Who are these people?
Who are these people?
The mother and and father have been married for 25 Years. They are devout Catholics who have 12 children (and 2 grandchildren), ranging from 25 to 13 months. The mom is a NFP-only Certified Nurse-Midwife, and has been for several years. The father is a stay-at-home dad and all-around handy man. He has been a stay-at-home dad for almost 20 years (a little more than 18, to be exact.)
< Their three oldest daughters have all married and moved out, although not necessarily in that order. The oldest, was living in Florida, but moved back to Arizona with her two children to be closer to family. She has a very special little girl with CP, and a cute red-headed litle son. The second child, is in the Navy, and lives in Hawaii with her husband. The third daughter moved to Alaska, as she's always wanted to do. The second-oldest boy moved in with his sister in Hawaii, so that he could concentrate on finishing high school and benefit from the experience of having plenty of upstanding military role models (and a little bit of that military discipline!)
There were eight other children living at home. One was formally adopted some years ago. The parents were in the process of adopting the other, after raising her for 5 years as their own.
What Happened
April 27, 2006. One of the children was removed from school by one uniformed armed male Sheriff's deputy. NO paperwork was left at the school for the parents (none of the REQUIRED paperwork). At 2:30 pm the father went to the school to pick up his children. One of them was not there. NO one knew where she was, the regular office staff was gone, NO one would answer The father's questions, he was handed a photocopy of a sheriff's deputy business card (which looks different than a sheriff's department business card the oldest has in her possession from March).
The father called the number on the business card; he was transferred to dispatch who said they could page that particular officer, and that they would page him. He called the school to find out if anyone knew if it was a real officer or a person posing as a real officer. He called the mother; she said to put out an Amber alert if no one at the sheriff's office would tell him where his daughter was. (You can be in Mexico within two hours from this area.) He called the school again, they confirmed they had seen a badge and claimed it was a legitimate officer. The father told them he was unable to get a reply form the sheriff's department and if he didn't have an answer it the next few minutes he was going to put out an Amber Alert. A few minutes later he got a call from the sheriff's dept (it was not the officer who took the child).The person on the phone said there had been allegations made, there is a CPS investigation into these allegations, and the child is safe, they know where she is.
The father asked why the school had not given him this information and saved him an hour's worth of worrying about whether his child had been kidnapped. The Officer stated "they are not able and should not give out that information, even if they had it."
Around 8:30 pm 2 (unmarked) cars and one white van (containing the child) pulled up to the house. They spoke with the father, there was a CPS representative there, these were all men, and they said the father must sign this paper now or all his children would be removed tonight. They claimed the paper contained a statement to the effect that The oldest boy would not stay here or be around the children until this investigation were over, and that a copy of the statement would be made and given to the father. He has still not received the copy.
They talked for a while, asked a few questions, one officer took it upon himself to take a gander at the other nearby rooms, he walked into the den where the children were watching TV. He walked to glance into the kitchen. The oldest saw him and moved from where she was standing talking on the phone to the mom to walk towards him and meet his gaze. She told one of the kids to clear the table. The officer turned and went back to the living room with the rest of the people.
The father mentioned the deadbeat ex-husband of the oldest sister and that he thought it was him making fraudulent calls to CPS because in the divorce papers she had asked for sole custody (on the grounds that the ex was incapable and unwilling to care for his special needs daughter).
The police asked the father and oldest son to come downtown to answer some questions, they made it sound like a formality, and it would all be cleared up shortly. They wanted the father to follow them to the office for questioning. The boy would ride with his father in the blue van. In the boy's possession was his wallet and a journal (he uses journals to write fictional stories, he has done this for quite some time, but this particular journal was a new one, he had gotten it on Easter). They go outside. The father handed his son a paper (the one he had signed? or another one the police had handed him, he told him not to read it out loud (The father was trying to hear the other officers and he was asking how this was going to work if the boy goes into the car while the other child goes inside? I think that was the decision.
The other child goes inside. The oldest asked her if she had eaten, no she had not, but she did have a new stuffed animal and she was grinning ear to ear, not a happy grin like I'm so glad to be home, but more of a Cheshire cat, oh look what I did, I'm getting to get all kinds of attention now grin. The oldest told her that dinner was fish and it was on the stove, she refused to eat fish. The oldest told her if that was the case to change out of her school clothes, and asked if she had homework, she said the officer made her leave her backpack at school, THe oldest told her she would still have do the dishes then (her chore).
The father followed the police downtown, when they get close to the building, the police go separate directions, and the father follows one who turns into employee parking. It takes the father a few minutes to figure out where to go.
