Thursday, June 01, 2006

Une Lettre de Nathalie



Maple Ridge, le 1er juin 2006
Cher Francis,
Cela fait maintenant une semaine que j’ai été transférée du zoo au safari
. Je suis toujours en cage mais j’ai un peu plus d’espace pour me retourner. J’avoue qu’après avoir passé six semaines dans l’enfer du centre correctionnel de Surrey, j’ai eu quelques difficultés à m’habituer à mon nouvel environnement.

J’avais l’impression d’être un animal tapi dans ma cellule les premiers jours : il m’était difficile d’occuper l’espace autour de moi et d’organiser ma journée. Mon espace ayant été restreint pendant six semaines et le rythme quotidien ayant été scandé par les enfermements répétés en cellule, j’avoue que je n’avais même plus le goût de sortir dehors.

Les premiers jours, j’avais l’impression d’être une somnambule marchant sans pouvoir traiter l’information autour de moi. Petit à petit, les sensations reviennent, les réflexes de survie se remettent en place. Je comprends mieux maintenant la peur de prisonnières avant leur sortie de prison. Il leur faut réapprendre à fonctionner dans la société et ce et ce n’est pas évident quand toutes les libertés nous ont été enlevées et quand nos droits les plus élémentaires sont bafoués.

Je m’habitue donc petit à petit à mon espace mais les imprévus sont une constance dans cet environnement. Quand je pense avoir compris certaines choses, d’autres évènements surviennent et remettent en cause la grille d’interprétation que j’essaie de mettre en place.

Par exemple, hier, après avoir téléphoné à l’avocate que je n’arrivais pas à joindre depuis deux jours, je suis arrivée à 5h07 à la cuisine pour le dîner du soir. Apparemment les portes de la cafétéria ont été ouvertes plus tôt (d’habitude on mange à 17h) et à l’heure où je suis arrivée la plupart des femmes avaient fini de manger. Résultat : la garde à la porte d’entrée m’a refusé l’entrée à la cafétéria et je n’ai pus avoir à manger. Je lui ai expliqué que j’étais enceinte, rien à faire.

Aujourd’hui, midi, nous avions des hamburgers. Je n’ai pu manger que la moitié du mien car si je mange trop à la fois, j’ai des remontées gastriques étant donné que le bébé est assez haut. Je suis donc sortie de la cantine avec la moitié de mon hamburger. Peine perdue : la garde de sortie m’a demandé de mettre mon hamburger à la poubelle car je n’avais pas le droit de sortir avec une partie de mon repas. Je lui ai expliqué pourquoi (enceinte, remontées gastriques). J’t’en fou, elle m’a dit de faire une demande aux services santé pour que je puisse amener une partie de mon repas à l’appartement. J’ai donc dû mettre la moitié de mon burger à la poubelle.
Voilà, les gardes ont tout pouvoir, les règles ne sont inscrites nulle part et donc chacune s’amuse de nous. Réjouissant !

J’ai vu le consul et Cécile Walk lundi dernier. Ils étaient surpris d’apprendre que j’avais été transférée. J’ai pu leur expliquer que la première surprise était moi-même quand le mardi j’ai demandé à quelle heure l’audience avait lieu le lendemain et que j’ai appris mon transfert à 9 heures du soir. J’avais très peur d’être transférée pour ne pas que je sois à l’audience (manigances courantes qui m’ont été rapportées par différentes prisonnières). J’ai appris le mercredi par l’avocate que l’audience avait été annulée.

J’ai aussi appris par une garde que mon transfert n’a été approuvé qu’a la dernière minute. Apparemment, version officielle, la direction de la prison ne voulait pas m’envoyer au centre Alouette parce que mon dossier est médiatisé. Dans ces cas-là, les prisonniers sont isolés (souvent au trou) de manière à ce qu’aucune information ne circule. Cela confirme donc que la direction a essayé de réduire au minimum mes communications vers l’extérieur.

Par rapport à l’incident du 8 mai, quand toutes les personnes de notre appartement ont été enfermées ; en résumé, j’avais le choix entre des violences physiques que j’aurais subies si je déménageais dans un autre appartement et les violences de l’institution. Comme j’ai « choisi » de rester dans ma cellule d’origine, j’ai dû être enfermée. Point final … Je pense que la bonne « réponse » aurait été de me laisser la liberté de sortir de ma cellule et d’expliquer aux autres filles que je n’avais rien à faire avec l’histoire de harcèlement.

