The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion We No Longer Struggle With

A judge in Vermont recently ruled that a man civilly committed under Vermont’s civil commitment scheme known as Act 248 which places individuals who have been accused of a crime or are considered a “danger to the public” does not have the right to a renewed competency evaluation and to stand trial.  According to this ruling a person found incompetent to stand trial has forfeited the right forever to attain competency and face their accuser to clear their name.  Statutes: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/fullchapter.cfm?Title=18&Chapter=206

Upon a finding of incompetence the individual in this case, William Bennett was  “committed” to the care and custody of the Vermont Commissioner of the Department of Aging and Independent Living (DAIL) .  The  charges were then dismissed yet the State’s Attorney retains the right to reinstate the charges, in other words the statutes of limitations are stayed.

Competency unlike an insanity defense,  refers to an individuals ability to understand the court proceedings and  effectively assist their attorney in providing a defense.  The statutes clearly state that the individual, his attorney or a judge may at any time request a renewed competency evaluation.  Because competency is fluid some individuals  may be brought to competency through education.  This is especially true in this case where you have a borderline, or questionable diagnosis of mild metal retardation.  Even though V.S.A. 4814 (a) seems to allow for renewed competency evaluations, the Judge ruled otherwise.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/92323235/Manley-Decision-4-6-12-1

In this case the State’s Attorney argued that there are no charges pending and that the Statutes of Limitations had expired in June of 2011. Therefore States Attorney, Lisa Warren argued, a competency cannot be ordered.   Yet in November of 2011 the DAIL  Attorney with the State’s attorney proposed the following:

The charges against Mr. Bennett were dismissed without prejudice back in 2006 and so could be reinstated.  Under this agreement, your client would not challenge his competency.  Caledonia State’s attorney Lisa Warren (also co-signatory to this letter) would reinstate the original two counts of L&L and your client would plead guilty and be offered a probationary sentence.  This offer stands for a period of two weeks until November 9, 2011. Note: this offer is only good if your client agrees to a plea deal. This is not an offer to reopen the criminal case for the purpose of bringing the criminal case through trial. http://www.scribd.com/doc/92324748/Lisa-Warren-3-7-12

This was clearly an attempt to coerce my son into a guilty plea which if accepted would have brought him back to criminal court where a judge must inform a defendant of his or her right to a trial.  The judge would also have to ask the defendant if he or she was coerced into the plea.

In the original case William was charged with two counts of L&L, not L&L against a child.  The alleged victim was older than William and the circumstances surrounding the events were very suspicious.  A provider for the Agency brought William, then 18 and a 19 yr old female client to a hotel and left the their alone.  The provider had been explicitly instructed by me, Bill’s mother and Bill’s therapist to prevent these types of situations..  The State’s attorney waited a full year before bringing charges.  From reviewing the files, I believe the State’s attorney only filed the charges as a vehicle to the commitment.

In her decision Judge Manley also ruled that each annual review of the committment is a new case (even though they are filed under the same docket number), and that the proceedings occur in the family court  rather than the crimminal court which the statute clearly states.  In this particular court there has been a long standing practice to close these proceedings to the public.  This practice isn’t provided for by law or statute, it simply is the way for the State and the Court do it.

In her decision Judge Manly also denies the Guardian of the committed individual party status.  The Act 248 statutes provide for an annual review which is supposed to review whether or not the DAIL is providing  care and habitation in a “individualized manner” in accordance with the statutes and whether or not they pose a risk to public safety.  In this proceeding the Commissioner must show that the individual still poses a threat to public safety and is still in need of “care and habilitation”.

In the cases I have seen the individual is provided a Guardian by the State and an Attorney from Vermont Legal Aid.  If a state Guardian is involved they are given party status and they file a report agreeing with the state.   If the guardian is a  private non-state guardian, they are not given party status and receive no notification of a review before or after it takes place.  Attorneys form Vermont Legal Aid have Stipulated to the States recommendations that the individual should remain in custody for another year without ever meeting with their client.    The State and the Court have it pretty well rigged.

You might at this point be asking yourself why the State would want to keep someone in custody who doesn’t pose a threat to the public.  The answer is very simple, MONEY.  A lot of money comes into the State’s Coffers under these people’s commitments.   Some of of the money stays at the state level to pay salaries  for case managers and “Public Safety Specialists” and $100,000. to $300,000 comes straight to a local “Designated Agency” who provides supervision.  This is a big chunk of money that goes right into the Agencies budget and they do not like to see it go away.