Upon arrival, the father and son were separated. The father was grilled, threatened, and accused; his rights were not read. He did not think he was free to leave (which is enough for a Miranda violation according to what we found online). The "Mr Incapable-of-telling-the-truth Detective" was the father's questioner, he accused the father of knowing and hiding wrongdoing (b/t two of the kids). Before he was able to leave, they handed him his son's wallet. They told the son his wallet and journal had been given to his father. They tell the father that the child in question needs to see their forensic pediatrician, and that it would not wait until Monday.
Friday April 28th. The kids are kept out of school; They were waiting for a phone call about these exams that can't wait until Monday. The mom leaves messages all day on various voicemails, no calls were returned.
Saturday they leave to go to a reception for their second daughter's wedding. They take all their kids.
Monday The oldest was home alone with her kids. She got two phone calls, one from "Mr Incapable-of-telling-the-truth Detective" and one from "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS investigator" whose message was "it's about her kids." Kids sounded derogatory coming from her mouth. She did not say who she worked for/with.
May 3rd, the parents take two of the girls to the forensic Pediatrician's office downtown. While they were gone, two CPS workers showed up at the door of their house. They did not provide identification. One was "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator"; the other was similar in build, structure, and height and hair color. Slim, short (shorter than "Ms. Doens't-like-kids", by at least 2 inches) dark hair, about shoulder length for both. This woman did not give any identification; she may not have even been a CPS worker. I don't know. They asked for the toddler. The babysitter asked why, they said they had a paper that they would hand to her when she gave the toddler over. The sitter asked if the parents knew, they said "not yet, but they will, I'm going there to tell them next" The sitter told them to hold on and shut the door. She called one of the boys down, and the mother on her cell phone, and told her they were here to take the toddler, she was shocked and surprised but had no advice on what to do, The sitter asked if she should let him go, the mother said yes she didn't know what else to do. THe sitter asked The older boy for the toddler's shoes, told him CPS was here to take him away. The sitter looked for clothes for the toddler, the case workers start pounding repeatedly on the doorbell. She dressed the toddler. Brought him downstairs and opened the door, then they demanded to know which other children were here. The sitter said "isn't that your job? Shouldn't you know how to do it? I'm not going to help you do it" The mother says not to call her back, the sitter hung up. "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" is on her cell phone. The other woman starts saying we (as in the cps workers) need to go, now. "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" starts asking the person on her cell phone for the other children's names, she starts giving those names to the sitter, and then she writes them down on this paper that's supposed to explain everything. The sitter shut the door again. The toddler is still with her. She tell the rest of the kids to get dressed with shoes, that CPS was going to take them, remind them not to say anything or they'll make up stories and lies about what the kids say and keep them from returning home. When they're ready She opens the door and tells THe older boy to watch the toddler. The unidentified woman tells the toddler he's going to a big playroom. "Ms.. Doesn't-like-kids" thrust her paper at the sitter. It was not signed by a judge or anyone else, just herself. There is no where else for anyone to sign. This was not court ordered.
At the pediatrician's office, "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" takes the breast-fed baby out of his mother's arms. There is a forensic physical exam done on both of the girls, The child questioned the week before has an intact hymen, she has a tear somewhere up behind the hymen. The other one is intact too, completely normal. The people doing those exams did not tell the kids what they were doing. The mother was present during the exam. The exam was supposed to be at 8 am; the kids were taken from the sitter at noon. Later that afternoon, all the kids were examined by a nurse, the nurse tells the mother she should be "happy to know" that all her kids are "well fed and happy and healthy".
May 4th there is a "team decision-making meeting", Two family friends, and the parents go to this so called "meeting." The panel admits that if the parents have $65,000 they could get a lawyer who would get their kids back. One admits ("Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator"s supervisor on this day) that parents are often the "last to know". This panel also admits they had come to a consensus without anyone else present, that the kids would not be returned, ever. One of the friends asked specifically, "isn't' this supposed to be a consensus for all present?" They said they came to one already. The "facilitator" at this hearing made transcription errors (she put the boy who was not living in the state on the list for "safety concerns" and left the fully adopted child off); CPS also lied at this meeting and has written children removed form home on April 27th.
May 5th, parental visit. The toddler walks like he is in shock, until he sees his parents, he straightens up and is happy top see them. He had not been fed. The middle boy had not been fed because he had failed "to do his chores in time" and was punished with no breakfast. the two older girls are in a facility with lice, one of them has been punched and told "bad girls do not get birthdays."