J’ai pu finalement voir le médecin cette semaine. Résultat des courses, en 8 semaines j’ai pris un kilo. J’ai des contractions régulièrement et je suis très fatiguée. Le docteur m’a donc ordonné de me reposer et de rester allongée toutes les après-midi. Je ne vais donc pas travailler mais surtout je ne peux pus aller en cours de justice car je ne supporterai plus les voyages. Comme le procès doit durer une dizaine de jours il va falloir attendre la naissance du bébé pour le procès.

J’ai aussi une infection urinaire. J’attends la confirmation du labo mais à ce jour je n’ai pas de médicaments et je suis vraiment épuisée. Aujourd’hui, je pleurais comme une madeleine sans raison simplement de sur-fatigue. Je n’arrive pas à récupérer et je m’affaiblis donc de jour en jours.

Si je n’avais pas été enceinte, je pense que j’aurais passé tous les jours avant mon procès au trou. C’est du harcèlement et de la torture, je ne vois pas d’autres mots.

Ces techniques pour faire « craquer » les prisonniers sont des procédures communes en Colombie Britannique, province par excellence du Far West (Opposé de Phare-Ouest). J’ai eu connaissance de manière détaillée de ces techniques par une prisonnière et en racontant son histoire, tu auras une idée jusqu’où les choses peuvent aller.
Cette femme a un oncle qu’elle apprécie beaucoup. Régulièrement, elle va pêcher avec lui et elle est invitée à manger chez lui et sa tante. Cet oncle possède une double vie et est impliqué dans le trafique de drogues. Il y a de ça quelques mois, la police canadienne a son bateau qui transportait 2 tonnes de drogue.

Son oncle a pu se défendre et faire annuler le procès sur un détail technique. Depuis, la police est sur les dents pour essayer de le reprendre en flagrant délit de trafique. Sachant que cette prisonnière apprécie son oncle, la police s’est employée à torturer cette prisonnière pour qu’elle leur transmette des informations qu’elle ignore et pour faire craquer son oncle.
Tout d’abord, la police l’a arrêtée de nombreuses fois en plein milieu de la nuit chez elle alors qu’elle vit seule avec sa fille qui a maintenant 14 ans. La police la mettait en garde à vue pendant quelques heures et la relâchait car il n’avait pas de mandat d’arrêt.
Ensuite, la police est allée voir son patron lui disant qu’il devait renvoyer cette femme parce qu’elle était impliquée dans un trafique de drogue. La police a raconté que s’il ne la mettait pas à la porte, lui-même (le patron) serait soupçonné de trafique de drogue. Il l’a donc renvoyé mais, apparemment, il pleurait.
Plus tard, la police a commencé à suivre tous les déplacements de cette jeune femme. Elle croyait qu’elle devenait folle. Sa meilleure amie a aussi été suivie par la police. Finalement, la police arrêtée cette jeune femme avec un mandat d’arrêt et 30 accusations auxquelles elle devait répondre.

Au même moment, sa voiture a été confisquée pour voir si elle contenait de la drogue. La couronne lui a refusé de pouvoir sortir de prison avant son procès et sa fille a été placée sous la « protection » des services sociaux. Pendant son incarcération dans les cellules de garde à vue, la police est venue régulièrement lui offrir de l’argent si elle voulait parler des activités de son oncle, ce qu’elle a refusé ignorant sa double vie.
En cellule, les gardes ont refusé de la nourrir. Ils ont aussi refusé de lui donner une couverture et un matelas pour les nuits. Régulièrement, elle a demandé du papier toilette pour aller aux W.C. Ceci lui a été refusé aussi. Elle est restée plusieurs mois en prison en attendant que la couronne pose une date pour le procès. A court d’argent, elle a perdu sa maison. A 38 ans, elle n’a plus rien !
Finalement, elle a craqué et elle a décidé de plaider coupable pour 4 des 30 accusations bien qu’elle soit innocente pour toutes les accusations. Son raisonnement : il faut absolument qu’elle récupère sa fille qui ne va pas bien. En plaidant coupable, elle n’a pas besoin d’attendre le procès et la peine qu’elle encoure sera plus courte que son attente.
Elle a été condamnée à 7 mois de prison mais elle peut sortir dans quatre mois. Pour cela, elle doit suivre des programmes pour les drogués (bien qu’elle n’en soit pas une). On pourrait croire que c’est une mauvaise farce, mais c’est la réalité. Le pire c’est qu’elle sait qu’en sortant elle sera de nouveau torturée et harcelée jusqu'à ce qu’elle parle.

