Kidjacked » legal » handbook.asp Kidjacked? Share your story!!!Want to share your story? Follow these posting guidelines.AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Wednesday, July 24, 2024
 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31  
 Kidjacked | Jacked Up 
Comments are strictly moderated.
decorative corner
Join Kidjacked on Facebook

14% of foster care youth are prescribed psychotropic medication, according to the Institute for Juvenile. (2006)

decorative corner

Child Protective Services
And The Juvenile Justice System

A guide to protect the constitutional rights of both parents and children.

Intro 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Conclusion [Print]

Channel 17 News in Kansas - CPS says, "Trust us"

"Know your rights before you talk to anyone from CPS, they won't tell you your rights. CPS can't do anything without your consent, demand a warrant and speak with an attorney first before speaking with anyone from CPS, neglecting to do so could cost you your children."

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said it best, "The government's interest in the welfare of children embraces not only protecting children from physical abuse, but also protecting children's interest in the privacy and dignity of their homes and in the lawfully exercised authority of their parents." Calabretta v. Floyd, 189 F.3d 808 (1999).

It is unconstitutional for CPS workers to conduct an investigation and interview a child on private property without exigent circumstances or probable cause.

The decision in the case of Doe et al, v. Heck et al (No. 01-3648, 2003 US App. Lexis 7144) will affect the manner in which law enforcement and child protective services investigations of alleged child abuse or neglect are conducted.

The decision of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals found that this practice, i.e. the "no prior consent" interview of a child, will ordinarily constitute a "clear violation" of the constitutional rights of parents under the 4th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. According to the Court, the investigative interview of a child constitutes a "search and seizure" and, when conducted on private property without "consent, a warrant, probable cause, or exigent circumstances," such an interview is an unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the rights of the parent, child, and, possibly the owner of the private property.

The mere possibility of danger does not constitute an emergency or exigent circumstance that would justify a forced warrant-less entry and a warrant-less seizure of a child.

Hurlman v. Rice, (2nd Cir. 1991)

A due-process violation occurs when a state-required breakup of a natural family is founded solely on a "best interests" analysis that is not supported by the requisite proof of parental unfitness. Quilloin v. Walcott, 434 U.S. 246, 255, (1978)


Child Protective Services CPS Police Abuse Constitution (Texas)

This is only a guide to your constitutional protections in the context of an investigation of alleged child abuse and neglect by Child Protective Services ("CPS"). Every state has variances of CPS in one form or another. Some are called DCF, DHS, DSS, DCYS, DCFS, HRS, CYS and FIA, collectively known as "CPS" for the purposes of this handbook. The material in this handbook should be supplemented by your own careful study of the 4th and 14th Amendment and other Constitutional protections that are guaranteed even in the context dealing with CPS.

The intent of this handbook is to inform parents, caregivers and their attorneys that they can stand up against CPS and Juvenile Judges when they infringe upon the rights of both parents and children. As you read this handbook, you will be amazed what your rights are and how CPS conspires with the Assistant Attorney General ("AAG"), who then in turn has the Judge issue warrant/orders that are unlawful and unconstitutional under the law.

Contrary what any CPS officials, the AAG, Juvenile Judge or any social workers may say, they are all subject to and must yield to the 4th and 14th Amendment just like police officers according to both the Circuit and District Courts of the United States as well as the U.S. Supreme Court. CPS workers can be sued for violation of your 4th and 14th Amendment rights. They lose their "immunity" under "Deprivation of Rights Under the Color of Law" and must be sued in their "Official and Individual" capacity in order to succeed in a §§ 1983 and 1985 civil rights lawsuit. If police officers assisted CPS in that deprivation of rights, they also lose immunity. The police officer(s) may also then be sued for assisting CPS in the violation of both yours and your child's rights when they illegally abduct your children or enter your home, without probable cause or exigent circumstances, which are required under the warrant clause of the 14th Amendment.

About The Authors

The authors of this book are not attorneys and do not pretend to be attorneys. The authors were victims of a false report and were falsely accused by DCF in Connecticut without conducting a proper investigation. The authors fought back for 8-months against this corrupt organization whose order of the day was to deny them their 4th, 6th and 14th Amendment rights and to fabricate false charges without evidence. DCF's charges and petition to the court were nothing more than baseless allegations, never evidence. DCF withdrew the fraudulent petition on December 18, 2002 admitting they had no evidence. The fact of the matter is that they never had any evidence but abused the authors and their children for an 8-month period.

