretty good situation and you shouldn’t worry too much, from what you’ve told me so far, about the social worker testifying. Just make sure that you and your attorney, when you examine the social worker, make sure that she states that two of the three allegations were totally unfounded and that one of them was inconclusive. So there is no finding of abuse against you. So, in my opinion — and I don’t know all the facts, of course — but in my opinion that you’ve told me —
Female: Now, one of the thing is —
Vincent Davis: this social worker is not going to — testimony is not going to hurt you. Go ahead, one of the things is what?
Female: Well, in the past, he’s been trying very hard to get custody of the girls and I think for like a financial benefit. And I have about 17 other unfounded calls — you know, 17 other unfounded calls or investigations that have been made against me. And it’s just gets scary when somebody is calling over and over and over again, you know, when you’re getting, you know, three at the same time and stuff and I just — I think he kind of approached my daughters but I name call them and, you know, it’s simply not true.
Vincent Davis: Right. Well, you know, you — don’t be surprised if the person that’s calling over and over again or persons — you know, there’s the father or the father’s proxies, you know, trying to gain an advantage over you in the family law case. If he also is trying to convince your child to make statements and to testify against you, that alone can be a basis for you to gain custody of the child or the children. If a parent is found — under the Family Code in California, if a parent is found trying to influence the child against the other parent on — truthfully, that’s a basis for the judge to change custody. So that’s something that you should be talking to your attorney about when you’re getting ready to prepare for this hearing.
Female: Now, it’s proving that’d be very difficult because this is what happened.
Vincent Davis: No. It’s not very difficult. I mean, it’s always like that, but, you know —
Female: My daughter making a false to the police, saying I lost her in a bathroom. And they came to my apartment and they came and looked. There is no lock whatsoever on the bathroom door. And, you know, not to get into too many details, but — I mean, this is like one example, something that had happened and he had my daughter call while he was with her, you know, and she’s told, me and my husband, that she didn’t know why but it’s — you know, said it wasn’t true.
Vincent Davis: How old is your daughter.
Female: And I know — you know, I know that they’re being influenced.
Vincent Davis: How old is your daughter.
Female: She’s 10 years old. And I have an eight-year-old.
Vincent Davis: Okay. So — okay, so this is something you should definitely be talking to your attorney about in trying to turn the tables on the father. You know, if he and his attorney subpoena the social worker, it could really backfire on them, because the judge can now — will be able to see that these allegations that someone keeps calling about are unfounded. And the judge might believe in the back of his or her mind that, you know, it’s the father that’s behind all of this. So, and just that someone who need to be —
Female: And also [0:37:38 inaudible]
Vincent Davis: Yeah. And it —
Female: [0:37:48 inaudible]. Or mediation. So it’s been continued for literally a year. From different calls —
Vincent Davis: Right.
Female: continuing [0:37:52 inaudible].
Vincent Davis: Right. So, don’t fear the social worker’s testimony on this instance, but you and your attorney should be prepared. Ma’am, I want to thank you for your call and your story and your question. Keep listening to us each week.
Female: Thank you.
Vincent Davis: Bye-bye.
All right, I’m going to take another call. It’s from area 918, ending in 43. Ending in 13, I’m sorry. Area code 918, ending in 13.
Good morning. You’re on with Attorney Vincent Davis.
Female: Good morning.
Vincent Davis: Did you have a story to tell or a question to ask?
Female: I have a story to tell. Okay. My daughter was — she wants to go with her grandmother’s to Los Angeles, California two years ago, and my daughter got detained by the social worker because we didn’t have the proper document to give her medication. At that time, all the proper documents were sent to the worker and everything and the next thing you know the worker said, “No, we’re not going to give you your daughter back.” My mom went to the court to get the guardianship. She had an appointment to go on Monday. On that Friday, my daughter got detained.
So it’s been going on three years. Three years allegations were — all the allegations were taken out, except one, and it says that the mother is unable to provide appropriate parental care and supervision of the child due to the child’s mental and emotional problems. And it says — states that the child was hospitalized in psychiatric facility on 6/16 and 5/30, 2013. Which I’m the one who called because she wanted to hang herself, because she had a knife.
So after that, I haven’t seen my daughter — I speak to my daughter face-to-face on Facebook. I write her, I text her. She has an iPhone which I just give her. She has been to different foster group home six times. She had different workers six times. Now she has another worker within a special team to put her in foster home which is adoption. So they — they’re putting her in. She was in foster homes this last time. The next thing you know they took her out because the foster mom didn’t want her there. And now they’re trying to replace her in another foster home.
