NH Christian home schoolers busted for spanking, lose 8 kids to accusers
Ric Werme
for another good cross post group. This family needs your prayers.
My wife, Paula, doesn't take on abuse/neglect cases from parents who
she feels are abusers.]
[All: Paula found an interesting expert witness in an Ohio police
department who has found that nearly all the children he's dealt with
who've assaulted or killed their parents say they were _not_ spanked
while growing up. I'll have more to say about it once she gets his
book from Amazon.com. I'll post a review here and on
alt.parenting.spanking.]
Apparently the Somogies were nearly charged with truancy too because
they hadn't filed information about a correspondence school with the
home school supervisor (I think the local public school in this case).
The confusion was "were the children in school be virtue of enrollment
with a corresponse school or were they home schooled and subject to
the [unconstitutional] home school reporting requirements? DCYF
decided against the truancy charge once they realized the kids were
testing at the 95-98th percentile....
Oh - DCYF is NH's Child Protective Service, the Division of Children,
Youth, and Families, a government agency devoted to what's best for
the children, no matter how much damage it causes to all involved.
Well, other than DCYF's contractees, of course. :-(
From: Paula Werme pwerme at mediaone.net
Subject: [Fwd: NHHR-POLITICS: Somogie Family]
My week:
Karen Trudeau wrote:
>
> To whom it may concern :
>
> By now many of you have heard about the case of the Somogie family
> of Pelham NH. The Division of Children, Youth and Families (DCYF)
> has removed all 8 of their children from their home, including a 4
> 1/2 month old nursing baby, because of alleged child abuse. These
> parents spank their children, as is taught in the Bible, as one form
> of discipline, or training, of their children. Spanking a child is
> not illegal in the State of NH. Because of their biblical
> convictions, they have been accused by the grandparents of beating
> their children. Unbelievably, the DCYF has placed these children
> into the custody of the accusers (these same grandparents). The
> Somogies have been home-schooling their children for many years. But
> before a preliminary hearing even took place, their children were
> placed into the public school system by the grandparents. The DCYF
> knew that they were enrolled in a correspondence school, but wanted
> to find the Somogies truant. Leslie, the mother, is allowed to
> nurse the baby every few hours, but must leave her father's property
> between feedings where she waits in her car until the next time she
> can nurse her baby. She also must encourage the young children not
> to cry when they see her because the grandparents won't let them see
> her if they seem "upset". Allen, the father, has not been allowed to
> see his children since they were taken. The grandparents have even
> cut the girls' beautiful long hair.
>
> These parents have not been charged with a crime, but are being
> treated like criminals. This family needs your prayers and
> support. The children need your prayers. We must all pray that the
> negative influence of these grandparents will be stopped. We must
> pray that the DCYF is prevented from destroying this family. Just
> like Daniel, the Somogies refuse to stop worshipping and obeying
> their God. And just like Daniel, we must pray and believe that our
> Lord will deliver them from the lions den. We are fighting the same
> enemy, and we serve the same Lord. The weapons of our warfare are
> not carnal, but they are mighty to the pulling down of strongholds.
>
> Please pray specifically for the Somogie family. They can use all
> the support they can get. If you would like to write to encourage
> them, Allen has given permission to publish his mailing
> address. Please write to:
>
> Allen and Leslie Somogie
> 29 Spring Street
> Pelham NH 03076
>
> A hearing has been scheduled for October 19, 2000 at 1:00PM. It
> will be at the Salem District Court on Geremonty Drive in Salem, NH.
> Allen has asked for all who would like to show support for their
> case to attend if at all possible. Please pray that they find favor
> in the eyes of the court.