THe breast-fed baby is deathly ill, the parents both remark "He looks like he has not been fed, and certainly not fed properly, someone must've taken him off his diet" (breast milk). He is congested, he has trouble breathing, he is listless and lethargic, pale, and wheezing.
The parents spend the rest of the day arguing with CPS and leaving messages begging to drop off the baby's prescribed SVN machine and his medicines. At 4:15 PM they're told they had better get there before 5 pm, because that's when the case worker is leaving. The mother writes instructions, leaves a phone number on them, drives and makes it on time, she is told "if the baby goes to the hospital over the weekend she will not hear of it until Monday." by "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator". She doesn't work weekends (in fact none of them do unless they are on call or something to do emergency removals).
Monday May 8. The parents leave messages on both "Ms.Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" and her "supervisor" voice mails. No phone calls are returned.
Tuesday May 9. "Ms. Doens't-like-kids CPS Investigator" finally returns a call. She threatens the father and tells him he will never get his kids back.
10:30 PM The second daughter, the one in the Navy, and her husband land, having just flown in from Hawaii on emergency leave. The oldest gives them the phone numbers she has for "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" and her supervisor.
Wednesday May 10. The second daughter calls CPS. No response or call-backs. She and her husband take the father to drop off breast milk at the CPS office, and have to leave it with the secretary, because ""Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" was out and might be out all the rest of the day." They visit the oldest boy in jail, who's despondent and upset. He still hasn't talked to his lawyer, and he's still not quite sure why he's there.
Thursday May 11. It's supposed to be the day of The oldest boy's first hearing, but the parents and thier daughter and her husband arrive at the courthouse to find that the hearing has been vacated. There is no information on why, or who vacated it, or when the replacement hearing is.
The second daughter calls "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" at CPS and asks if any of the required paperwork or petitions have been filed, as the parents still haven't been informed. The response was "Yes, and the hearing's been set. They will be notified when I get to it." THe second daughter replied "Oh, the hearing's already been set? When is it? Have you notified them? Because they didn't know that it had even been filed." "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids"'s response was "The hearing is tomorrow. I'll notify them later." She requested more information, since the mother was right there so she could let her know. "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" responded that "I'll call and notify them when I GET to it. I have 20 other cases right now, and I don't have time for this!" and hung up. (Don't you just love the professionalism??) The second daughter called her back and asked to have her supervisor's name and number. She was given a name and number, but no one answered at the extension. She called the front office and asked for the supervisor of "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator". She was given a DIFFERENT name and number. The person at this extension, "Mr. Almost-Reasonable", answered his phone (For a wonder…no one else but the secretary seemed to know how to do that consistently!!) and said that he didn't know anything about the case, since he'd only been working there three days. He said he'd find out and call back with the requested info.
The parents walk over to the Juvenile Courthouse, since they were in the neighborhood, and discovered that the second adopted daughter was on a separate case. They also find out the names of their court-appointed representatives from the information desk. (NOTE that this information is supposed to BE PROVIDED TO them, they're not supposed to have to GO AND GET IT!)
At a little before noon, the second daughter gets a call back from "Mr.. Almost-Reasonable", the new supervisor. He tells her that "Ms. Doesn't-like-Kids" should have called by now (but she hasn't). The second daugter gets a chance to ask a couple questions, like, "Can I go and see my siblings now??" He tells her that they have to do a background check before she can see the kids ((A BACKGROUND CHECK FOR A *SUPERVISED* VISIT WITH YOUR OWN SIBLINGS?!!!))
At noon, the parents FINALLY receive a call that the first hearing for their kids is set for 2 pm the next day. They have still not received a copy of the petition at this point. An hour or two later, they receive a fax. An 88 page fax, which is the Petition for Dependency.
That 88 page fax says on the first page that "There are supposedly 3 adult children over age 18" and the rest of the 88 pages is filled in a like manner with a whole host of other deliberately misleading interpretations and "information" and outright lies and slander, all starting with the line "According to Information and Belief."
Apparently, it is "common practice" for CPS to fill the petition with this kind of misinformation with the deliberate intent that all or most energy be diverted to refuting each and every ridiculous claim, because if you don't, they will take the lack of response as "evidence" that the "information" is "true" because you "fail to refute" it.
Note, here, that the parents have visitation with the kids At 10 AM to 1230 PM scheduled for the next day. In order for their affidavit to be valid, they MUST get several copies notarized, and the affidavit MUST be filed before noon. Directly after the visitation, they must go to the courthouse, and be there before 130 PM, because being late is an automatic termination of the parents' rights. They have MUCH less than 24 hours to get through the whole 88 pages, and document every error or peice of deliberate misinformation.