C’est à en être malade. Donc comme tu vois, je ne suis pas la première victime du terrorisme « légal » de la justice britanno-colombienne.

Mon système immunitaire est à bout et je redoute le pire. En effet, j’ai appris dimanche dernier qu’il y a une épidémie d’une infection de la peau appelée MRSA. Cette infection est très contagieuse et même les anti-biotiques les plus violents ne fonctionnent pas toujours. J’ai appris l’origine de l’épidémie par hasard lorsque le service santé m’a appelée pour faire un test sur ma peau et m’a demandée de donner un échantillon de ma salive.

J’ai refusé ces deux tests car la procédure paraissait louche. En fait, c’était une étudiante en médecine qui faisait des recherches et qui avait « oublié » de dire aux prisonnières que ces deux tests étaient facultatifs.

J’étais vraiment en colère d’apprendre que cette étudiante pouvait récolter des informations sur l’ADN des prisonnières sans leur accord. De nouveau, j’ai risqué le trou car les instructions venaient des gardes de la prison. Ceci confirme que le système de détention est complice des chercheurs qui prennent les prisonnières pour des rats.

Voilà, les affaires continuent et je survis. Je sais que tu te bas comme un diable, que beaucoup de personnes te suivent. C’est vraiment encourageant. Fais plein de bisous aux enfants et plein de tendresse à Jean-Philippe.
Je t’aime très fort

Nathalie.

Letter from Nathalie from Prison



Maple Ridge, June 1, 2006

Dear Francis,

It has been one week now since I was transferred from zoo to safari. I am still in a cage, but I now have a little more space to move around. I must admit that, after having spent six weeks in the horrible correctional center in Surrey, I had some difficulty adjusting to my new environment.

During the first few days, I felt like an animal crouching in my cell: it was difficult for me to occupy the space around me and to organize my day. Since my space had been so limited for six weeks, and the daily routine disturbed by repeated confinements in my cell, I must admit I didn’t even feel like going outside anymore.
I felt like I was sleep-walking without being able to process the information coming to me. Little by little, sensations return, survival instinct comes back. I now understand the fear of leaving the prison that inmates often experience. They must learn again to function in society; this is very difficult when all liberties have been taken away and when our most basic rights are scorned.

So, I am becoming accustomed, little by little, to my space. However, unexpected events occur constantly. When I think I have learned something, other events occur and disturb the perception frame I am trying to establish.

As an example, yesterday, after having called my lawyer whom I had not been able to reach in two days, I arrived in the kitchen at 5:07 PM for dinner. Apparently, the cafeteria doors were opened early (we usually eat at 5:00) and when I arrived, most women had finished eating. As a result, the guard at the door refused to let me in and I did not eat dinner. I explained that I am pregnant and need to eat, but to no avail.

Today, we had hamburgers for lunch. I could only eat half of mine, because I have gastric reflux if I eat too much at a time, since the baby is high. Therefore, I left the cafeteria with half of my hamburger. No chance: the guard made me throw it in the trash since we are not allowed to leave with food. I explained the reason why I needed to keep it, but she said I needed to make a request to the health services to be allowed to take food into my cell. So, I had to throw my half hamburger into the trash.

Guards have total power, rules are not written anywhere, and therefore they are free to do whatever they want. Pretty bad.

I saw the Consul and Cecile Walk last Monday. They were surprised to learn that I had been transferred. I was able to explain that I was the first to be surprised: on Tuesday, I asked the scheduled time of the hearing for the next day, and I learned at 9:00 pm that I would be transferred. I was worried that they would transfer me so that I would not be able to attend my hearing (this is common practice, according to several inmates. On Wednesday, I learned from the lawyer that the hearing had been cancelled.I also learned from a guard that my transfer was only approved at the last minute. The official version is that the prison management did not want to send me to the Alouette center because my case is being covered in the media. In these instances, inmates are isolated (often in solitary confinement) to prevent information from being spread. This confirms the fact that the management tried to reduce my communication with the outside to a minimum.