>
> A bank account has been created to help Allen and Leslie
> financially. The purpose of this fund is to provide for them monies
> that they may use where they have need, whether for legal expenses,
> money for food, bills, gas money, taxes etc. This family should not
> lose their home and will not go into debt because of the DCYF. If
> you want to give them a gift you may make checks payable to their
> lawyer, Paula Werme, who is administering the account. Please send
> checks or money orders to:
>
> Paula Werme
> 83 North Main Street
> Penacook NH 03303-1235
>
> Please be sure to specify that the money is for the Somogie
> account. You may also want look at Paula Werme's Web site
> http://people.ne.mediaone.net/werme/law/. It has so much information
> about the constitution, our rights, and the problems with the DCYF
> and social "services". The intent of this letter is to warn you, to
> point you in the right direction, to help the Somogie family
> specifically, but in the end, YOU MUST EDUCATE YOURSELF. DO NOT
> DELAY.
>
> In Christ,
> Karen Trudeau
> October 12, 2000
>
> Please feel free to send this to anyone you think may need to read it, or
> who might like to help. The Somogies do not wish for the media to be
> contacted; however, so please do NOT send it to them.
>
> ______________________________________________
> NHHR-POLITICS mailing list
> Send postings to: NHHR-P...@dimentech.com
> Membership config: http://www.dimentech.com/mailman/listinfo/nhhr-politics
--
Paula Werme
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/werme/law/index.html
"Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Ben Franklin
--
Ric Werme | we...@nospam.mediaone.net
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/werme | ^^^^^^^ delete
Vote www.harrybrowne.com for President!
mcla...@my-deja.com
Obviously, it happens, but it can be local, not just federal ...
In article <10oG5.44169$pu4.4...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
jim patterson
McLane, i checked out that URL you posted and I think the 2 most
telling comments i noticed were:
``````````
Parents having to prove themselves innocent, rather than the ministry
having to prove they are guilty.
"Social workers are God," says Simpson. "They have no rules, no law
and that's what makes them so dangerous."
`````````
Basically, this is what i have heard. That the parents are pretty
much powerless once the Child Services (By whatever name) are called
in. The sad thing is that of course in many cases intervention is
called for, but in others innocent people are uselessly terrorized.
Everything i've ever read says that children are the most suggestible
and gullible of all human entities. I know that's quite a 'duh' to
most, but the doors it opens for the abuse of the child welfare
system are very broad. A four year old might just sell his parents
out for a new toy and a lollipop. Or one a little older if he was mad
at mommy. Now get a young inexperienced social worker with close to
unlimited power over others lives and if she gets ticked she can
really cause them problems. Suppose something like she(strange, i've
only heard of female caseworkers) was very very anti-smoking and saw
that Dad had a pipe in his den.
CDH
Hash: SHA1
Unfortunately, this buffoonery has also spread to Florida, at least
partially. Under recently-passed state law, hearsay testimony can be
allowed in cases involving children. Apparently no one thought to tell
these idiot legislators that if one exception to the rule of law can be
permitted "for de widdle chiwdwen," then others will inevitably follow.
Heck, these posts have already demonstrated the presumption of innocence
has been abandoned, so let's also do away with the right to speedy &
public trial; to counsel; to know the charges; to croxx-examine; to
subpoena friendly witnesses; and the prohibitions against double jeopardy
and compulsory self-incrimination. >:-| Hell's bells, Lincoln abolished
habeas corpus "to save the union"; can de widdle chiwdwen be any less
important??
Dave in Occupied Florida
---------------
"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy
from oppression, for if he violates this duty, he establishes a
precedent that will reach to himself."
-- Thomas Paine
- --
ROT13 the "reply to" for actual e-mail address.
TANSTAAFL
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
Comment: De-fang Carnivore! Get PGP today!
iQA/AwUBOe3SZpbo4dyDcn19EQKjaACg0IhOlF03Du7Rig2zYALaIscV6j0Anjc4
pwzzvcWMZgmXqr/LCsj3k7Lw
=tXlH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
ramalane
>
> "CDH" <p...@yfot.arg> writes:
>
> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >Hash: SHA1
>
> >Unfortunately, this buffoonery has also spread to Florida, at least
> >partially. Under recently-passed state law, hearsay testimony can be
> >allowed in cases involving children.