Friday the 12th. One of the girls' birthday. The parents spend the morning getting affidavits notarized, court papers filed, and then race over to where the kids are supposed to meet them for thier daughter's little birthday party. The second daughter and her husband meet them at the little makeshift "party." They party is short, and they soon head off to the court hearings.
When they get to the courthouse, they are informed that they were put on one of the children's case by "Mistake" because they don't actually have a "material interest" in the case, seeing as how they have "no rights" in her case, because they weren't her legal parents yet. They are "allowed to watch" the hearing, which was confidential. The parents were told they had no more business in the case and would not be informed of any further developments in the case, nor were they allowed to see thier almost-adopted daughter any more. They were told that there were "no rights to terminate" in this case.
They had another hearing, but again we run into that "CPS has to protect itself" thing.
Monday May 15. The oldest boy calls and tells us his last hearing was vacated because they failed to indict him. He has another hearing set for the morning of 17th. He has still not talked to a lawyer.
Tuesday May 16. The parents, second daughter, her husband, and four character witnesses for the parents go to the courthouse. Just before the hearing, they are approached by CPS with a bit of blackmail which they called a "deal": If they cancel the hearing, they can have the breast-fed baby back that night, and the toddler on Thursday, after a forensic exam to "make sure he's not perpetrating any abuse and has not been abused" (even though their main point of contention is that they don't want him "abusing" the baby, they've been KEEPING THOSE TWO TOGETHER this whole time.) The other kids should also be returned as they complete thier interviews. The parents, at this point seriously concerned for the baby's health, considering he's still extremely sick, agree. This deal is explained to the judge, who is told that the CPS investigation has not yet been completed.
After the hearing, The parents rush to the home to meet the baby. They later get a call from "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" that she "cant find the foster mother, because she's not at home." It was too close to 5 to "do anything" about it, so they'll have to wait until the morning, when CPS would drop the baby off at the house.
Wednesday May 17. The father and second daughter go to the courthouse for the oldest boy's hearing. They are informed there that the venue for the hearing has been changed, and the hearing is now in the central courthouse. They rush to the other courthouse, but are still a little late. They are in time to hear the oldest boy's "Hearing" which consisted entirely of "State your full legal name and date of birth, , , I'm entering you for a not-guilty plea. Your court date is such and such at blah time, and your judge is such and such. Next!"
When they get out of the courtroom, the second daughter has a message on her phone: "It's mom. They called me and said that they took the baby to Urgent Care at the hospital last night. They said I have to go to the office to pick him up. your husband is taking me there."
The parents, second daugter, and her husband meet at the CPS office. When they got there, the mom was already breastfeeding the baby. His face, head, and nose and mouth were all discolored and bruised. He had a lump on the side of his head, a bruise on his arm, and bug bites all over his head and arms. [I can't show you the pictures. Again it's that CPS-has-to-protect-itself thing.] His eyes are not tracking/focusing properly, and he does not balance properly. The paper that they gave the mother for a record that he was in medical care says nothing about the reasons why the child was admitted. It also spells his name incorrectly. The parents took pictures, call the good-for-naught court-appointed lawyer, and set up an appointment for him at the doctor's office. The injuries are worrisome enough for the Dr to call for several scans to rule out concussion, subdermal hematoma and skull fractures. Thankfully, the baby was battered and traumatized but otherwise fine. The hospital and Dr keep the parents at the hospital for 7 hours, because they thought the mother or father had beaten the baby. The hospital called the CPS office several times, but received no answer and no call-backs.
The baby almost didn't leave his mother at all. He kept going back to nurse every few minutes.
The people taking care of him didn't feed him ANY of the breastmilk that was delivered. 3 or 4 insulated lunchbags full of 6-8 bottles of breastmilk each, were returned with the baby, still frozen and unused. No one knows what they fed the baby during the time they had him.
The second daughter and her husband completed an interview for a background check so they could try and take the kids. The parents received a letter addressed to the biological mother of the daughter they were trying to adopt. By this action they have taken it upon themselves to countermand a court order. "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" has in the petition that was filed, a copy of the court order terminating the biological mother's rights, and here she is, trying to supercede that court order.
Thursday May 18th. The parents could get no calls back from cps or anyone to answer the phone that morning. There was supposed to be visitation scheduled for the afternoon, but it was cancelled and rescheduled. That afternoon, "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" called and told the mom that she didn't think the mom would be getting ANY of the other children back, and she didn't think she should have gotten back. She denied that she told the judge she would be giving the toddler or any of the other kids back after their interviews, telling the mom that she had made no such deal.