In December of 2010, I hired a private attorney for my son.  Since that time my son has suffered at the hands of the Commissioner and the “Designated Agency”.  A bizarre series of attempts to isolate and intimidate and harass him began, he has been assaulted by a “home care provider”, denied his inhaler, forced to clean other peoples urine an feces, denied  access to his attorney, forbidden to see his private psychologist, he’s been moved from location to location without any idea where he’s being taken, he’s been forced to sleep on springs, he’s been  threatened, intimidated and harassed beyond what most of us could endure.

Yet he’s maintains composure and determination to end the cycle of abuse perpetrated against him by the courts and Vermont Human Services.  Adult Protective Services is currently investigating one of the placements where Bill had to clean someone else’s urine and feces.  During this time, he was also denied his inhaler for allergies and asthma.  This is disgusting and a disgrace to the State of Vermont.   video:http://youtu.be/O0fN5aDlB7k

After a year of wondering why an how the citizens and the Government of Vermont can witness such abuse and neglect of a disabled group of men without and fail to act,  I came across some research by Melvin Lerner that explains the psychology of what I’m witnessing.   In 2008 Lerner was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award by the International Society for Justice Research.  Lerner sought to answer the questions of how regimes that cause cruelty and suffering maintain popular support, and how people come to accept social norms and laws that produce misery and suffering.  This is a question I have struggled with.  Why when abuse is obvious and blatant in this rural area of Vermont do Judges and law makers just turn their heads and even reward the abusers.

Lerner’s repeatedly witnessed the tendency of observers to blame victims for their suffering.  During his clinical training as a psychologist, he observed treatment of mentally ill persons by the health care practitioners with whom he worked.  Though he knew them to be kindhearted, educated people, they blamed patients for their own suffering.

In 1966, Lerner and his colleagues began a series of experiments that used shock paradigms to investigate observer responses to victimization. In the first of these experiments, 72 female subjects were made to watch a confederate receiving electrical shocks under a variety of conditions. Initially, the obseres were shocked by the apparent suffering of the subject.  However, as the suffering continued and observers remained unable to intervene, they began to blame the victim.  The blame became greater as the shock treatments intensified.  Other researchers were able to replicate Lerner’s findings.

Lerner hypothesized that the belief in a just world is crucially important for people to maintain for their own well-being. However, when daily with evidence that the world is not just: people suffer without apparent cause, one strategy people will use to make sense of nonsense is to blame the victim.  To avoid the feelings of  powerlessness victims will even blame themselves.  Most survivors of sexual abuse can identify with this.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_phenomenon

After years of presenting evidence of abuse to Mental Health professionals,  judges and  the Agencies tasked with protecting victims,  I’ve been relieved of the delusion.  I’ve found support among others who’ve also been freed of the delusion, we are working hard together to force justice upon the deluded.  Each of us has a role and a voice.  Write a letter to the editor, like it on facebook, educate your Grand children and children about the dangers of the system.  To speak out in any form and you are part of the solution.

Lets keep working toward peace an justice in reality.

Tracy Gilman

Vermont Human Services Ignores Medicaid Fraud and Abuse

Disability Rights Vermont uncovered Medicaid fraud in an investigation of an assault on a disabled man by a “home care provider”. http://www.scribd.com/doc/56888199/Disability-Rights-Vermont-Investigation-into-Abuse-By-Home-Care-Providers

In the report the Sterling Area Agency, in Morrisville Vermont admits they knowingly put a contract into the name of a person not providing the service.  SAS also knowingly supported the contracted provider in not complying with the requirements laid out in her contract.  This has been reported to the Vermont Attorney General and they have said they are going to investigate.

The Vermont Agency of Human Services oversees this provider, has received a copy of the DRVT report but has taken no action on the fraud or the assault.  Earlier that day, I Tracy Gilman, the Legal Guardian and mother of Bill Bennett attempted to remove him from the placement due to concerns for his safety.  Vermont Human Services ordered him back to the placement just hours before the assault occurred.

The  DRVT report also concluded that:

The information provided by the contracted Home Care Provider, Wendy Demar and the assaulting “home care provider”  Wayne Demar were “strikingly” inconsistent.  Wayne Demar admits to following Bill to his bedroom and pushing him down on his bed but did not admit to holding him down.  Yet Wendy Demar state that Wayne admitted to her having pushed and held Bill down.