So, all of these have been going on for three years. I took the classes, I took everything that they needed me to take. The problem is that I live in Tulsa, Oklahoma. And my daughter is in Los Angeles, California. So what my worker told me the other day that I was unable to — failed to take care of my daughter. So she said I was not able and I asked her how am I not able to not take care of my daughter. She said because I didn’t have a place to stay in all this time. I said I do have a place to stay.
I do go to school. I do have, you know, jobs and stuff like that. And she was like, “Well, you’re not going to get — ever get her back.” So they’re trying to give her to my brother, which he’s a single man with a girlfriend, with a CTO girl. I didn’t understand that. So — and you’re placing a child everywhere every single time, why you can’t be placed in back with the mom when the mom didn’t do anything but to give the daughter some help? So in the same manner, the court doesn’t say anything. So now my attorney, we’re doing an — Appellate, Superior Appellate Court. And that one hasn’t come back yet. And — but all the — denied all — I have five denials also. So there could be 93 days motion, it’d be denied five times.
So my question is, if you’re trying — if you give help for your daughter because she asked, why would that [0:41:50 inaudible]? I think it should be allowed. The parents should not be accountable for something that they’re trying to help their kid. I think the state is accountable because they detained the person in. From — then three years my daughter hasn’t been the same. My daughter has been given B’s, F. She’s not good [0:42:07 inaudible]. She’s just — always have emotional and, you know — emotion thing because they took her away from me and my mom. And I believe that they just don’t want to give her back because I’m in another state and they state that multiple times they’re going to do anything. They’re not going to. So it’s nothing that I can do, and what do you want me to do? What can I do? When I ask them, and they was like, “There’s nothing I can do for you.”
So they treat me like — you know, like I am a bad parent because people do call, and people call constantly, like every five minutes for no reason. You know, they [0:42:37 inaudible] whether you’re a worker, a lawyer, an attorney, a parent. I understand that in case-by-case. But with my case it’s very different and it’s very difficult. And no one understands, no one takes under my wings with this. You know, it gets really sad that parents have to get separated from their own mom, with their own family. You get separated from your own family. And the worker, they do tell they can’t — you know, “That is your mom’s fault.” The do tell them that, because my daughter tells me this all the time. She don’t want to be there. She’s been asking to come home, they didn’t — won’t let her. They say, “No, no, no,” it’s always an excuse, and she always — you know, she’s just very, very upset. Because she wants to come home and they won’t let her come home. Now they’re trying to put her with my brother, in San Diego.
Vincent Davis: Ma’am — ma’am —
Female: Okay. Can’t, you know — Yes.
Vincent Davis: Ma’am, hold on a second. Hold on a second. You say you live in Oklahoma and your child is in California?
Vincent Davis: Have you ever been to California inside the courtroom?
Female: I went to California in May when — the time they told me, “Come take your daughter because we’re going to leave her to you.” So I said, “Okay. Well, I’ll be there in a minute.” I changed all my classes because of that. So I went in May. No, I went in June, I’m sorry. I went in June. Well — no, I’m sorry, I went in May, and I stayed there till June. I stayed there for like a month and a half. I did visitation with my daughter. They gave me monitored visitations all the time. All the time. So I didn’t mind that. I don’t care. You know, that’s my daughter’s feelings. All we do when we see each other, we just cry. You can’t help that emotion. You know, you cannot help that emotion, so it’s nothing that I can’t do. I tell my daughter I can’t do nothing for her. I do see her like face-to-face because we do FaceTime. And she does call me because I do give her a phone and I do give her things so she could get in touch with me. But they tell her, “You know, your mom hasn’t done anything. You know, you’re not going to come home because your mom –” so they’re always making a switch with each other. So, I don’t know, you know —
Vincent Davis: Okay, hold on a second. Hold on. Hold on. Ma’am, do you have a pen and a piece of paper? I want you to —
Female: Yes, I do.
Vincent Davis: write this telephone number down. Okay?
Vincent Davis: 888-888-6582.
Vincent Davis: 888-888-6582.
Vincent Davis: After the show into — 9 o’clock, call that number about 9:15, 9:30.
Vincent Davis: A secretary will answer, and I want you to book an appointment over the phone or via Skype — Skype is free — for us to talk more in detail about your case.
Vincent Davis: Because from what you’ve told me, I think a great injustice may have been done you. And I might be able to help you. But I’ll have to talk to you more in detail, and I’ll have to review documents in your case file. But we’ll talk about all of that when you make the appointment. Okay?
Vincent Davis: And tell the secretary — hold on. Tell the secretary that you talk to me today on the radio and that I wanted you to make an appointment for tomorrow, Sunday. Okay? Because I really would like —
Vincent Davis: to talk to you about this as soon as possible. I want to thank you for calling from Oklahoma about your California case, and I look forward —
Vincent Davis: to speaking with you tomorrow, ma’am. Okay?
