Man faces choice-divorce or lose his child-he's not unfit nor is she
Fern5827
Man Faces Choice of Wife or Son
To keep custody, he must divorce Sheryl Hardy, who did time for her son's
death.
By JAMIE RILEY
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
ST. LOUIS -- Randy Hardy must choose between his wife and his 21/2-year-old
son.
Hardy, 49, of Jerseyville, Ill., is the husband of Sheryl Hardy, who 13 years
ago in Lakeland pleaded no contest in the particularly gruesome killing of
another son, Bradley, 2.
Because of that case, the state of Illinois has told Hardy that he must divorce
his wife -- and also not live with her -- if he wants to raise his son. A
hearing in the case is set for February in Circuit Court in Jerseyville.
The case, now more than 2 years old, has drawn national attention, especially
in Florida, where Bradley's 1989 killing led to changes in Florida law.
And the case is on the minds of many in quiet Jerseyville, a town of 8,000
about 40 miles north of St. Louis. Randy and Sheryl Hardy both grew up there.
At a downtown shop, a saleswoman closed the front door and acknowledged that
everyone talked about the case.
"But," she said, "they're not going to talk to a reporter about it."
One who did was longtime Jerseyville resident Shirley Reynolds. She said:
"Anyone who hurts a child or an old person is mean, not sick, but mean. She's
mean."
Neither Randy nor Sheryl Hardy would discuss their legal case or their dilemma.
But Randy Hardy's mother, Doris Hardy, said in an interview last week that her
son does not want to divorce Sheryl Hardy, but does want to raise his son.
"He's in love with that Sheryl," Doris Hardy said.
The battle between the Hardys and the Illinois Department of Children & Family
Services began the day the Hardys' baby was born in February 2001.
Working on a tip, the family services agency took the baby from the Hardys
because of Sheryl Hardy's Florida conviction and put the child in foster care.
The Hardys sued to regain custody and initially won, largely because of expert
witnesses for the agency who testified in court that Sheryl Hardy, 35, had been
rehabilitated and would be a fit parent.
Circuit Judge Thomas Russell, considered by many area lawyers to be a staunch
protector of children, gave the Hardys custody of the baby.
The family services agency immediately appealed and won. The appellate court
said Russell had misinterpreted the state statute and sent the case back to
him. In the second round, Russell permanently terminated Sheryl Hardy's
parental rights.
The Hardys have appealed that ruling to the state Supreme Court. A hearing is
pending.
Doris Hardy has been allowed visits with her grandson during the entire time
he's been in foster care, but she does not know what will happen if Randy Hardy
loses custody of the child.
"He's my only grandson," Doris Hardy said.
"He looks just like his daddy," she said, holding up a studio portrait of the
child, with blond hair and clear blue eyes.
Doris Hardy said her son "always wanted to be a daddy" and now he must make do
with two three-hour visits each week.
"He takes him to the park, and they play," she said. "Randy said the boy's a
runner. Said you can't hardly keep up with him."
Doris Hardy said her son knew about the Florida incident soon after he met
Sheryl, but he didn't tell Doris Hardy until after they were married.
THE NICEST MAN
Although Randy and Sheryl Hardy both grew up in Jerseyville, their lives were
very different.
Randy led a simple, straightforward life as the only child of Doris and Thomas
Hardy. Thomas Hardy died about 30 years ago, and Doris Hardy's parents helped
her raise Randy.
Sheryl Hardy's parents divorced when she was 4, and her mother died when Sheryl
was a teenager. That's when Sheryl left for Florida, homeless and pregnant.
While Randy Hardy continued to work at Sinclair Foods as a stock clerk, the
same job he'd had since high school, Sheryl was in Florida, where she met and
married Thomas Coe.
The newlyweds abandoned Sheryl Hardy's son, Bradley, in now-defunct Lakeland
Mall. The infant was placed in foster care; he was returned to the Coes after
they objected to adoption proceedings begun by the foster parents.
After only 66 days with the Coes, Bradley was dead. He died of injuries
suffered when Thomas Coe repeatedly rammed Bradley's head into a porcelain
toilet bowl for having soiled his pants.
Sheryl Hardy pleaded no contest to second-degree murder and served nine years
of a 30-year sentence. She testified against her husband, who was found guilty
of first-degree murder and is in prison for life with no possibility of parole.
The brutality of Bradley's killing led to new laws in Florida setting up a
child-protection plan named for Bradley and an overhaul of the state's
child-welfare laws.
Sheryl had three other children, including one born while she was in prison.
All were placed for adoption in Florida.