As a direct result of the false charges, manufacturing of evidence and violating the authors 1st, 4th, 6th, 9th and 14th Amendment rights, the authors filed a lawsuit in January 2003 in Federal Court in the District of Connecticut (3:03-cv-109AVC). There are 28 Defendants in this civil action and the authors are representing them selves Pro se. The authors have never been convicted of any child abuse or neglect nor are there any investigations on going. The authors have three children, a 15-year-old and 10-year-old twins.

The author's goals are that:

  • No other child is illegally abducted from their family
  • CPS and juvenile judges start using common sense before rushing to judgment
  • Require CPS agents to conduct their investigations the same as do the police in order to be constitutionally correct and legal
  • CPS must by law comply with the "Warrant Clause" as required by the Constitution and the Federal Courts whereas they are "governmental officials" and are subject to the Constitution as are the police.

There are No Exceptions in the U.S. Constitution for CPS.


The truth about Child Protective Services

You, as a parent or care-giver, must be totally informed of what your legal rights are, whether you are a parent caught up in an oppressive, abusive or often unlawful action of CPS, or if you have never been investigated by CPS. Many individuals come to the wrongful conclusion that the parents must have been abusive or neglectful in order for CPS to investigate. This is a myth. The fact of the matter is that over 80% of all abuse calls received by CPS workers are false.

Another myth is that CPS can, without your consent, conduct an investigation in your home, or speak to your child without your explicit consent. CPS employees will lie to you and tell you they do not need your consent. This is patently untrue. They absolutely need your consent to come into your home or speak with your children. If there is no "exigent circumstances" (imminent danger) to your children with "probable cause" (credible witness) to support a warrant. CPS (everywhere in the United States) cannot lawfully enter your home and speak with you and your children. In fact, it is illegal, and you can sue the social worker and the police who assist them and they both lose immunity when personally sued.

If CPS lies to the AAG and the Judge in order to get a warrant/order and you can prove it, that also is a 4th and 14th Amendment rights violation, which is a civil rights violation under § 1983 and conspiracy against rights covered under § 1985. If a CPS worker threatens to call the police after you refuse them entry, and they have no warrant, they are violating the law and lose their immunity. Even if the police only open the door to provide entry to the CPS official, this is coercion, threatening and intimidation tactics, and both may be sued.

Remember, CPS officials will not tell you your rights; in fact they are going to do everything in their power including lying to you, threatening you with police presence telling you that you must let them in. The police may even threaten you into allowing CPS in because you are obstructing an investigation. Many police officers do not realize that CPS must comply with the warrant clause of the 14th Amendment or be sued for violating it.

CPS does not have a legal right to conduct an investigation of alleged child abuse or neglect in a private home without your consent. In fact, removing a child from your home without your consent even for several hours is a "seizure" under federal law. Speaking to your children without your consent is also a "seizure" under the law. If CPS cannot support a warrant and show that the child is in imminent danger along with probable cause, they cannot enter your home and speak with your children.

Remember, anonymous calls to CPS are never considered probable cause under the Warrant Clause. Even if they have the name and number from the reporter on the end of the phone, that also does not support probable cause under the law.

CPS must by law, investigate the caller to determine if he or she is the person they say they are and that the accusations are credible. The call alone, standing by itself, is insufficient to support probable cause under the law. Many fabricated allegations are made by disgruntle neighbors, ex-spouses or someone wanting to gain revenge. As such CPS is required to show due diligence, just as police are required to obtain sworn statements.

CPS agencies across the country have an exaggerated view of their power. No matter what you consider constitutes actual abuse or neglect, CPS has it's own definition. That definition is whatever they decide it to be. CPS will lie to you, they will tell you that they can do anything they like with total immunity. Tell that to the half dozen social workers sitting in jail in California, who lied to a judge. We will discuss this in further detail, in Section 2: Are All CPS Workers In The United States Subject To The 4th and 14th Amendment?

The case for Foster Care Reform written in stone [picture of a head-stone]

For additional copies or questions,
please e-mail us at Thomas Dutkiewicz or Aimee Dutkiewicz

Intro 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Conclusion [Print]