>
> Civil court has a lower standard of proof, hearsay is permissible,
> so is double jeopardy. See
> http://people.ne.mediaone.net/werme/law/due_process.html for more.
>
> >ROT13 the "reply to" for actual e-mail address.
>
> --
> Ric Werme | we...@nospam.mediaone.net
> http://people.ne.mediaone.net/werme | ^^^^^^^ delete
> Vote www.harrybrowne.com for President!
The term double jeopardy is non-applicable in civil litigation, moron.
/ramalane
--
Copyright© 2000 Ramalane.com All rights reserved.
The REAL Ramalane, The Internet Quetzalcoatl©
[ramalane.com is currently under reconstruction,
but as soon as the Federal troops withdraw....]
Ric Werme
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>Unfortunately, this buffoonery has also spread to Florida, at least
>partially. Under recently-passed state law, hearsay testimony can be
>allowed in cases involving children.
In most states, abuse/neglect is tried in civil, not criminal court.
Civil court has a lower standard of proof, hearsay is permissible,
so is double jeopardy. See
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/werme/law/due_process.html for more.
>ROT13 the "reply to" for actual e-mail address.
Hey! I use that trick on postings from work. :-)
Ric Werme
>Ric Werme wrote:
>> In most states, abuse/neglect is tried in civil, not criminal court.
>> Civil court has a lower standard of proof, hearsay is permissible,
>> so is double jeopardy. See
>> http://people.ne.mediaone.net/werme/law/due_process.html for more.
>The term double jeopardy is non-applicable in civil litigation, moron.
I know that. What do you call peple who don't know that? For a
civil trial involving divorce or a contract dispute between two private
parties the concept of double jeopardy makes no sense. For a child
abuse/neglect trial between the State and a citizen it does.
Personally, I think it is moronic that child abuse is not a crime. As
for double jeopardy, Rhonda Sharpe testified at a public hearing on
DCYF field practices about her troubles with CA-CPS wrt her children
and broken bones due to Osteogenesis Imperfecta. After several months
and thousands of dollars of legal expenses they wone these case.
Later they moved to NH and described the whole affair to their peditrician.
On the next broken bone, the peditrician decided manadtory reporting
required him to report to DCYF due to the possibility of abuse. So,
several thousand dollars and months later they won again. DCYF appealed,
despite the judge's strong ruling. Several thousand dollars later, DCYF's
expert witness didn't show up for trial and DCYF asked for a continuance.
The judge dismissed all charges and chewed out DCYF.
Had these alleged assaults been tried in criminal court, DCYF wouldn't
have been able to appeal and a case that never should have been brought
in the first place couldn't have been appealed.
CDH
"Ric Werme" <we...@nospam.mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:StrH5.45821$pu4.5...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
> In most states, abuse/neglect is tried in civil, not criminal court.
> Civil court has a lower standard of proof, hearsay is permissible,
> so is double jeopardy. See
> http://people.ne.mediaone.net/werme/law/due_process.html for more.
Quite true. However, the trial in question was a criminal child abuse
case. It stuck in my mind because the newspaper article specifically
mentioned a new law that made hearsay admissible in certain circumstances
when children were involved. Had it been a civil case, such mention would
have been unnecessary. And since, as you pointed out, hearsay is already
allowed in civil cases, enacting a new law to that effect would be the height
of redundancy.
BTW, I agree with you on Browne. He's got my vote on 11/7, assuming
Emperor Clinton allows the election to proceed as scheduled.
Dave in Occupied Florida
----------------
"The doctrine that 'human rights' are superior to 'property rights'
simply means that some human beings have the right to make property
out of others; since the competent have nothing to gain from the
incompetent, it means the right of the incompetent to own their betters
and to use them as productive cattle. Whoever regards this as human
and right, has no right to the title of 'human.' "
-- John Galt
----------------
"One of these centuries, the brutes, private or public, who believe
that they can rule their betters by force, will learn the lesson
of what happens when brute force encounters mind and force."