Regarding the incident on May 8th, when all the people in our section were confined; in short, I had the choice between physical violence suffered if I had moved to a different section and the violence from the institution. Since I “elected” to remain in my original cell, I had to be confined. I think the right “answer” would have been to allow me to come out of my cell and to explain to the other inmates that I had nothing to do with the harassment claim.
I finally got to see the doctor this week. In 8 weeks, I gained one kilo. I have contractions periodically and I feel very tired. The doctor told me to rest and to lie down every afternoon. Therefore, I do not go to work, but, which is worse, I cannot go to court because I will not be able to tolerate the trips. Since the trial should last about 10 days, I will have to wait until the baby is born before going to trial.

I also have a urinary infection. I am waiting for confirmation from the lab, but to this day I have not received any medication, and I am exhausted. Today, I was crying continuously for no apparent reason, just from exhaustion. I can’t recover and am becoming weaker every day.
If I had not been pregnant, I believe I would have spent all the days until my trial in solitary confinement. This is harassment and torture; I don’t know any other word to define it.
These techniques to break down prisoners are common in British Columbia, the typical “Far West” province. I learned a detailed example of these practices from an inmate and when I tell her story, you will have an idea of how far abuse can go.

This woman has an uncle whom she likes very much. She used to go fishing with him and would eat with him and her aunt. The uncle leads a double life and is a drug dealer. A few months ago, Canadian police seized his boat with 2 tons of drugs.

The uncle was able to defend himself and have the lawsuit dropped because of a technical detail. Since then, the police are trying to catch him again. Since they know that this lady likes her uncle, they began to harass her to obtain information – which she does not have – and to catch her uncle.

First, police arrested her several times in the middle of the night. She lives alone with her 14-year old daughter. Police would keep her in custody for a few hours and release her, since there was no warrant.

Then, police went to see her boss and told him that he should fire her because she was involved in drug traffic. They told him that if he didn’t fire her, he would be suspected of complicity to drug traffic. Therefore, he fired her, but she says he was crying.
Later, police began to follow this lady everywhere. She thought she was going crazy. Her best friend was also followed by police. Finally, police arrested the lady with a warrant citing 30 indictments.

At the same time, her car was confiscated and searched for drugs. The crown refused to release her from prison before her trial and her daughter was placed under the “protection” of social services. During her incarceration in custody cells, police came regularly to offer her money if she would talk about her uncle’s activities. She refused, since she knew nothing of his illegal activities.

In the cell, guards refused to feed her. They also refused to give her a blanket and a mattress. She did not have toilet paper. She remained in prison for several months, waiting for the Crown to schedule the trial. She was financially ruined and lost her house. At 38, she has nothing left.
Finally, she broke down and decided to plead guilty for 4 of the 30 indictments, even though she is innocent on all counts. Her reasoning is that she must get her daughter back because her daughter is not well. By pleading guilty, she does not have to wait for the trial and the sentence may be shorter than the waiting time.

She was sentenced to 7 months but will be released in 4 months. She is required to attend drug rehab programs even though she has never taken drugs. You could think this is a bad joke, but it is reality. The worse is that she knows that when she gets out, she will be again tortured and harassed until she talks.

It makes me sick. As you can see, I am not the first victim of the “legal” terrorism in the British Columbian justice system.

My immune system is weak and I am scared. In fact, I learned last Sunday that there a skin infection epidemic called MRSA. This infection is very contagious and even the strongest antibiotics can’t always cure it. I learned of this epidemic by accident when the health services called me to perform a test on my skin and asked me to give a saliva sample.I refused both tests because it looked suspicious. Actually, a medical student was doing research and had “forgotten” to tell inmates that these tests were optional.I was really angry to learn that this student could collect DNA samples from inmates without their authorization. Again, I risked solitary confinement because the instructions came from the prison guards. This confirms that the prison system is an accomplice to researchers who use inmates as lab rats.

Here you are. Life goes on and I am surviving. I know you are fighting as hard as you can, and I know that many people are helping. This is encouraging. Please give the children lots of kisses for me and give my love to Jean-Philippe.

I love you very much,Nathalie

Sunday, May 14, 2006

Nathalie Gettliffe Spends Mother's Day Behind Bars



Mother’s Day spent behind bars
The Leader, Canada
By Dan Ferguson Staff Reporter May 14 2006

A pregnant woman arrested for abducting her own children from Surrey to France will spend Mother’s Day in a B.C. jail, a Richmond Provincial Court judge ruled Thursday.