The two HCP’s also differed in their stories one saying that Bill was agitated upon arriving home and the other saying he was not.

The Home Care Provider did not comply with Bill’s Behavioral Support Plan, Crisis Response Plan or his SAS training.

The Home Care provider entered into Bill’s room to unnecessarily confront Bill within his own personal space.

That he forcibly placed Bill on the bed and held him there against his will.

That more likely than not the Home Care Provider acted in an effort to intimidate and place Bill in fear in order to reassert control and express his frustration over the days events.

The Home Care Provider did restrain Bill on the bed in a manner that was not appropriate pursuant to the Guidelines cited in Behavior Support Guidelines published by Vermont Human Services 2004 that prohibits under any circumstances, “restraints that have an individual lying on the ground or in a bed with a worker on top of the individual”.

Adult Protective Services apparently never interviewed either provider before making the determination that “No Abuse Occurred”.

William Bennett’s troubles with the state have been ongoing since he entered into services.  In 2005 he was set up by a home care provider who dropped him off at the Comfort Inn and Suites with a nineteen year old girl.  As a young man with a disability this was exactly the sort of “encounter” William wasn’t ready for and the guidelines clearly outlined in his support agreement made that clear.

The Agencies records clearly acknowledge “poor supervision L&L resulting.  Bill was then charged with Lewd and Lascivious conduct and “successfully” court ordered into the custody of Vermont Human Services.  Where he has been subject to years of Abuse and Neglect at the States Hands.

One can only conclude that the Agency will go to any lengths to avoid responsibility/liability for the actions of its minions.  The only avenue for Justice seems to be to sue the State of Vermont.

I have carefully documented the neglect and abuse against my son for many years and I can tell you there are so many fraudulent practices occurring at the area agencies that the counts of abuse and neglect won’t be counted on one hand.

I’m certain documentation is being created and destroyed by these agencies in an effort to erase all evidence and create new evidence.

Instead of addressing the abuses that have been reported Vermont Human Services has harrassed, intimidated and retaliated against me, costing me tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees to maintain my guardianship of my son,  to file motions for relief from abuse, motions to prohibit them from interference with his right to legal counsel.  They have attempted to intimidate me into signing releases of information without legal counsel.  They have  harrassed my son relentlessly, interference of his access to legal counsel.    They have isolated him from his whole family and have treated us like criminals forcing us to have our visits in parking lots supervised by unidentified staffers.  They have acted in an egregious manner in an attempt to break our spirits.

After repeatedly informing our Governor Peter Shumlin, Douglas Racin Secretary of Human Services, Dr Susan Wehry Commissioner of The Department of Aging and Independent Living of the abuses to no avail, I will be commencing a Hunger Strike one month from the fourth of July, 2011.  If this supposed Human Services Agency wants to break people’s spirits and it will be in a public forum for all the world to see, not in some rinky dink little town where nobody pays attention.

Please sign our petition http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/vermont—investigate-the-abuse-of-quotdevelopmentally-disabled-offendersquot/  Maybe, just maybe someone will do the right thing.

And Let’s not forget the DRVT report where the 24 year old man died a slow,  gruesome death while in Sterling Area Services.  The care givers where negligent, forged documents, ignored his desperate pleadings for help, failed to provide medical attention and watched this young man deteriorate for six months until he was found face down in his bed, dead.  Yet, was anyone held accountable for that? http://www.scribd.com/doc/52929838/Disability-Rights-Investigation

Tracy Gilman, Mother of William Bennett

Vermont Human Services Agency Poses Risk to Public Safety

Vermont Human Services is ignoring the standards of their own Best Practices Manual http://www.ddas.vermont.gov/ddas-publications/publications-os/publications-os-documents/os-pub-supervision-treatment-sex-offenders-with-ds committing Medicaid fraud and helping agencies such as Northeast Kingdom Human Services and Sterling Area Agency to cover up reports of abuse, posing a seriouse  “Risk to Public Safety”.  “Risk to Public Safety”  is the same term used to civilly commit and incarcerate some of the very people this service is supposed protect.

Vermont Human Services charges the state and federal government millions of dollars every year to pay for services not provided.  These State contracted Human Services Agencies are supposed to protect the public by “treating” and rehabilitating people; who could not be convicted of crimes, people who have served their sentences for crimes and in many cases people who haven’t even been charged with a crime.

