litigator
Junior Member
The legal guy
Posts: 20
|
Post by litigator on May 12, 2007 7:40:20 GMT -5
Here are some things to consider when you must respond to a CAS Protection Application and want to prepare excellent court documents:
Know exactly what documents you need and why you need them. Don't be afraid to ask questions of court staff and anyone else who may have helpful info!' Knowing the purpose of court papers will help you in preparing them and in knowing how critical they are to your case. For example:
Q:Why did we get a Notice of Motion? A:The Protection application given to you by the CAS sets out the relief they are seeking as the end result, namely, a specified period of supervision or wardship. However, until the final disposition of the application, a temporary or "interim" order must be in place. The Notice of Motion sets out what interim relief is being sought by the CAS pending final disposition of the case. Therefore, it is critical to advise the Court what interim order you want at the first appearance of the proceedings especially following an apprehension. When preparing your own answer/plan of care be sure to include what interim order you wish the court to make i.e an order returning the child to my care or an order placing the child in the care of friend family etc etc. If you do not ask for an interim order of your own chances are the CAS will get exactly what they are asking for.
Be clear and concise. Use numbered paragraphs in the body of your answer section as well as in your affidavits in order for the Judge to be able to refer to specific items easily and quickly. Keep the paragraphs short and focused. Two ways of organizing ideas are to 1) put items in chronological order; or 2) arrange items according to specific issues i.e. substance abuse or chronic neglect. Use headings!
Set the stage for your relief and do not take things for granted. The Judge must know the following: who are you? how have you come to know the information you are providing? what is the Society's application? how long has the Society been involved? In addition, the Judge needs to know the family members and their relationships to the children in question. Don't just assume that the Judge will review the protection application in detail and will cross-reference the documents. BE SURE THAT EACH DOCUMENT CAN STAND ON ITS OWN IN TERMS OF IDENTIFYING THE PLAYERS ( YOU, YOUR SPOUSE, THE CHILDREN ETC) AS WELL AS THE RELIEF YOU ARE SEEKING.
e.g. I am the father/mother of the child named in the Protection Application and as such, have knowledge of the matter to which I hereinafter depose.
AVOID stating that the Society has been involved with your family "since 1996" unless the involvement has been continuous. It gives the Court the misperception that the Society's involvement has lasted for 7 years rather than the true representation which might be 4 or 5 openings during that time. AGAIN, BE FACTUAL. IT IS FAR BETTER TO CATCH THESE OVERSIGHTS THEN TO BE CAUGHT IN INACCURACIES.
Be completely FACTUAL. Stay away from giving "opinion" evidence. Rather, give an account of your facts to dispute the Society's position.
The issue of hearsay is significant when preparing affidavits because the opposing party or their lawyer has the right to cross-examine you on your affidavit if they so choose. This can be unpleasant for you if you are caught providing second hand information. Plus, once an affidavit is filed, it can not be pulled from the court file for correction. Hearsay is information which is not within your direct knowledge or the result of your own observation.
|
|
|
Post by Lorna on May 12, 2007 9:44:50 GMT -5
As long as a family is fighting in court to get their children back the CAS should not be able to put forward CW or adoption to the courts. Now with this said, we all know it CAN and IS being done.....So we need to change the laws on this, and this is my question to anyone with the answer:
HOW DO WE START THE PROCESS OF CHANGING THIS? WHO DO WE SEND THE PAPER WORK TO? WHAT PAPER WORK NEEDS TO DONE?
Or any other laws, but I think one at a time...
|
|
|
Post by Question on May 12, 2007 12:31:25 GMT -5
What about the Plan of Care called 33:A or 33:B? That is the first motion of the application at the very start beginning of the applicaton (first hearing) within 72 hours. This motion called plan of care is very important where you write your answers in and where you want the Kids to be cared for with who? Then after that, you can file motions of affavadit like these above. Avoid emotions, opinions, but keep the facts in.
Names, Dates, locations, and such.
What about the Psch. Doctors? Do we name and name? CAS Doctors, and Private Doctors of our own? What about CAS therapist? Do we put that in?
I know I have dealings with them for almost 8 years. I think it is better to avoid telling them 8 years, because the Judge will think you have a long history or patterns with CAS which is a bad thing. CAS will prove pattern but we can prove at the present case not the past. CAS can dwell and put in "histories" of Protection cases with the Judge. We need to focus on the CASE, not the Previous old ones. After all, it is what they alleged you with, so stick with the present allegations, not the old ones.
How many motions do we get to file in Court? What about the Motion to Intervene? What is that? I have heard Motions for Discovery as well. Oh boy, I am thinking we will be dealing with hundreds of motions, eh? LOL
Just another headache to deal with the Courts. I would love to avoid it at all costs, but with CAS People with their capability to Lie, it is better to have it on Court Records than in their CAS files that are packed full of Lies. It is a way of getting the truth out.
|
|
litigator
Junior Member
The legal guy
Posts: 20
|
Post by litigator on May 12, 2007 12:46:18 GMT -5
Form 33b answer/plan of care for parties other than CAS is not a motion on your part. When the CAS files their protection application they become the moving party (the person asking the court to do something) and you are now the respondent. When you submit your response you are not bringing a motion you are responding to an application. In your response there is a section asking what order you wish the court to make. It is imperative that you fill that section out.