In denying Nathalie Gettliffe’s bail application, Judge Margaret Rae said Gettliffe has refused to return her son and daughter to the custody of their father, Surrey resident Scott Grant, despite repeated orders by courts in Canada and France. While Gettliffe, who is five months pregnant, offered to post bail and even wear an electronic monitor, the judge said the woman has nothing to keep her in Canada and every reason to return to France.

Ex-husband Grant was pleased. "I’m ecstatic that the court saw through all the lies," Grant said. He was talking about French news coverage of the case, some of it generated by Gettliffe’s French boyfriend, Francis Gruzelle, a journalist who has written several stories accusing Grant of belonging to a cult. Grant, a financial consultant who belongs to a fundamentalist church, has repeatedly denied the claims.

Gruzelle was the reporter who wrote the first stories about the international custody fight shortly after Gettliffe left Surrey with her son and daughter for France in 2001. During a 2004 interview with The Leader, Gettliffe denied that she was romantically involved with Gruzelle, saying he was only a friend who was sympathetic because he had lost his wife to a cult.

However, recent French news reports describe Gruzelle as Gettliffe’s companion and father to a nine-month-old son with her as well as her unborn child. Gruzelle’s ex-wife recently came forward to describe Gruzelle as an embittered former spouse who accused her unsuccessfully of cult involvement during a custody fight.

Some French news reports have also referred to complaints by Gruzelle and Gettliffe that a relative of Grant’s was handling her prosecution. Grant said his mother’s common-law husband happens to be a Crown prosecutor who is not involved with the case in any way.

A specially appointed independent prosecutor has been handling the matter. In a French-language television interview following the Richmond ruling, Gruzelle expressed outrage, saying that keeping his pregnant girlfriend in jail could lead to a miscarriage.

He also repeated claims that Getliffe had come to Canada for a mediation meeting with her husband, something Grant says isn’t true. He maintained he only learned that Gettliffe was returning to Canada when he performed a Google search and stumbled across a University of B.C. website that revealed she would be appearing before an examination panel of professors at the university to complete her Canadian Ph.D.

Grant alerted authorities, who arrested Gettliffe on arrival and charged her with abduction in contravention of a custody order. Her next court appearance is set for July.

Surrey Leader.com

Thursday, May 13, 2004

Look at the Corruption Inside the Judiciary - USA - Case 1

Feds investigate child porn on P2P networks - 65 arrests, 1,000 cases
announced 5/14/04 AP Washington "A nationwide probe into child
pornography trafficking using Internet file-sharing networks has
resulted in 1,000 investigations and at least 65 arrests, federal
officials announced Friday. The broader investigation centers on the
growing use of "peer-to-peer," or P2P, networks that allow users to
connect computers directly with one another to exchange files
rather than using traditional Internet servers that are easier
to track."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4980441/

this one paragraph fwd from L Moss Sharman More details in
pornography case -

Responding to a motion by Stephen W. Thompson's lawyers, a U.S.
prosecutor defended the seizure of a "monstrous" cache from the
EX-JUDGE'S Shore home. By John Shiffman Inquirer Staff Writer
5/13/04 Camden

"A federal prosecutor said yesterday that a "monstrous collection" of
child pornography kept by a former state Superior Court judge had been
lawfully seized from his Shore home. In a legal filing, the prosecutor
said Stephen W. Thompson's cache of child pornography included
"thousands of images of naked or partially naked children engaged in
sexually explicit conduct." At one point, the judge kept 20 such images
on the laptop computer he used on the bench in Camden County, according
to Assistant U.S. Attorney Diana Carrig. From the desktop in his
chambers, Carrig said, Thompson e-mailed a Web site that sold child
pornography and downloaded information from a "travel sex guide" site.

Thompson is charged with possession of child pornography and traveling
to Russia to videotape himself having sex with a teenage boy."

Sunday, April 18, 2004

Men Who Lead Two Lives....Another Look At the Corruption

Submitted by Lynne Moss-Sharman:
Los Angeles Times, Gayle Pollard Terry
April 18, 2004

Secrets in Bakersfield - Rumors of a powerful cabal were whispered for years. Then the local newspaper investigated. By Gayle Pollard-Terry, Times Staff Writer 1/27/03

" "For more than a generation," the story said, "Bakersfield was run by a cadre of men who led double lives. To the public, these men were members of the community's most visible institutions, its justice system and the media. "But in truth ... these men -- a sprinkling of county executives, judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, even the newspaper's publisher -- were part of a loose-knit, secretive network. "Some were homosexuals who preyed upon young men and boys, then used their positions of power and influence to protect one another from possible ramifications.