Civil Commitment  is being used as a continuum of incarceration.  All over the country people are being detained indefinitely without charges or convictions.  Treatment is mandated and provided through state human services agencies and corrections.  The very people and agencies responsible for assessing and treating are the people profiting  from “treatment”.  This conflict of interest does not encourage treatment that results in successful rehabilitation.

In Vermont 194 individuals are in the custody of the Department of Aging and Independent Living (DAIL) under Act 248, Vermont’s civil commitment law for people with mental retardation (18 V.S.A Section 8839 et seq).  In a 2010 Report to Representatives Lippert and Marcotte on Individuals with Developmental Disabilities Who Pose a Public Safety Risk, http://www.ddas.vermont.gov/ddas-publications/…/ds-offenders-report-2009 DAIL  makes the following recommendations (to themselves) which remain unfulfilled;

1. Competency evaluations for individuals suspected of having a DD should include a current evaluation by a psychologist skilled in assessing individuals with DD.
2.  Some ACT 248 commitments should be for a defined period rather than indefinitely.
3. Additional review processes should be adopted  for individuals who are under guardianship and in a restrictive program.
4. The State should adopt the best available risk and criminogenic needs assessment tools, to ensure that these individuals do not remain in treatment or in restrictive settings longer than necessary.

Although the Act 248 Statutes give the individual the right to seek judicial review of an order of commitment, in many of the ACT 248 cases, annual reviews take place with no participation from private guardians or the DD clients themselves.

In the case of William Bennett notice of annual reviews were not given to him or the guardian.  This goes against Section 4.10 – (c) – (pg. 36) of Regulations Implementing The Developmental Disabilities Act of 1996 March 2011.  Clients with DD cannot be expected to fully understand and initiate these proceedings without support from their guardian and real advocacy from their attorney.

In the most recent annual review Bennett was phoned by a Vermont Legal Aid Attorney and asked if he needed a consultation.  For a person with a developmental disability the word “consultation”  may have no meaning.

Recommendations for continued services/incarceration were made by the service providers and DAIL, agreed to by the Legal Aid Attorney, submitted to the courts and approved by a  judge.  This automated system to extend “care” to ensure the continued funding is a breach of human rights.

Without  proper procedures for legal representation of DD individuals outlined in the legislation their human rights will continue to be violated for a profit to these privately owned publicly funded institutions at a cost to the state of $100,000 a year and up, per client.  The report to Lippert and Marcotte goes on to say that no court has ever concluded in the 23 years since the passing of Act 248 that a person committed should be released.  This should raise questions about the treatment being provided.

From a review of  the reel to reel tapes of the hearings it is clear that during the  formation of Act 248, the testifying professionals were concerned that DD people would be “swept up” due to public discomfort and families of DD individuals not wanting to deal with them   They expressed a clear concern that these individuals civil rights would be violated, that people would be detained longer than necessary and that treatment would not be given on an individualized basis.

Expert testimony given by mental health professional, felt that long-term commitment was not necessary for many of the Developmentally Delayed Individuals.  In testimony given by Charles Mosley to the House Judiciary, Mosley states that there is a lot of potential to train individuals with Mental Retardation and 24 hour supervision could often decrease after the first few months.  He goes on to say that Lots of these people are mildly retarded and have great potential for employment teaching.

During Testimony Walt Morris, Defender General disagrees with the characterization of the individuals as “getting off the hook”.  He also points out that public discomfort with street people and people who are different tends to sweep them up into the system.

Testimony by Bill Reedy of the Vermont Coalition of the Handicapped urges access to the same civil rights proceedings as any other citizen.  He also voices concern that commitment be provided in the “least restrictive manner” and adhere to constitutional standards.

Roger Strauss, Director of Washington County Mental Health refers to the Judicial Review as a method to see if  “appropriate therapy” is being received.  Saying that “constitutional law requires the commissioner to provide appropriate therapy”.  In discussions of the annual review it is repeatedly stated that the Commissioner is responsible to provide “individualized” treatment in the “least restrictive manner” possible.

It also requires that the burden of proof be more substantiated as the individual proceeds through the care-program. Thus putting more pressure on the Department of Human services to prove the individual still poses a danger to public safety.  This is obviously a measure that has failed.