Vincent Davis: And keep listening to our radio show every Saturday from 8:00 to —
Vincent Davis: 9:00 AM. Thank you.
Female: I will.
Vincent Davis: Bye-bye.
Female: Thank you. You have a wonderful day.
Vincent Davis: That’s an incredible story. Lady sends her daughter here from Oklahoma to visit with the grandmother, ends up in CPS/DCFS custody. And what did she say? Three and a half years she hasn’t seen her daughter? Unbelievable. Something’s wrong with that case.
All right, the next caller I’m going to take is from area code 808, ending in 42.
Good morning. You’re on with Attorney Vincent Davis.
Female: Good morning. I’m again calling from Hawaii.
Vincent Davis: Did you have — You’re calling from Hawaii?
Female: [0:47:09 inaudible] so I guess I — Yes. It’s been — you’ve spoken with me a few times on the radio. I will just relate my situation and maybe you can talk about it with the people so that they can get some advice.
I went to court yesterday, and I’m sorry I’m a little bit — I’m actually very, very drained and very exhausted because I’m fighting these people and they’re just beating the crap out of me and my kids. I’ve been having to represent myself because I’ve gone through just about — well, Hawaii is a very small pool, and all of the state-appointed attorneys that I’ve had — had about three to four of them — have not done anything to help my case at all. They basically just tied my hands behind my back, and the time has dragged on, it’s been more than three and a half years that they’ve been torturing me and my kids, and I finally got to the point that I had to figure out how to represent myself.
I recently had a private attorney, but I think that she was just so overwhelmed with my case and everything that they’re trying to do that she just couldn’t handle it and — And so here I am again back in the position of representing myself. I filed a very hefty motion recently and it was supposed to be heard yesterday. And after waiting the entire day to go into court, it was not heard and it was just postponed until October 17th. So, my daughter had had some very, very severe injuries and my kids are also undergoing extreme psychological abuse from the foster parent who‘s forcing them to call her mom or else they put her — they put my kids in time out and they have to hold their arms out in the air and go and lean against the wall but they’re not allowed to touch the wall. It’s lean into the wall and not touch the wall. So, of course my kids don’t want — you know, they’ve been complying because they don’t want to be put through that, and they want to keep the situation in their foster care good. But it’s just a really bad situation for my kids.
The attorney general — this is what I want to bring up, because my kids were never harmed in the first place. And I was scared out of going to trial by my first state-appointed attorney because I didn’t know that state had absolutely no evidence whatsoever. But he scared me and he told me that I needed to stipulate because I wasn’t going to win, the judge hated me, and if you pissed him off, he’s liable to keep your kids forever.
So, me being scared and she said just keep your services, and get your kids back. So I thought that doing my services would be easy. And I jumped right into it and I’ve been — I thought, you know, parenting classes, “Oh, that’s so easy, I can finish those fast,” and psychological profile, “No problem. And as soon as I do a psychological profile, they’re going to see how sane I am and my kids were going to come right home.” And — no. I took their psychological profile at Kapiolani Medical Center, which they own all the people over there and they said whatever they wanted to say. And they diagnosed me with borderline personality disorder, which my psychologist had been saying that’s not even a big deal, and I’ve been in therapy for years. They don’t agree with the diagnosis. They agree with diagnosis of depression because of not having my kids, and severe depression and anxiety. And I was able to overcome that and get clinical discharges, and now they’re trying to say that those discharges are no good and trying to send me all the way back to the beginning and have a new psychological profile, a new therapy and — I just don’t — I don’t know what to do anymore.
I don’t know if I can — I try to undue my stipulation when I found out that they had no evidence. All of the charges were dropped. It was supposedly that my kids were molested, but they weren’t molested. My mom brainwashed my daughter, tricked her into saying that her peepee was touched. And I’ve seen the video, my sex abuse therapist has seen the video, many people have and they’re like, “Oh, my God. Like how did your case even open?
They — the police had to drop all of the charges against the supposed perpetrator, who was my boyfriend, and there’s nothing. They have nothing. When she went for the examination, there was no evidence or she never even said on the video she said that her peepee was touched. But that was because my mom trained her and because they kept repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly asking her that. But you can tell from the video that she doesn’t even understand what molestation is and that there — she wasn’t molested.
Vincent Davis: And are you still being represented by a private attorney?
