Why is the Truth Important: CPS and the "Right to Lie"
Google Images
[Here's a chance to kill two birds with one stone... to shine a light on corruption in California, where an attorney actually went to court to defend CPS right to commit perjury and fabricate evidence, and to have a post for @KrNel's contest "Why is Truth Important.]
We live in a world governed by moral relativism where truth has taken a backseat to expediency; a world where it's ok to lie if it achieves some "higher good." In fact, truth is the only higher good. Truth is not a means to an end- it is the end itself. "Do as thou wilt is [NOT] the whole of the law," it is an abomination of the law- it breeds in itself a law without justice.
Case 15-55563 Preslie Hardwick v. Marcia Vreekin, in the US Ninth Circuit Court was about the Constitutional right for case workers and social workers in California to commit perjury and fabricate evidence to remove children from their birth parents and whether or not they were protected by qualified immunity from prosecution for doing so. The lawyer for the defendants, Pancy Lin argued that the social workers had worked within their rights presenting perjured testimony because there were no clearly stated case laws, or equally clearly stated statutory guidelines preventing them from doing so- either in State or Federal court.
Ms. Lin wasn't arguing as to whether perjury and evidence fabrication was permissible or not- it clearly isn't- but that given that there were no clear cut Constitutional prohibitions, the plaintiffs' Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights had not been violated. Having lost in State court, Ms. Lin and her clients appealed to Federal court. The State court held:
In this case, the jury specifically concluded
that Vreeken and Dwojak lied, falsified
evidence and suppressed exculpatory
evidence–all of which was material to the
dependency court’s decision to deprive
Fogarty-Hardwick of custody–and that they
did so with malice. These findings are clearly
sufficient to satisfy the Supreme Court’s
definition of circumstances in which
‘qualified immunity would not be available.’
Similarly, the US Ninth Circuit Court determined:
Pursuant to an order of the Superior Court of Orange
County California, arising from acrimonious juvenile
dependency proceedings, Deanna Fogerty-Hardwick lost
custody of her minor children, Preslie and Kendall. In this
subsequent civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983, Preslie Hardwick sued the County and employees of
its Social Services Agency (“SSA”). She contends that the
social worker employees acting under color of state law
maliciously used perjured testimony and fabricated evidence
to secure her removal from her mother, and that this abuse of
state power violated her Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment
constitutional rights to her familial relationship with her
mother.
To me there's something Orwellian about a world where you have to go to court to confirm what most people learn in childhood... that it is not ok to lie. The fact that this even came to court is a testimony as to how corrupt CPS and the system that spawned it has become... and the system is just a reflection of the society at large. Moral Relativism and subjective truths create a slippery slope that lead to this...
Is truth dead? Subjective truth is dead- subjective truth is no truth at all, and likewise it does not and cannot achieve some greater good. It took Preslie Hardwick 17 years to get justice for having being torn from her mother's arms based on lies and fabricated evidence and personally I find it a bit disingenuous for a lawyer to say that the social workers were justified because it wasn't "clearly" stated... they knew that perjury is wrong as well as illegal. But it took until 2017 to get it codified (If the defendants don't appeal to the US Supreme Court). This should have never gone to court in the first place.
This is the crux of the defendants case:
The defendants do not contend – nor could they – that
Preslie did not have a constitutional Due Process right or a
Fourth Amendment right protecting her against deliberate
government use of perjured testimony and fabricated
evidence in the dependency court proceeding designed to
rupture her familial relationship with her mother. This right
is beyond debate. What they do claim is that the specific
granular right to be free from deliberately fabricated evidence
in civil child dependency proceedings where a parent’s or
child’s protected familial liberty interest is at stake had not
yet been “clearly established” prior to the dependency
proceeding at issue. They concede that the rights Preslie
relies upon had been clearly established in criminal
proceedings against parents, but not yet in a civil proceeding
context. We disagree.
They try to separate civil from criminal statutes, where the prohibitions against perjury have been clearly outlined in criminal cases but not civil... It is NOT permissible to commit perjury in any court- nor is it permissible to tell falsehoods anywhere else. In other words: Yes, those pants DO make your ass look fat! This case is important for families and I hope people take note of it. This establishes legal precedence that case workers, social workers and other employees of the state CANNOT commit perjury or falsify evidence, or withhold exculpatory evidence and they are NOT protected by immunity if they do. I would urge anyone who has had their children removed to remember this case, particularly if the workers lied. Justice Trott says that the Supreme Court has upheld the rights of birth parents as a Constitutionally protected right since the 1940's. This is a video of the arguments (I felt kind of bad for Ms. Lin-she didn't have a shot- I wouldn't have taken the case).