As for how many motions you can file in court, as many as you like provided you have legal grounds to successfully argue the motion. Avoid filing motions frivolously as if you are not successful you may incur an order for costs against you.
You may indeed file motions for discovery, again be sure to do your homework because if you lose you may be required to pay the opposing party's legal and court costs. You may not need to file a motion for discovery as it is your right to cross examine out of court, any of the society's witnesses and this evidence can then be used against them in court later say at a trial.
Any person with a vested interest in the outcome of a case may apply to the court via motion seeking intervenor status. Anyone who becames a party to a case this way is now also liable for costs against them.
|
|
|
Post by miyaxanagel on May 12, 2007 13:09:14 GMT -5
Is there a way that you can shift or change positions such as:
Changing yourself to be the applicant and they become the respondants?
Did this ever happen to families to file ahead of their game? Just wondering if anybody had done such thing?
I remember that I was the applicant and the CAS was the respondents when I was filing for Human Rights Violations with the Human Rights Commission for lacking interpreters. I filed about two or three with CAS and three with the Police. So far I have won two, and the rest are still investigating.
|
|
|
Post by fixchildrensaid on May 12, 2007 15:53:37 GMT -5
Having just come to this board yesterday:
What is this site's stance on naming Judges or CAS workers, etc., who seem to be corrupt?
I have avoided mentioning particulars of my situtation because I'm not sure on this site's position, but maybe they need to be exposed.
Perhaps if their friends start asking them why they are being accused of corruption, they will think a little harder about their actions.
Lord knows, the courts aren't holding them accountable yet, so maybe public opinion will change things.
|
|
litigator
Junior Member
The legal guy
Posts: 20
|
Post by litigator on May 12, 2007 18:04:27 GMT -5
section 45 (8) "No person shall publish or make public information that has the effect of identifying a child who is a witness at or a participant in a hearing or the subject of a proceeding, or the child’s parent or foster parent or a member of the child’s family".
Although this law prohibits the publication of identifying information I believe that it was put in place to protect not the children but the corrupt members of the Family Justice System.
It is not in any child's best interests to have their parent wrongly persecuted by a CAS agency, nor is it in the best interests of any child to be involved with a family justice system in which judges and lawyers do not protect your interests but rather cause harm and financial ruin to families.
Judges routinely ignore perjury, do not give parents the chance to speak and most heinous, do not show the due diligence to challenge the allegations of Children's Aid Societies even when it is clear to people with non legal backgrounds that they are lying and very badly at that.
The Office of the Children's Lawyer claims to provide competent representation to children so that their wishes may be made known to the court. This is not what happens. The children's wishes are ignored and the lawyers with the OCL walk hand in hand with CAS over your family. So with no one truly speaking for your child the penalty for publishing information is far less than the penalty of having no one hear your child crying out for help in a broken system. I SAY GO FOR IT, FOLLOW THE BRAVE LEAD OF CATHY NORRIS AND LETS ALL POST VIDEOS AND EVIDENCE ON THE INTERNET TO EXPOSE THE RAMPANT DESTRUCTION OF FAMILIES BY THE CHILD PROTECTION RACKET IN THIS PROVINCE.
MARTIN LUTHER KING Jr. SAID IT BEST: An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.
The courts are not going to start throwing people in jail for this. If a large number of people start publishing hard facts and evidence then the powers that be will have no choice but to react in our favor. The courts will be hard pressed to further destroy families that post their names and faces all over the internet.
|
|
|
Post by miyaxanagel on May 12, 2007 18:19:01 GMT -5
Yes, I believe I will be next. lol I am not afraid of these people. They can threaten, bribe, bad name, get revenge, take your children, your house, your car, your stuff. But they won't take away my belief in God. They can't take away the Love bond of my children and I. They cannt take my strength because I ask for it, and most of all, fear is what they do to people. Surely you can't be afraid of little people imposing all kind of things on you, even in death. But our spirits still lives on, no matter what they do to you. We still live on and move on. There is a better term "Till we meet again." The Children will be returned to rightful parents someday as promised. I would expose the truth and expose their lies. It is the balance of the system. I am ready to go to Court! I think these people are afraid to take me to Court, that's why I never went to Court (Family Courts with these people). Only Criminal Courts for my partner. That's it.