Friday the 19th. The baby was forcibly removed just after the mom had her visitation with the children. The father was prevented from going to this visitation by the detective involved in the case. This removal is on audio tape, CPS was told to repeat what they had said because the mom was going to record it, then the removal occurred. "Ms.. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" and one other individual are heard quite clearly. Including the second woman's statement "I AM removing him from your breast" then you can hear the baby screaming, the mom crying and then begin left alone, she then calls her good-for-naught court-appointed lawyer and leaves a message. You can hear them on the tape, saying that "there are new allegations and we are removing the baby" the mom offers to have the father stay out of the house, since the new allegations are now aimed at the father. "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" replies "that can be discussed later." the mom demands to know when, they give her a date of June 5 or 6th when another hearing is scheduled for. The mother demands to know where the baby is going, if he is going back to the foster parents that abused him. yes he's going back there was the reply, along with laughter. the mother says again, "the people who put a lump on his head, gave him a black eye and we had to spend all day in the hospital fending off allegations tat we did this? The hospital wanted to take the baby from US." "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" claims the hospital has no such authority. The mom argues back, "they were going to hold us until CPS responded or until they spoke with a social worker or something."
This is the text of a letter my mother wrote to the AZ state legislature.
Dear Sirs and Madams,
The text of this letter is nearly identical to letters I have sent to Sheriff Joe Arpaio and to Attorney General Andrew Thomas.
I am contacting you because of a situation in my family which has led to multiple offenses by MCSO and CPS in our opinion, ie "Maricopa County" and the "State of Arizona". I am very scared and nervous as I write, for many reasons, but primarily because I fear the injustice of the system and have already been victim, as have my children, to the misuse of power in this situation. I fear for the safety of my children more than anything and one of my children especially, who is herself a victim, is bearing the brunt of this.
It seems that our State has deemed it possible, and in fact preferable, to decide that parents are guilty, and not presumed innocent, in direct opposition to our United States Constitution. Under the Guise of the "Multi Disciplinary Protocol for the Investigaion of Child Abuse", if there has been an allegation of abuse, children are taken from their parents under the assumption that we "should have known". In our case, an ARMED, UNIFORMED, MALE Sheriff's Deputy, came to take our [age deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itself"] daughter "away" for questioning in a marked car. He was unaccompanied and our daughter was very much intimidated by a grown man with a gun! He had NO, *absolutely NO* paperwork to take our child from school- yet he was Allowed to do so??!!
I have seen numerous situations where there is actual, visible or admitted abuse, by the parents themselves, where nothing is done and children are left in the home, yet in our situation, when there is no proof and only allegations *against another party* , the extent of which we are not being informed of, we are being accused and treated as if guilty.
I am sorry this letter does not flow well, but please let me back up and explain:
My husband and I have been married for 25 yrs. We have 12 children, 1 who is adopted, one whom we have guardianship of. 3 Children are married.
We have *always* had one parent stay at home with the exception of about a 3 month period which was over 18yrs ago. We keep a tight reign on our children, or at least we have tried to. We do primarily family activities, including religious education and attending church services weekly, and 2-3 week times during the Lenten Season when possible.
I don't remember all the facts, but recently we were told our [age deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itslef"] daughter c/o being molested by our [age deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itslef"] son. He has been in jail since that time and is obviously not allowed to come back home.
We have repeatedly told everyone involved we had no knowledge and no idea of the possibility of any molestation happening, until after our son was in jail.
Despite that, at the direction of the MCSO, CPS was told (per [name deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itself] at DES Family Advocacy) that our children should be removed. They say we are being charged with "failure to protect". They are using a clause from the ARS, Section 8 that states they can take the children away in "situations in which the parent knew or REASONABLY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN that a person was abusing or neglecting a child"
Even if sexual abuse is conclusively shown at the end of all this- it is widely known that children to not typically tell their parents, the CPS people, [name deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itself"] even admitted this. We have made every effort to cooperate, and we have made countless statements to the FACT that we had no idea anything even remotely abnormal was happening in our household. How many other families are Intact? How many intact families have one parent stay at home? How much more could we have protected our children? We even drive them to and from school in our personal vehicles.
Since we had no knowledge of anything prior to my son's arrest, and since we have repeatedly told everyone we can think of this, we are at a loss to understand how our children could be taken from us. None of our children, aside from our [age deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itself"], has made any accusations as far as we understand. We are not however being told the truth, let alone the whole truth about many things.