After leaving prison in 1999, Sheryl moved back to Jerseyville, and started
working as a clerk at Sinclair Foods, where she met Randy.
The two started dating, and, when she found out she was pregnant, they married.
After the birth of her son with Randy Hardy, Sheryl Hardy had a tubal ligation.
Randy and Sheryl Hardy now live together in a modest, one-story white house on
a quiet street about a mile from the Jersey County courthouse and a few blocks
from Jersey Community High School. They live just three blocks from Randy's
mother.
Randy Hardy recently quit his job at the grocery.
"He was a terrific employee," said Stanley Sinclair, the store's owner.
Sinclair said he felt sorry for Randy Hardy's situation and had considered him
a friend.
His opinion is shared by many in Jerseyville. Shirley Reynolds, who has known
Randy and Sheryl Hardy since they were children, said Randy Hardy is "the
nicest man you'd ever meet."
Reynolds said Randy Hardy is mentally slower than most.
"He's not retarded. He's special," she said.
That is essential, she said, to understanding his unwillingness to divorce
Sheryl.
"He lacks common sense," Reynolds said. "Common sense would tell him to get rid
of that woman so he could raise his son."
REHABILITATION DEFENSE
Sheryl Hardy's defense in the custody case was her rehabilitation.
A family services agency homemaker -- a person who assesses the stability of
homes for children in foster care -- testified that the risk of harm to her son
would be significantly less than in an average home.
The homemaker testified that she would rate Sheryl Hardy's parenting ability a
10 on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 as excellent.
Three mental health professionals, including two hired by the state,
recommended that the agency return the baby to the Hardys.
But agency lawyers argued in the appeal that the law says that a person
convicted of murdering a child cannot ever have custody of another child.
After Sheryl Hardy lost custody of the baby, the agency refused to return the
baby to Randy Hardy as long as Sheryl Hardy was present. Agency lawyers have
declined to discuss the case.
A Chicago lawyer who specializes in parents' rights in custody cases said the
state's edict to Randy Hardy -- get divorced or lose his son -- is
unconstitutional.
"I think he has an extremely compelling constitutional case," said Bob Lehrer,
a partner in the firm of Lehrer and Redleaf. "Since his parental rights are not
being terminated, he as a parent can say who he wants visiting the kids."
Lehrer recently filed a class-action suit in federal court in Chicago
contending that a spouse's rights are violated when one spouse is removed from
a home while under investigation for child abuse or child sexual abuse.
"The child has a constitutional right to be nurtured and cared for by his
parents without state interference, and parents have a constitutional right to
care for their children," Lehrer said.
"The right to interfamily relations has been held to be part of the substantive
process rights covered in the Bill of Rights," he said.
But, Lehrer said, because Illinois courts give so much leeway to the Department
of Children & Family Services and because parents in such cases are often
poorly represented, it's nearly impossible for parents to win.
Lehrer said there is probably not another case like the Hardys' in Illinois, or
even the country, because most cases involve sexual abuse, and it's almost
always the fathers who are ordered to leave.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
An absolute tragedy. Grandmom has no rights to child? Or can you murder the
Mom and then get custody of kids. As in the FAMOUS CASE. Is there no family
on either side who can step in?
DESCRIPTORS; DFS, DCFS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, FAMILY LAW, KINSHIP CARE, LIBERTY
INTEREST, SOCIAL WORK, FOSTER CARE
madeupagin
"Fern5827" <fern...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031001165919...@mb-m23.aol.com...
As a person who closely followed young Bradley's case, this is an absolute
mockery. This woman did NOT kill her son, her ex-husband did. I cannot
imagine the pain and horror this poor woman has gone through, first with the
death of her son, and now with the loss of another.
I feel for her, truly!
Tere
Greg Hanson
Why did it go against her?
Was it based on the old spiral fractures are child abuse myth?
Or some other contrivance?
I read some case awhile back where they already decided
that it was unconstitutional to presume the parent
would never reform even ten years later. Of course I
don't remember citation info, just the concept expressed
by a judge somewhere.
madeupagin
"Greg Hanson" <Gre...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:35120b16.0310...@posting.google.com...
> What was the "particularly gruesome" part of the murder?
The particularly grusome part is the fact that Bradley's STEP-FATHER (not
the mother) killed him by dunking his head in the toilet repeatedly --
fracturing his skull and killing him.
> Why did it go against her?
The Florida courts punish with great regularity, abused spouses. This woman
was an abused spouse, she didn't realize how badly her son was being
treated, and was unable to save her son. This is typical in Florida. Blame
the victim.
> Was it based on the old spiral fractures are child abuse myth?
> Or some other contrivance?
>
See the above.