An expert witness in the taped hearings, believed to be Bill Reedy of the Vermont Coalition of the Handicapped puts it very clear, we are talking about people with inappropriate behavior, not armed and dangerous criminals.  He continues saying “very few people need to be shackled, mentally retarded people actually are less violent than you and me“.

Major parts of the original Act 248 statutes in Vermont have been repealed leaving civilly committed individuals with no civil rights and undermining the oversight and accountability originally intended by the legislatures.  Section 8821-8834 regarding Provisions of Service and Judicial Review has been repealed, Section 8842 stated that Hearings be  in accordance with 8827 which has been repealed, Section 8845 states that procedures shall be in accordance with 8834 which has been repealed.  Just take a look at the most recent draft, it looks as though they will cross-out (repeal) the entire Act.

Total authority is given to DAIL due to the Court’s and the Legislature’s lack of concern for civil rights for all and fear of public opinion, “out of sight, out of mind”.   Developmentally Disabled people remain in restrictive and abusive environments for decades without hope.

DAIL has demonstrated that they will go to great lengths to silence reports of abusive practices.  In a recent petition for Relief From Abuse in which one DD client’s life was threatened by another client in a State Licensed Group Home, Attorney’s from the Agency (NKHS) running the  home and an Attorney for the Commissioner of DAIL showed up to fight the order.  The Defendant nor his guardian or attorney for the defendant was even present.  NKHS and DAIL made  no denial that the threat was  made, yet the judge dismissed the order after the attorney from DAIL threatened to call in the Attorney General if the judge pursued the matter further.  DAIL and NKHS immediately moved the aggressor client back into the group home with no concern what so ever to the risk posed psychologically and physically to the Aggressed client.

In January of 2011 William Bennett”s guardian and mother hired an attorney to contest the Act 248 placement. William’s Guardian is concerned that his placement in this program will have permanent detrimental effects on him.  Since his placement in this “Safe Choices”  program he has been assaulted by a home care provider, kept incommunicado, been double staffed by workers who refuse to give their names, been denied his rescue inhaler, been sexually harassed by a staff member, been kept isolated from his family and guardian, been denied a low fat diet recommended by his physician, been denied opportunities to exercise, forced to witness another client having daily uncontrolled grand maul seizures, has been denied private conversations with his attorney and his guardian, has been threatened and intimidated to sign releases of information for medical and psychological appointments. William Bennett has and still is being harassed and Bullied by the State of Vermont.

DAIL and it’s Agents have been actively thwarting efforts by William and his guardian to improve his mental and physical health through years of suppressing and isolating William.  The damage done due to the negligence and incompetence of these supposed providers is inexcusable.

DAIL has the ultimate responsibility for the well-being of people in custody, they have a vested interest in covering up abuse by providers they contract with.  The Human Services Board would normally review decisions made the Commissioner of DAIL  but has recently stated that they don’t have authority over the commissioner in Act 248 cases.  The  Human Services Board defers to the courts, which under threat of the Attorney General submit to the DAIL.

Adult Protective services is supposed to defer to the Secretary of Human Services when the Commissioner of DAIL is implicated in reports of abuse but instead make findings that the abuse never occurred.  The Secretary of Human Services Douglas Racine, after repeated pleas from the guardian of William Bennett defers to the Commissioner.  Vermont’s Governor Shumlin after repeated pleas from the guardian of  William Bennett defers to the Secretary of Human Services.

Adult Protective Services, commissioned with investigating abuse has recently been threatened by Vermont Legal Aid and Disability Rights Vermont for not investigating reports of abuse.  APS settled out of court and is supposed to implement changes and clear up a back log of abuse reports.  William Bennett and his guardian have made several recent reports of abuse to APS  and has not seen any action taken.  No doubt they will at some point write a letter saying “no abuse occurred”.

In case after case of abuse reported to The Department of Human Service they have hammered clients and advocates into submission with their incredible powers and access to tax payer funded attorneys.  It is time we as a Civil Society end this atrocious abuse of this vulnerable group of fellow human beings.