MCSO has directly lied during statements to my husband and probably myself. CPS has lied and has admitted to it. We have not been given a court date and time as of this letter, and from what I can tell from reading the "Guidelines" , even if they decide to put our case eventually in the "basket" they can review it every 30 days INDEFINITELY. The guidelines clearly state there is NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. Even if our daughter was to come forward and admit fabrication, the charges against us stay. That is what has been written by our state government. Additionally, if the children are kept from the home via a dependency, and later returned to us, ANY OF OUR CHILDREN CAN BE TAKEN a second time and our parental rights TERMINATED, *without any reason, without any proof of anything at any time*. All the "state" needs, (in this case a childless, single young woman, aged 25) is someone who thinks something is "not normal". I can tell you that as a mom of a large family, there are LOTS of people who think that, in and of itself, is not normal.
I want to know WHAT the charges are against my husband and myself and how, for each individual child, these charges apply. I don't want a global "failure to protect" statement, I want concrete examples and proof.
We HAVE NOT EVER failed to protect our children and I resent that they have been taken from us and placed in harms way. My children have not been fed, have been mistreated, are being denied the company and pleasure of their family, siblings, friends and parents. They are being denied their religious rights to attend church services and to receive communion.
The social worker/case worker and the manager have not returned our calls the vast majority of the time.
I only want to protect my children, as does my husband. To be accused of failing to do so, and then having our children taken from us on those grounds cuts us to the very core. My little [age deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itself"] son was totally breastfed when he was taken. I can't even get the CPS department to call us back to tell us if he still has breastmilk to drink. To know that my children have at times not even been fed while in CPS/MCSO custody is very disturbing.
I intend to pursue this as far as need be because I KNOW we have done nothing wrong and I fear for the safety and well-being of my children. I am under the assumption that you are a fair and honest and I hope you will endeaver to help us rectify this situation.
Thank you
[name deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itsef"] RNC, CNM, MSN
The mother and and father have been married for 25 Years. They are devout Catholics who have 12 children (and 2 grandchildren), ranging from 25 to 13 months. The mom is a NFP-only Certified Nurse-Midwife, and has been for several years. The father is a stay-at-home dad and all-around handy man. He has been a stay-at-home dad for almost 20 years (a little more than 18, to be exact.)
< Their three oldest daughters have all married and moved out, although not necessarily in that order. The oldest, was living in Florida, but moved back to Arizona with her two children to be closer to family. She has a very special little girl with CP, and a cute red-headed litle son. The second child, is in the Navy, and lives in Hawaii with her husband. The third daughter moved to Alaska, as she's always wanted to do. The second-oldest boy moved in with his sister in Hawaii, so that he could concentrate on finishing high school and benefit from the experience of having plenty of upstanding military role models (and a little bit of that military discipline!)
There were eight other children living at home. One was formally adopted some years ago. The parents were in the process of adopting the other, after raising her for 5 years as their own.
What Happened
April 27, 2006. One of the children was removed from school by one uniformed armed male Sheriff's deputy. NO paperwork was left at the school for the parents (none of the REQUIRED paperwork). At 2:30 pm the father went to the school to pick up his children. One of them was not there. NO one knew where she was, the regular office staff was gone, NO one would answer The father's questions, he was handed a photocopy of a sheriff's deputy business card (which looks different than a sheriff's department business card the oldest has in her possession from March).
The father called the number on the business card; he was transferred to dispatch who said they could page that particular officer, and that they would page him. He called the school to find out if anyone knew if it was a real officer or a person posing as a real officer. He called the mother; she said to put out an Amber alert if no one at the sheriff's office would tell him where his daughter was. (You can be in Mexico within two hours from this area.) He called the school again, they confirmed they had seen a badge and claimed it was a legitimate officer. The father told them he was unable to get a reply form the sheriff's department and if he didn't have an answer it the next few minutes he was going to put out an Amber Alert. A few minutes later he got a call from the sheriff's dept (it was not the officer who took the child).The person on the phone said there had been allegations made, there is a CPS investigation into these allegations, and the child is safe, they know where she is.
The father asked why the school had not given him this information and saved him an hour's worth of worrying about whether his child had been kidnapped. The Officer stated "they are not able and should not give out that information, even if they had it."
Around 8:30 pm 2 (unmarked) cars and one white van (containing the child) pulled up to the house. They spoke with the father, there was a CPS representative there, these were all men, and they said the father must sign this paper now or all his children would be removed tonight. They claimed the paper contained a statement to the effect that The oldest boy would not stay here or be around the children until this investigation were over, and that a copy of the statement would be made and given to the father. He has still not received the copy.
