VC & meeting are over
- Thread starter klmno
- Start date
Marcie Mac
Just Plain Ole Tired
Don't get me started on a rant with the legal system here in CA. Danny was picked up on a warrant at his boss's wedding a little over a month ago. I called and found out that bail was 100,000 -WTH - it was supposedly for resisting arrest back in "2007" - even the deputy at the jail said "something is wrong with this bail" Now you know they would not have let him out of jail with a charge like that, and although he has been stopped a few times, and the local police knew he had a warrant, didn't feel like making a 40 mile drive to take him to that jail. He was transferred three times over the weekend to different places,and when he went before the judge they let him go same day - no probation, nothing-judge just said ok time served and get out of here. A hugh waste of time and money on a bogus charge. His boss took a week off as HE had a charge for an unpaid "pot" ticket (before the law went into effect that if you had some weed below a certain amount they don't do anything) -was prepared to do his week so went to turn himself in, clerk looked at the charge, stamped it, and said done - go home.
If they are going to spend money, I wish they would spend it on programs to actually "help" keep them out of jail, but I guess that is too logical
Marcie
If they are going to spend money, I wish they would spend it on programs to actually "help" keep them out of jail, but I guess that is too logical
Marcie
klmno
Active Member
OMG where is that like button??
I am reading responses but feel a little too spent right now to respond much- I will say that there were a few snippets of conversation re other things- IEP, school reentry, medication insurance, and the attny took a lot of notes. My feeling is that it is a real shame that the people in csu can't concentrate on what they are expected to do by higher ups. I'll leave it at that for now. I wush the entire thing had been recorded and my attny and me getting a copy- a judge would have a field day. The people in charge of fed funding would have to work over the weekend.
AnnieO
Shooting from the Hip
klmno... 
You have worse luck with the legal system than we do. I just do not understand why they would lie so much. Placating you or not, I'm sorry, they are a government entity and should NOT BE DISHONEST with ANY of the parties. "We're trying to work something out" would be better than the koi you're getting.
Wish I could smack them over the head with a 2x4 for you.
You have worse luck with the legal system than we do. I just do not understand why they would lie so much. Placating you or not, I'm sorry, they are a government entity and should NOT BE DISHONEST with ANY of the parties. "We're trying to work something out" would be better than the koi you're getting.
Wish I could smack them over the head with a 2x4 for you.
klmno
Active Member
When the attny calls me, after she talks with director of this program, I'm going to discuss the possibility of getting this in front of a judge. I remembered that reentry lady had given me a brochure on this and it makes it pretty obvious this is to get the kid to independent living unless he comes straight home. Everyone working with people in the system knnows it's the PO that establishes the 'real' goals for a kiid to get off any service and they won't clarify those, except for that anger management course which reentry lady said took a min of 4 mos and the first mo in the gh is spent getting acclamated, then after the AM coursde, they concentrate on getting them to the community. A judge most likely won't over-ride that buut can better establish a time frame and get the facts out so we at least know what they are. If difficult child is going to independent living, we need to get that out now- but a judge might very well over-ride that. If not, I'm going to be addressing the issue that I'm not here to jump thru hoops under a false pretense that we're working on reunification.
I'm, so glad I got attny on board- it makes it a whole lot harder for them to claim to a judge later on that the problem is me not respeccting their authority. The problem is them givinig lip service instead of beiing open and honest about what the order really is.
I'm, so glad I got attny on board- it makes it a whole lot harder for them to claim to a judge later on that the problem is me not respeccting their authority. The problem is them givinig lip service instead of beiing open and honest about what the order really is.
klmno
Active Member
I dropped a copy of the brochure off at attny's office and made some notes on the back- basicly, PO was supposed to have the parole plan (not just placement decision) written and presented yesterday- that would legally have to include terms of parole and any required services, time limits, etc, to step doown and ultimately get off parole. They wouldn't even answer these questions directly when asked. Secondly, they verbally claim reunification is the goal however the program isn't a reunification prgram. Thirdly, they told difficult child he could be out as early as 3 mos but when directly asked what it would take other than difficult child maintaining good behavior for 3 mos, there answer was "we'll just have to see how he's doing and determine then when we think he's ready". That is NOT a measurable goal, which is required for any gov service, program, and even parole/probation.
Therefore, I'm asking for a hearing before a judge for any reason the attny can get it there to 1) ask if there can be an established reunification plan, the same as dss is required to do, 2) if there is not going to be a reunification plan, then can I be released from csu requirements, 3) clarify what are rights, responsibilities, and requirements
But most importantly, it would force PO/super to submit to the court their current parole plan- not just the placement issue- so they would have to have measurable goals written and submitted, as they are required by law to do, otherwise a judge would have no idea how to evaluate the case. "We'll see how it goes and how he's doing and what we think, even if he's behaved for 90 days" won't cut it in court.
It's my understanding that a kid coming out of a Department of Juvenile Justice facility can have the case reviewed by a judge. That alone is grounds for a hearing if requested.
Therefore, I'm asking for a hearing before a judge for any reason the attny can get it there to 1) ask if there can be an established reunification plan, the same as dss is required to do, 2) if there is not going to be a reunification plan, then can I be released from csu requirements, 3) clarify what are rights, responsibilities, and requirements
But most importantly, it would force PO/super to submit to the court their current parole plan- not just the placement issue- so they would have to have measurable goals written and submitted, as they are required by law to do, otherwise a judge would have no idea how to evaluate the case. "We'll see how it goes and how he's doing and what we think, even if he's behaved for 90 days" won't cut it in court.
It's my understanding that a kid coming out of a Department of Juvenile Justice facility can have the case reviewed by a judge. That alone is grounds for a hearing if requested.