Female: No. Right now I’m representing myself until I could find an attorney. The problem is, in Hawaii there is almost no good CPS attorneys or if — because it’s such a small pool and they — they have to deal with these people every day. They sit on the same courtroom every day, so they’re all friends with each other and they don’t want to rock the boat. They just play this circus game and — I don’t know what to do. Is there any — Can I represent myself, get an out-of-state attorney or —
Vincent Davis: You know, I don’t — you know, I’m not familiar with Hawaii law. So I can’t tell you if you can represent yourself or not. I know that in California, in certain unique situations, a parent can represent themselves, and I’ve actually seen it a few times. And a lot of people argue under federal law, which would include Hawaii, that you have the constitutional right to, you know, represent yourself. But, again, I don’t know the law in Hawaii, so I couldn’t tell you whether you can or you can’t. I could tell you that here in California, you know, you could possibly represent yourself. And in California, what I’ve seen several times as a matter of fact, the person represents themselves but has an attorney to “assist them” in the procedural and evidentiary rules. But the person is actually representing himself with a court-appointed assisted attorney.
You can hire an out-of-state attorney. The out-of-state attorney would have to apply to the judge in Hawaii to appear what’s called pro hac vice, to try to represent you in that — in the state of Hawaii. For example, I’ve represented a person in Illinois. And I went to Illinois, federal court in Chicago, and I applied pro hac vice and the judge approved me to represent a person in an Illinois case. I’ve also represented a person pro hac vice in Nevada, in Las Vegas. I was approved by the judge there. So you can get an attorney out-of-state to go to Hawaii and apply for pro hac vice status. But, you know, I just have to warn, probably it’d be very expensive. Just the cost of, you know, flying back and forth and the hotels and rent-a-car and —
Vincent Davis: That’s why you should probably focus your search for an attorney there in Hawaii, and if not on the island that you’re on, perhaps you can now search around the surrounding islands. You know, Google knows all, so — I don’t know if you’ve been searching on Google, but I would encourage —
Female: Oh, yes. Uh-huh.
Vincent Davis: you to keep searching and keep looking for an attorney there in Hawaii, unless you, you know, have a lot of money that you want to spend on an attorney from — you know, from the mainland that — to travel there to do your case. Which is also possible. It’s just a matter of time and money. Ma’am, I want to thank you again for calling us. And please keep listening to our show. By the way, what time — it’s almost 9 o’clock here in California. What time is it there in Hawaii?
Female: Your show starts at 5 o’clock here. So sometimes I miss it because I don’t wait — hear my alarm. But one other thing, they replaced the DHS with the attorney general yesterday on my case.
Vincent Davis: Really?
Female: And — yes. I think that they’re — I think there’s something very, very odd with my case. I mean, I know noticed her — she’s come inside in the courtroom several times, especially when — because I haven’t had a trial and I’ve been asking for one for years now and they’re refusing to give me a trial because they’ve — now filed to terminate my rights and they keep telling me that “That’s the trial that you’re going to get,” and I’m like, “Well, I haven’t had a trial on the charges yet,” and I try to unstipulate and I’ve been fighting to try and still get my original trial that they have not given me. And so with the motion that I recently filed, they decide — and the DHS attorney was so sharp. I mean, he was really good that I wonder they replaced him with the actual attorney general and she’s now taking over my case.
Vincent Davis: Yeah. They may have been worried about you possibly suing them, I don’t know. I mean, that’s just a wild guess. I know that’s a very unusual situation. That could happen here in California. It’s usually because of some type of conflict of interest. I’ve actually made a couple of motions over my career about disqualifying the local, you know, county counsel’s office, and appointing the state attorney general. And in some cases they do disqualify the county counsel’s office and — but they have a private attorney who comes in and represents the social workers. He is a former attorney who represented social workers for the county counsel’s office. And he’s very skilled and very professional. And that happens when the county has — the county counsel’s office has a conflict of interest. So there may be some type of conflict of interest, but that’s something you’re going to have to discuss with a local attorney. Ma’am, I’m running out of time and I want to thank you again for calling. Keep listening. Goodbye.
We have about 90 seconds left in the show, and there was something else I wanted to tell the listeners. And that something else is very important and it’s happening on Monday in our court system. At the main criminal courthouse in Los Angeles on Temple, something I think probably for the first time ever in Los Angeles, if not in California, is going to be happening at the Clara —- F-L-O-T-Z Criminal Justice Center, located at 210 West Temple, Los Angeles, California 90012. On that day, four county social workers are going to face arraignment and the scheduling of a preliminary hearing. They are — four county social workers in Los Angeles are being criminally prosecuted by the District Attorney’s Office for apparently some type of negligent and/or lying in the social worker reports that were filed with the court; two men and two women. Their actions or inactions on a case apparently or allegedly led to the death of a child named Gabriel. So, before you go to Shawn’s case, check that case out, and we’ll see you next week on the radio.