They talked for a while, asked a few questions, one officer took it upon himself to take a gander at the other nearby rooms, he walked into the den where the children were watching TV. He walked to glance into the kitchen. The oldest saw him and moved from where she was standing talking on the phone to the mom to walk towards him and meet his gaze. She told one of the kids to clear the table. The officer turned and went back to the living room with the rest of the people.
The father mentioned the deadbeat ex-husband of the oldest sister and that he thought it was him making fraudulent calls to CPS because in the divorce papers she had asked for sole custody (on the grounds that the ex was incapable and unwilling to care for his special needs daughter).
The police asked the father and oldest son to come downtown to answer some questions, they made it sound like a formality, and it would all be cleared up shortly. They wanted the father to follow them to the office for questioning. The boy would ride with his father in the blue van. In the boy's possession was his wallet and a journal (he uses journals to write fictional stories, he has done this for quite some time, but this particular journal was a new one, he had gotten it on Easter). They go outside. The father handed his son a paper (the one he had signed? or another one the police had handed him, he told him not to read it out loud (The father was trying to hear the other officers and he was asking how this was going to work if the boy goes into the car while the other child goes inside? I think that was the decision.
The other child goes inside. The oldest asked her if she had eaten, no she had not, but she did have a new stuffed animal and she was grinning ear to ear, not a happy grin like I'm so glad to be home, but more of a Cheshire cat, oh look what I did, I'm getting to get all kinds of attention now grin. The oldest told her that dinner was fish and it was on the stove, she refused to eat fish. The oldest told her if that was the case to change out of her school clothes, and asked if she had homework, she said the officer made her leave her backpack at school, THe oldest told her she would still have do the dishes then (her chore).
The father followed the police downtown, when they get close to the building, the police go separate directions, and the father follows one who turns into employee parking. It takes the father a few minutes to figure out where to go.
Upon arrival, the father and son were separated. The father was grilled, threatened, and accused; his rights were not read. He did not think he was free to leave (which is enough for a Miranda violation according to what we found online). The "Mr Incapable-of-telling-the-truth Detective" was the father's questioner, he accused the father of knowing and hiding wrongdoing (b/t two of the kids). Before he was able to leave, they handed him his son's wallet. They told the son his wallet and journal had been given to his father. They tell the father that the child in question needs to see their forensic pediatrician, and that it would not wait until Monday.
Friday April 28th. The kids are kept out of school; They were waiting for a phone call about these exams that can't wait until Monday. The mom leaves messages all day on various voicemails, no calls were returned.
Saturday they leave to go to a reception for their second daughter's wedding. They take all their kids.
Monday The oldest was home alone with her kids. She got two phone calls, one from "Mr Incapable-of-telling-the-truth Detective" and one from "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS investigator" whose message was "it's about her kids." Kids sounded derogatory coming from her mouth. She did not say who she worked for/with.
May 3rd, the parents take two of the girls to the forensic Pediatrician's office downtown. While they were gone, two CPS workers showed up at the door of their house. They did not provide identification. One was "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator"; the other was similar in build, structure, and height and hair color. Slim, short (shorter than "Ms. Doens't-like-kids", by at least 2 inches) dark hair, about shoulder length for both. This woman did not give any identification; she may not have even been a CPS worker. I don't know. They asked for the toddler. The babysitter asked why, they said they had a paper that they would hand to her when she gave the toddler over. The sitter asked if the parents knew, they said "not yet, but they will, I'm going there to tell them next" The sitter told them to hold on and shut the door. She called one of the boys down, and the mother on her cell phone, and told her they were here to take the toddler, she was shocked and surprised but had no advice on what to do, The sitter asked if she should let him go, the mother said yes she didn't know what else to do. THe sitter asked The older boy for the toddler's shoes, told him CPS was here to take him away. The sitter looked for clothes for the toddler, the case workers start pounding repeatedly on the doorbell. She dressed the toddler. Brought him downstairs and opened the door, then they demanded to know which other children were here. The sitter said "isn't that your job? Shouldn't you know how to do it? I'm not going to help you do it" The mother says not to call her back, the sitter hung up. "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" is on her cell phone. The other woman starts saying we (as in the cps workers) need to go, now. "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" starts asking the person on her cell phone for the other children's names, she starts giving those names to the sitter, and then she writes them down on this paper that's supposed to explain everything. The sitter shut the door again. The toddler is still with her. She tell the rest of the kids to get dressed with shoes, that CPS was going to take them, remind them not to say anything or they'll make up stories and lies about what the kids say and keep them from returning home. When they're ready She opens the door and tells THe older boy to watch the toddler. The unidentified woman tells the toddler he's going to a big playroom. "Ms.. Doesn't-like-kids" thrust her paper at the sitter. It was not signed by a judge or anyone else, just herself. There is no where else for anyone to sign. This was not court ordered.