@richq11 I agree with @empress-eremmy that this perfectly illustrates the problem, one of them, that we have in this country. excellent post!
Thank you... THis wasn't the post I anticipated writing this morning.
well it sure worked @richq11! if this wasn't the intended one I can't wait for the originally intended one.
@krnel here is your winner. This is an excellent piece. You choose the perfect topic to describe truth
Thank you so much... Ironocally, I stumbled across this when I was looking for something else!
This made my day.
So often we hear how the courts DIDN'T work. This time, they worked. It did my heart good to hear the judge's incredulity at the lawyer's ridiculous argument.
There is some justice left.
I know... and from the 9th Circuit- amazing!
The reason cases like this even see the light of day is because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT had previously determined that it is OK for "The USA, Inc." to lie to people in the arena of so-called "national security." It is the height of hubris for the feds to grant themselves the right to lie and to decide what makes the nation "secure," but they did it and have not been successfully challenged yet. The corporate subsidiary known as "The State of California, Inc." was therefor legally sane (though, of course, not legitimately so) to ask if they didn't have the same right.
Of course, NONE OF THEM DO, but WE THE PEOPLE need to reassert OUR rights to force them all not to DARE to lie to us.
Amen to that!!! There's a guy on Steemit @CommonLaw that you should check out.
It is so cleanly a case of fraud and a violation of the very reason men institute government. See number 2. Where it says "Fraud Avoids a contract." The contract they are avoiding is the Constitution for the United States.
![Fraud Boviers 1.png](https://steemitimages.com/640x0/https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmPeqnSCp56pjPDSuUwDBUbr76euciC1NXXvuKp13NNE8H/Fraud%20Boviers%201.png)
And they've been very successful doing it. The reason they get away with it is that they target people without the means to fight back. These types of cases (CPS) are generally litigated in family court as "civil" proceedings. These judges are overwhelmingly biased in favor of the state and the trials are not public. It's only that this case made it out of the family court setting that it was adjudicated. The family court judges allow tainted evidence and perjury because this is about money (lots) not justice. For every child removed from their biological parents there are 25 "professionals" whose livelihood depends on this incredibly corrupt system.
This is only part of the reason they are getting away with it.
"The reason they get away with it is that they target people without the means to fight back."
It isn't that the means to fight back doesn't exist. It is because people are not organized like they are. This is why I keep sharing with people to get involved with the committee's of safety. They are the only organized people working on this. What they need is more people involved.
https://www.nationallibertyalliance.org/user/21603
The people they target tend to be poor and uneducated- they're not even aware for the most part that there are people out there who will help.
Why informationwar and familyprotection are so important as projects is the fact of creating value for those who expose the truth.
Thanks for the lead, Rich. Will follow...
I think you'll like him.
Anybody you like, I am sure I will like. Thanks, again!
This really made my day. I hope this case sends shockwaves throughout the CPS establishment - if you lie to take children from parents, the CHILD may sue you for millions of dollars. Yes, the "victim" can come back 18 years later and sue you and win. And saying you didn't know any better will not exonerate you. Saying the ends justify the means, will not make it alright. You will be sued and look foolish trying to appeal. Even in the 9th circus court of California, you will look ridiculous.
Thank you for sharing this gem, made my day. @ironshield
Thank you my friend... I was waiting for the other shoe to drop- after all this is the 9th Circuit Ct in Cali. I was surprised. One thing that surprised me too is why aren't the cases from SCOTUS from the 40's that affirm the constitutional rights of biological parents being used more?
Liberal judges trend towards the UN rights of a child, as if it is higher law than SCOTUS rulings. They can't legally do this, so they just sort of pretend the case law from the 40's simply does not exist. @ironshield
You'd think lawyers would know... probably why CPS targets people who can't afford decent counsel!
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
![](https://steemitimages.com/640x0/https://s18.postimg.org/51o0kpijd/play200x46.png)
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.
I have heard of this problem in other parts of the country and I must question the CPS motive. Putting children in the system is costly, so.......what benefit do they receive that they are willing to do ANYTHING to get the children in the system? I bet there is an interesting money trail here.
It is called fraud.