-- Ragnar Danneskjöld
----------------
"The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power
of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference
on his own hide."
-- Francisco d'Anconia
- --
ROT13 the "reply to" for actual e-mail address.
TANSTAAFL
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
Comment: De-fang Carnivore! Get PGP today!
iQEVAwUBOe5xqQVDEcxv6gmtAQFXaQf+NHPgowS9oKVPGh4fTDY/+QeOGV5CII7Z
8uFAuFw/icW+OttfhSh0yQLraIzktBfD2Y8kddoaiYlQaRegAySzZyX+NdREbAsu
sLW/eqk5A89rsqwTgsX9gi9PEPdr30MY3Gf7/g7FiTFwFYCC2Nia/jPcAdxyEzZ+
mKe734qHFA2u03RX5d+inPE7ERVL/TUDDXO+79pWyiEmkL2TuF4egBys720MIbaY
bNSbrjHz2HTgisKl9vFuafIttJNIiZaVC+YMfAxJrV4OL5/8XfWR6hhrwZdxYgx6
6Iogx7ciYP0rMEBMJs7bxFS0q/M5NTm3FM290XY+s6C3Y/pROtX4mw==
=kseU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
CPSCswrkr
>Civil court has a lower standard of proof, hearsay is permissible, so is
double jeopardy.
(did I get the attribution right?)
Intersting.
Protection from abuse orders are civil matters in PA. There are from time to
time violations of these civil protection orders that also meet the criteria
for a separate criminal conviction. In that situation, one would think that
the same behavior in the same incident is not only punishable as a violation of
the civil protection order (which can include prison confinement) but also as a
violation of criminal law, upon conviction (which can include prison
confinement as dictated by criminal procedure). I suppose we could even throw
in that the same behavior might even be a parole or probation violation, also
subject to prison confinement as a matter separate from each of the above
(triple jeopardy?).
Our county DA's office will not criminally prosecute a matter where the
defendant has been found guilty and punished for violating a civil protection
order, reasoning that there is case law (in PA?) that the situation would
consitute double jeopardy.
Comments? (Now, did I actually contribute something, or was I just babbling
again>)
Ric Werme
>>From: Ric Werme we...@nospam.mediaone.net
>>Civil court has a lower standard of proof, hearsay is permissible, so is
>double jeopardy.
>(did I get the attribution right?)
Yes you did. Thank you for leaving out that other poster's assessment
that I was a moron for suggesting double jeopardy was possible. :-)
>Interesting.
>Protection from abuse orders are civil matters in PA. There are from time to
>time violations of these civil protection orders that also meet the criteria
>for a separate criminal conviction. In that situation, one would think that
>the same behavior in the same incident is not only punishable as a violation of
>the civil protection order (which can include prison confinement) but also as a
>violation of criminal law, upon conviction (which can include prison
>confinement as dictated by criminal procedure).
Umm, don't give these folks ideas! Let me put my cynic's hat on for a
moment. When abuse is severe enough to warrant criminal charges and
it's the "right" sort of case, CPS will file (have the county prosecutor?)
file criminal charges and invite the media in to show everyone what a
good job they're doing. Otherwise it's civil, secret, and relies on the
lower standard of proof for conviction.
On a flight to NH I sat next to someone who worked in a county prosecutor's
office. He said that once DCYF got involved in a case, his department
would generally step back and let DCYF handle it in the civil courts.
I suggested they shouldn't put so muh faith in DCYF doing the right thing.
>Our county DA's office will not criminally prosecute a matter where the
>defendant has been found guilty and punished for violating a civil protection
>order, reasoning that there is case law (in PA?) that the situation would
>constitute double jeopardy.