|
|
|
Post by fixchildrensaid on May 16, 2007 18:20:51 GMT -5
Litigator, From your response, I take it that this site approves of Judges, etc. being named? I have the transcript of our trial, where the Judge (unnamed until I receive specific approval ) allowed evidence to be admitted, despite my ex-wife's lawyer objecting to it being allowed in. One would think that, if my ex's lawyer didn't want it in, it was going to make her look bad, right? Unbelievably, however, the Judge said that he wanted it in. Paraphrasing slightly (I don't have the transcript with me), the Judge said: "CAS may have investigated Mr. X, and they may have determined that he is not a threat to his children, but I may come to an entirely different conclusion than CAS has. If I do, not only will Mr. X not get custody of his children, but he will not have very much, if any, interaction with his children." The exhibit proved that my ex-wife was the threat (I don't want to give the specific details yet), so the judge WITHDREW the evidence. By the way, this hypocritical Judge was a speaker at the "Children Exposed to Domestic Violence" Conference that was held in London recently. They sure know how to pick 'em.
|
|
litigator
Junior Member
The legal guy
Posts: 20
|
Post by litigator on May 17, 2007 5:44:40 GMT -5
Well I can not speak for the other admins here I fully support naming anyone who acts against the best interests of children. I believe that the only way to stop the abuse of families is to specifically identify those perpetrating the crimes. Judges, lawyers and CAS workers will think twice about screwing people over if they fear their screw ups will be posted for all to see on the internet. By all means post your evidence, put the people that have abused you on the spot. Humiliate them and make them aware that you will not keep their dirty little secrets any longer.
|
|
|
Post by td on May 17, 2007 10:40:31 GMT -5
M.L.K.> also said "ITS ALWAYS THE RIGHT TIME, TO DO THE RIGHT THING"
|
|
|
Post by fixchildrensaid on May 17, 2007 19:34:43 GMT -5
Sounds good, litigator. This happened before the CFSA action happened, so I'm not breaking that rule anyway.
Justice Grant Campbell was the Judge who openly displayed the prejudice that I posted:
I have the transcript of our trial, where Justice Grant Campbell allowed evidence to be admitted, despite my ex-wife's lawyer objecting to it being allowed in.
One would think that, if my ex's lawyer didn't want it in, it was going to make her look bad, right?
Unbelievably, however, Justice Campbell said that he wanted it in. Paraphrasing slightly (I don't have the transcript with me), the Judge said:
"CAS may have investigated Mr. X, and they may have determined that he is not a threat to his children, but I may come to an entirely different conclusion than CAS has. If I do, not only will Mr. X not get custody of his children, but he will not have very much, if any, interaction with his children."
The exhibit proved that my ex-wife was the threat (I don't want to give the specific details yet), so the judge WITHDREW the evidence.
By the way, this hypocritical Judge was a speaker at the "Children Exposed to Domestic Violence" Conference that was held in London recently. They sure know how to pick 'em.
I just recently, finally received the transcript. While this is not the only example of the Judge's prejudice, this little gem should - all on its own - be grounds to win my appeal.
|
|
litigator
Junior Member
The legal guy
Posts: 20
|
Post by litigator on May 17, 2007 19:53:47 GMT -5
Well I was unlucky enough to have Justice Brownstone as my case management judge recently and I have some real zingers from him on tape. I have recorded every hearing I attended and this guy was unreal. He once allowed a conference about a report that was to become evidence. The CAS lawyer, the childrens lawyer and the judge were all given a copy of this report and I was told "SINCE YOU DON"T HAVE A LAWYER I AM GOING TO LOOK THIS OVER AND DECIDE IF YOU SHOULD HAVE A COPY" the two lawyers and the judge proceeded to have their own conference about this report while I sat there with no copy to look at.
|
|
|
Post by td on May 18, 2007 0:29:03 GMT -5
that is unreal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by advocate on May 18, 2007 0:38:51 GMT -5
Sounds good, litigator. This happened before the CFSA action happened, so I'm not breaking that rule anyway. Justice Grant Campbell was the Judge who openly displayed the prejudice that I posted: I have the transcript of our trial, where Justice Grant Campbell allowed evidence to be admitted, despite my ex-wife's lawyer objecting to it being allowed in. One would think that, if my ex's lawyer didn't want it in, it was going to make her look bad, right? Unbelievably, however, Justice Campbell said that he wanted it in. Paraphrasing slightly (I don't have the transcript with me), the Judge said: "CAS may have investigated Mr. X, and they may have determined that he is not a threat to his children, but I may come to an entirely different conclusion than CAS has. If I do, not only will Mr. X not get custody of his children, but he will not have very much, if any, interaction with his children." The exhibit proved that my ex-wife was the threat (I don't want to give the specific details yet), so the judge WITHDREW the evidence. By the way, this hypocritical Judge was a speaker at the "Children Exposed to Domestic Violence" Conference that was held in London recently. They sure know how to pick 'em. I just recently, finally received the transcript. While this is not the only example of the Judge's prejudice, this little gem should - all on its own - be grounds to win my appeal. Fix, I don't know your complete story? I'm not sure you have your child or visitation or what? but posting names and court stuff hear if you have any of the above, could affect your situation. I'm a firm believer in free speech and wanting to get the word out, but it could effect your child's situation badly, or your access it's totally not worth it. Remember they do monitor this and other sites. Members have had bad reactions to what they post on here and thier own sites by the CAS and the Police. Don't give them any more rope.
|
|