> I read some case awhile back where they already decided
> that it was unconstitutional to presume the parent
> would never reform even ten years later. Of course I
> don't remember citation info, just the concept expressed
> by a judge somewhere.
The sad part is in Florida, SUPPOSEDLY, just the fact you've had a child
taken from you is NOT supposed to be the only reason for removal of a
subsequent child.
F. L. v. Department of Children and Families, 849 So.2d 1114, 1120 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2003).
There are a ton of citations in that case. I'm using it in my very own case
as I type. LOL
Tere
Fern5827
And her citations are EXCELLENT.
And note that all 3 hired guns for the state of Illinois state that the Mom is
excellent.
IOW, she passed her psych eval.
DCFS has the time and the money and the POWER TO--BUT this is changing. Partly
thru this NG.
IOW, if you are *bad* CPS evals hold true--but if you are *good* DFS disregards
such evals.
http://www.CPSWatch.com Good site to read about family law.
http://www.CPSWatch.com/il/ Network there should you live in Illinois. Join
the chat groups, etc.
Tere and Greg commented:
>Subject: Re: Man faces choice-divorce or lose his child-he's not unfit nor is
>she
>From: "madeupagin" fals...@hotmailNOSPAM.com
>Date: 10/6/2003 8:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20031006081949.341$8...@news.newsreader.com>
Dan Sullivan
You expect everyone to read thru the threads you post to.
Do it yourself.
A two year old was murdered... isn't that gruesome enough for ya?
> Why did it go against her?
Why do ya think?
> Was it based on the old spiral fractures are child abuse myth?
Spiral fractures aren't a child abuse myth.
The child abuse industry believes that almost all spiral fractures are
caused non-accidentally.
That obviously isn't true.
But it isn't true that all spiral fractures are accidental, either.
> Or some other contrivance?
Read it yerself, Greg.
> I read some case awhile back where they already decided
> that it was unconstitutional to presume the parent
> would never reform even ten years later. Of course I
> don't remember citation info, just the concept expressed
> by a judge somewhere.
Dan
Greg Hanson
from ther family based on the myth. A bunch of the parents
were convicted and imprisoned, some committed suicide.
The Idea that spiral factures equate to child abuse is a myth.
A very powerful myth.
Used by ""experts"" whose JOB it is to know the facts.
Caseworkers told LIES OF CONVENIENCE to remove and convict.
The report you rediscovered is the Child Protection
equivalent of DNA for death row. But it's TEN YEARS OLD!
Has anybody ever told the 28 children identified in the
report, or the inmates or convicts?
Seems like an extremely powerful and damaging MYTH.
And that's just one small sample! Multiply it by THOUSANDS!
How many THOUSANDS have been imprisoned in this country
based on the "spiral factures==child abuse" myth?
How many THOUSANDS of families have been destroyed by the myth?
Because some nitwits prosecuted on bogus scientific conclusions?
Where you hedged the report results, you used logic that
parallels this:
A nut case mows down 1000 people. Chances are that some
of them were murderers or future murderers.
Whether it is 1000:1, 100:1, 28:1, 5:1 or 2:1 it is all insane.
""Taking out the many to get to the one"" is wrong.
That report you rediscovered reveals CPS uses a shotgun solution.
Just what you'd expect from unlicensed untrained caseworkers
with a high level of immunity when they LIE or misrepresent in court.
Greg Hanson
that caseworkers (and even you and I) believed, and that was
the idea that spiral fractures INDICATED child abuse.
That idea is a myth.
Spiral fractures do not equate to child abuse as cause.
MOST spiral fractures have nothing to do with ANYTHING
that anybody DID to the child whatsoever, the report showed.
You found this 10 years late, you and I and the caseworkers
and the general public all fell for the myth.
But for you and me and the public, it's not OUR JOB
to check such things. For caseworkers, the so-called
""experts"" going into courts all over this and other
countries, it is unconcionable that they chose to
ignore that important research that you rediscovered.
The idea that spiral fractures equate to child abuse is and
always has been a myth. Those 28 kids in that report
were WRONGLY and forever removed BASED on that MYTH.
A number of those parents went to PRISON.
That seems to be a pretty dangerous MYTH.
But that's what you get when untrained unlicensed
caseworkers engage in amateur medicine or psychology.
Especially when their malpractice is cloaked in
a high level of legal IMMUNITY. If you think about it,
in every one of those 28 cases, caseworkers and their
stooge doctors used LIES OF CONVENIENCE, and were
strident in their WRONG belief. That's 28 cases
of legitimized KIDNAPPING FOR LIFE, using medical LIES.
Who has told those inmates and those 28 kids?