Occasionally, however, the preyed-upon lashed out, leading to a string of murders involving young gay men and their prominent older male suitors." In the late 1970s and '80s, the victims included two millionaires, one of whom was on a county crime commission; the Kern County personnel director; the owner of a fashionable hair salon; and a 14-year-old girl who attended parties thrown by Bakersfield's one-time police commissioner, who committed suicide after being charged with providing marijuana to minors. With the exception of the girl, whose case was never solved, the murders were committed by teenage or young adult men who said they had had sexual relationships with the victims."

http://www.calendarlive.com/cl-et-gayle27jan27.story
latimes.com

AND ANOTHER ARTICLE:

Judge won't let convicted Bakersfield child molester post bail
by Brian Skoloff, AP Writer 3/15/04

"In Bakersfield alone, 46 people were arrested in eight alleged child molestation rings. Thirty were convicted, eight had their charges dropped and eight struck plea deals that kept them from prison. Twenty two of the 30 convictions were later reversed for reasons including legal technicalities, prosecutorial misconduct or faulty jury instructions."

Link (copy and paste):
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/
2004/03/15/state1714EST0111.DTL

AND MORE:

two fwds from L Moss Sharman - Child Porn Hearing Opens - South County husband and wife are accused of 90 felony counts each, including videotaping and molesting a 5-year-old girl. By Mai Tran 4/9/04 "The videotape gave authorities a roadmap that led to a locked chest stored in a bedroom closet of the couple's home containing 216 videotapes and CDs, many of them depicting the couple having sex with children, investigators said. Investigators said they did not know who sent them the tape or who had the access or time to record snippets from so many movies. Thursday's testimony offered a first glimpse into the case against David Hwang, 31, and his wife, Sheila Sikat, 23. The hearing, which was continued until April 20, will determine whether the couple should stand trial. Orange County sheriff's investigators contend the tapes and CDs reveal six children being molested."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-molest9apr09,1,3749389.story?c oll=la-headlines-california

Man accused of killing family members had mass suicide plan Brian Skoloff, 4/8/04 AP "Marcus Wesson devised a plan nearly a decade ago for his children to kill themselves if authorities came to retrieve the clan, according to a police detective testifying at a preliminary hearing on charges Wesson murdered nine of his kids. Wesson maintained strict control over his many children and would inflict "weeklong spankings" if they broke his rules, which included *NOT* talking to men outside of the family, Fresno homicide detective Carlos Leal testified that one of Wesson's adult daughters told him. The 20-year-old girl said the family was forced to study the King James Bible twice a day and listen to Wesson preach, Leal said, adding that she claimed Wesson began molesting her and her sisters when they were as young as 5."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/04/0 8/state1703EDT0122.DTL

>From American Journal of Public Health - The Economic Burden of Hospitalization Associated With Child Abuse and Neglect Posted 04/02/2004 Sue Rovi, PhD; Ping-Hsin Chen, PhD; Mark S. Johnson, MD, MPH Abstract and Introduction Abstract Objectives: This study assessed the economic burden of child abuse-related hospitalizations. Methods: We compared inpatient stays coded with a diagnosis of child abuse or neglect with stays of other hospitalized children using the 1999 National Inpatient Sample of the Healthcare Costs and Utilization Project. Results: Children whose hospital stays were coded with a diagnosis of abuse or neglect were significantly more likely to have died during hospitalization (4.0% vs 0.5%), have longer stays (8.2 vs 4.0 days), twice the number of diagnoses (6.3 vs 2.8), and double the total charges ($19266 vs $9513) than were other hospitalized children. Furthermore, the primary payer was typically Medicaid (66.5% vs 37.0%)." http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/472527

ABUSERS KEEP CUSTODY OF THEIR VICTIMS 70% OF THE TIME:

When Children Tell And No One Listens - October 1997 - By Sherry A. Quirk, Esq. "...some of the worst cases are those where authorities were notified of abuse and had determined that the child was at risk, but nevertheless left the child in the care of the abuser....Studies show that batterers have been able to convince authorities that the victim is unfit or undeserving of sole custody in approximately 70% of challenged cases." http://www.yesican.org/articles/childrentell.html

Tuesday, October 14, 1997

When Children Tell and No One Listens

When Children Tell And No One Listens
October 1997

By Sherry A. Quirk, Esq.