Hmm. I guess people who want to punish someone should wait for the
criminal trial to be over and then file their suit!
>Comments? (Now, did I actually contribute something, or was I just babbling
>again>)
More content then a lot of posts! :-(
mcla...@my-deja.com
In article <20001020230535...@ng-ck1.aol.com>,
sam...@aol.com (SamPast) wrote:
> Well, I finally got to watch the show I taped this week. It was
Montel
> Williams...talking about our favorite subject. Of course, he was
against
> spanking...the show discussed corporal punishment of kids in
schools. But
> there was one interesting piece...
>
> there was an author who wrote a book called, "Lots of Love and
Spanking" by
> Jamie Pritchett.
>
> Interesting!
>
> Sam
Neal Feldman
ramalane wrote:
> The term double jeopardy is non-applicable in civil litigation, moron.
>
> /ramalane
It would appear you are the moron, for that is what Ric said... there are
no preclusions of double jeopardy in civil matters.
Clearly there should be.
The concept is entirely applicable.
--
=============================================================
Home Page: http://members.home.net/silverstorm/
We will never rest until Gestapo CPS is completely abolished!
mcla...@my-deja.com
It appears, more and more, that there is, or soon will be, an all-out
war against the authority of parents.
Rather than supporting parents, and backing them up, Government seems
to be undercutting them at every turn. I am not sure why this is.
Perhaps because so many couples are childless, and the value of
childrren has thus sky-rocketted. Yes, as *** said, everything has a
price. Even children.
I am sorry to be so cynical, but the hysteria over spanking is just a
glimpse of the insanity.
The issue is not really the spanking. There are thousands of parents
who scarcely ever lay a hand on their children, if at all. But what is
wrong with a stern little "attention-getter" now and again?
The real issue is the families, the children, the parents. The real
issue is the support, or lack thereof, given (or withheld) from those
who are on the front lines, those who are providing the PEOPLE, the
children, the lavbor supply, the genius, the very FUTURE of their
nation.
General Electric used to have a slogan -- progress is our most
important product.
Well, in a way, I think that families are our most important resource.
And those who destroy them are destroying the heart and soul of the
nation.
Heaven help us if they succeed
shiv...@pobox.com
: Rather than supporting parents, and backing them up, Government seems
: to be undercutting them at every turn. I am not sure why this is.
It's built into a lot of western liberal/leftist thought from late last
century on, and you can find it in other places to. (Surprisingly,
back to Plato's "Republic".) When parents have primary control over
the raising of children, rather than the state, the state can't change
society and culture directly. It has to persuade the parents to get
them to teach the children, instead of doing it directly.
People who enjoy having power over other people and lack patience fall
into this trap, even if they otherwise are "family friendly".
--
Don't reply privately to this post -- the email address is a spamtrap
and I won't get your email.
CDH
<mcla...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8tmu9l$cl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> The war against parental authority:
>
> to be undercutting them at every turn. I am not sure why this is.
The government and their leftist allies know that the best way to cement their
control over society is to destroy the family, and that is accomplished by
estranging children from their parents and effectively taking over their
upbringing. Hitler was reputed to have said, "Give me a child until he is six.
It doesn't matter what any other adult does to him after that." Incidentally,
this is the underlying reason behind the official hostility toward private
schools and especially homeschoolers. Govt. schools are now essentially Marxist
indoctrination camps, and every child out of those schools' reach is a child
they can't brainwash.
Dave in Occupied Florida
---------------
"In the first place God made idiots. This was for practice.
Then he made School Boards."
-- Mark Twain
---------------
"How many Catholic schools do you think teach the students to question
the authority of the Pope? Do you believe Christian schools teach
students to question or challenge the authority of Jesus Christ? Do
military schools teach the cadets to challenge the authority of
superior officers? Well, why should we then expect government schools
to teach children to question the authority of government?"
--Neal Boortz
--
ROT13 the "reply to" for actual e-mail address.
TANSTAAFL