Dear Douglas Racine, Another Former Employee Comes Forward

Submitted on 2011/05/16 at 1:27 pm

Tracy, I applaud your uphill battle against the “Evil Empire”, being NKHS and Safe Choices!!! Not too many people dare to go up against this corrupt, demeaning, and self-serving so-called “non-profit” organization! There is so much corruption, neopatism and favoritism that goes on there, in particular the DS Department in St J. I know how you are feeling, Tracy – I too have attempted to expose this using the proper channels, and it was so convienently swept under the rug. I remember BIll’s situation so vividly – when you first attempted to have him removed from Safe Choices – I think it was in ’04 – he came onto my caseload, and was placed at Kate’s. That was the start of the nightmare for Bill! He was totally set up, left alone on numerous occasions, and left unsupervised at the Comfort Inn (more like dropped off by Kate!!) also left unsupervised at her home. (as I recall, the alleged “victim” was there without any knowledge of NKHS). I also remember when you were practically forced to put Bill back into the Safe Choices – you did not want that, but a certain so-called Assistant Director of DS practically threatened you. I have nothing but respect and admiration for what you are trying to accomplish – your dedication, devotion, and love for Bill goes far beyond what I have ever experienced in dealing with many families of Special Needs children. Safe Choices shold no longer exist, and those running it should be admonished, and in some incidences, lose their license to practice. Tracy, I will support your effort in any way I possibly can. Please e-mail me if there is anything you need that will assist you in shutting these demons down!

A PEACEFUL DEMONSTRATION will be held in Newport VT May 25 at 5:00 -8 P.M.  We will be in the State owned parking lot on Field Ave. Turn between the Goodrich Memorial Library and the Police Station on Main St..  DR. SUSAN WEHRY, THE COMMISSIONER of The Department of Aging and Independent Living ( has the ability to end this abuse) will be speaking to home care providers.  According to their Brochure it will be “an evening of pampering“, with Reiki, Massage and Dinner.  That would all be fine if disabled men weren’t languishing away year after year hidden in the woods eating bologna sandwiches and whatever else the food bank donates.  It would be okay If disabled men weren’t cut off from their families and all forms of social contact, left with no hope of the close connections Dr. Wehry will be enjoying.  It would be okay if disabled men weren’t forced to go to a group once a week where they are called liars, yelled at and demeaned by a  so called “Therapist”.  And it would all be okay if Vermont Tax payers weren’t paying over $20,000,000 a year to fund such programs.  It’s time to take back our Human Services.

A petition will be available to sign, volunteers are needed to gather more signatures and all are welcome.  Even if you can only stop and sign a petition, you’ve done your part.  Signs will be available.  We’ll be there until 8 p..m.  We Mean Business!

Commissioner of DAIL Retaliates Against Client’s Free Speech

Mrs Susan Wehry, COMMISSIONER of Department of Aging and Independent Living takes a drastic measure to stop William Bennett and Tracy Gilman from reporting the abuses of the “Safe Choices” Program run by Northeast Kingdom Human Services.

SHE RETALIATES BY DENYING MOTHER AND SON VISITS.

In an email Wehry says:

” It has come to my attention that in a blog authored by you”,  you wrote, “Even though my son Bill isn’t a sex offender, he’s been court ordered to take part in the safe choices sex offender program”

She says, “in light of your statement regarding your son not being a sex offender”  “I am terminating unsupervised visits between you and William”

She clearly states it’s retaliation against my son for a statement I made.   

AMENDMENTS

TO THE CONSTITUTION

OF THE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Amendment I.*

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS, OR THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE, AND TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES.

Mrs Wehry clearly states that this actions is a result of my statement, not any action that I took.  Whether I agreed with the court order or not, I have always followed it.  NOWHERE IN THE COURT ORDER DOES IT SAY THAT I  HAVE TO CALL MY SON A SEX OFFENDER. 

 How do people in this day and age, especially  someone who is entrusted with the care of our disabled population think that they have the authority to overrule our constitution?

In February my son was assaulted by a home care provider and DAIL immediately denied me access to my son.  They denied him  use of the phone, They took him to an undisclosed location and would not tell me, his legal guardian where he was or who he was with and they kept him under the supervision of the Home Care Provider who assaulted him.  Then they petitioned the court to remove me as his legal guardian and attempted to place him under their guardianship.

My son has never been tried or convicted of a crime, he was “Accused” while he was under their “supervision”.  They, with their high professional standards brought him to the Comfort Inn & Suites and left him there with a 19 year old girl.   I have been asked so many times if this was a set up.  YOU JUDGE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKUPdcNNyYk

DON’T EVER ASK THE STATE FOR “HELP”

Please take a moment and write your thoughts, Bill needs us more than ever. Peace and Love Good People

                                                                                        Sign The Petition  http://www.change.org/nonprofits/view/864311