Bio: Sherry A. Quirk, Esq., is a member of the firm of Verner, Liipfert, Bernhard, McPherson & Hand. Ms. Quirk practices extensively in the legislative and administrative areas, and over the past several years has devoted significant time and effort to the issue of sexual abuse of children.

In 1992, Ms. Quirk also established and continues to supervise Verner Liipfert's pro bono project on behalf of victims of childhood sexual abuse. She is the President and co-founder of One Voice: the National Alliance of Abuse Awareness and its public policy project, the American Coalition for Abuse Awareness.

One Voice, a 501 © (3) entity, is a national alliance of adult survivors and child victims of sexual abuse, their supporters, child advocacy organizations, non-offending parents, health care and legal professionals who are seeking to improve the quality of life for children and adult survivors of sexual, physical and emotional abuse. One Voice is active in educating the public, the national media and our members of congress on preventing the victimization of children, supporting the right of victims to seek redress through the courts and assuring access to appropriate treatment for victims of abuse. Ms. Quirk can be reached by e-mail at ACAADC@aol.com

- - - - - - -

Americans are more aware than ever of the tragedy of child abuse: our national and local media carry daily reports of children who have been beaten, imprisoned, starved, burned or sexually and emotionally abused. Shopping carts, milk cartons, billboards, newspapers all carry the message that children should tell if they are being hurt and that to prevent abuse, just call a hotline and help will arrive.

However, we are slowly awakening to the fact that, even if suspected abuse is reported, this does not always result in safeguarding the child from further abuse. In fact, some of the worst cases are those where authorities were notified of abuse and had determined that the child was at risk, but nevertheless left the child in the care of the abuser. We are also learning that not only the woman who flees domestic violence is at risk from further violence, but that her children are often the innocent witnesses to her being battered -- or additional victims. And in far too many cases, the batterer has not only revenges himself on his former partner, but hurts or kills the children as well.

But there is an aspect to this violence in the family which so far has escaped the public's attention: the granting of sole custody or unsupervised access to the batterer or child abuser. According to the American Judges Foundation, "One of the most common reasons given for resuming an abusive relationship is the fear that the abuser will act on the threats of taking the children from the victim. Studies show that batterers have been able to convince authorities that the victim is unfit or undeserving of sole custody in approximately 70% of challenged cases."

The idea that batterers and child abusers are awarded sole custody even when there has been a domestic violence conviction or reliable evidence of sexual abuse may seem so bizarre as to be unbelievable to most Americans. Even those who have experienced this admit that they never would have believed it possible until it happened to them. They thought that if their child made an outcry, help would be there for them. They thought that judges would look at a history of domestic violence, weigh the medical evidence, listen to the words of their children, and choose to protect the child. Instead, as the American Psychological Association states in its report on Violence in the Family (1996), "Family courts frequently minimize the harmful impact of children's witnessing violence between their parents and sometimes are reluctant to believe mothers…Some professionals assume that accusations of physical or sexual abuse of children that arise during divorce or custody disputes are likely to be false, but the empirical research to date shows no such increase in false reporting at that time. In many instances, children are frightened about being alone with a father they have seen use violence towards their mother or a father who has abused them. Sometimes children make it clear to the court that they wish to remain with the mother because they are afraid of the father, but their wishes are ignored."

Fathers, too, sometimes find themselves caught in the gears of the court when they report abuse their children have disclosed at the hands of stepfathers or their mother's boyfriend. These mothers are at times more interested in protecting their partner than safeguarding their children. Such cases underscore the importance of having the best interest of the child at heart, and that the protection of the child should be the goal of our child protection system. It goes without saying that each case must be judged on its own merits.

As far as we know, no one has addressed the long term affects of this betrayal upon children who told about being abused but were silenced or ignored by the judicial system and given into the hands of those who had abused and violated them. Susan Smith is an anecdotal example: a mother who, as a young teenager reported abuse by her stepfather, received no help, and proceeded to murder her own children. Told that the court would protect them from the abuser, how can abused children then believe that they deserve help and protection? And as Randy Burton, Esq., of Justice for Children has remarked, "The public's perception of widespread abuses in the family courts has created a crisis in confidence in the judicial system in general."



Please join us in drawing attention to the re-victimization of children through a court system which allows batterers and child abusers to have unrestricted access to children. Let your state and national representatives know about this grave problem and educate your local and national press.