At the pediatrician's office, "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" takes the breast-fed baby out of his mother's arms. There is a forensic physical exam done on both of the girls, The child questioned the week before has an intact hymen, she has a tear somewhere up behind the hymen. The other one is intact too, completely normal. The people doing those exams did not tell the kids what they were doing. The mother was present during the exam. The exam was supposed to be at 8 am; the kids were taken from the sitter at noon. Later that afternoon, all the kids were examined by a nurse, the nurse tells the mother she should be "happy to know" that all her kids are "well fed and happy and healthy".
May 4th there is a "team decision-making meeting", Two family friends, and the parents go to this so called "meeting." The panel admits that if the parents have $65,000 they could get a lawyer who would get their kids back. One admits ("Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator"s supervisor on this day) that parents are often the "last to know". This panel also admits they had come to a consensus without anyone else present, that the kids would not be returned, ever. One of the friends asked specifically, "isn't' this supposed to be a consensus for all present?" They said they came to one already. The "facilitator" at this hearing made transcription errors (she put the boy who was not living in the state on the list for "safety concerns" and left the fully adopted child off); CPS also lied at this meeting and has written children removed form home on April 27th.
May 5th, parental visit. The toddler walks like he is in shock, until he sees his parents, he straightens up and is happy top see them. He had not been fed. The middle boy had not been fed because he had failed "to do his chores in time" and was punished with no breakfast. the two older girls are in a facility with lice, one of them has been punched and told "bad girls do not get birthdays."
THe breast-fed baby is deathly ill, the parents both remark "He looks like he has not been fed, and certainly not fed properly, someone must've taken him off his diet" (breast milk). He is congested, he has trouble breathing, he is listless and lethargic, pale, and wheezing.
The parents spend the rest of the day arguing with CPS and leaving messages begging to drop off the baby's prescribed SVN machine and his medicines. At 4:15 PM they're told they had better get there before 5 pm, because that's when the case worker is leaving. The mother writes instructions, leaves a phone number on them, drives and makes it on time, she is told "if the baby goes to the hospital over the weekend she will not hear of it until Monday." by "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator". She doesn't work weekends (in fact none of them do unless they are on call or something to do emergency removals).
Monday May 8. The parents leave messages on both "Ms.Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" and her "supervisor" voice mails. No phone calls are returned.
Tuesday May 9. "Ms. Doens't-like-kids CPS Investigator" finally returns a call. She threatens the father and tells him he will never get his kids back.
10:30 PM The second daughter, the one in the Navy, and her husband land, having just flown in from Hawaii on emergency leave. The oldest gives them the phone numbers she has for "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" and her supervisor.
Wednesday May 10. The second daughter calls CPS. No response or call-backs. She and her husband take the father to drop off breast milk at the CPS office, and have to leave it with the secretary, because ""Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" was out and might be out all the rest of the day." They visit the oldest boy in jail, who's despondent and upset. He still hasn't talked to his lawyer, and he's still not quite sure why he's there.
Thursday May 11. It's supposed to be the day of The oldest boy's first hearing, but the parents and thier daughter and her husband arrive at the courthouse to find that the hearing has been vacated. There is no information on why, or who vacated it, or when the replacement hearing is.
The second daughter calls "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" at CPS and asks if any of the required paperwork or petitions have been filed, as the parents still haven't been informed. The response was "Yes, and the hearing's been set. They will be notified when I get to it." THe second daughter replied "Oh, the hearing's already been set? When is it? Have you notified them? Because they didn't know that it had even been filed." "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids"'s response was "The hearing is tomorrow. I'll notify them later." She requested more information, since the mother was right there so she could let her know. "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" responded that "I'll call and notify them when I GET to it. I have 20 other cases right now, and I don't have time for this!" and hung up. (Don't you just love the professionalism??) The second daughter called her back and asked to have her supervisor's name and number. She was given a name and number, but no one answered at the extension. She called the front office and asked for the supervisor of "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator". She was given a DIFFERENT name and number. The person at this extension, "Mr. Almost-Reasonable", answered his phone (For a wonder…no one else but the secretary seemed to know how to do that consistently!!) and said that he didn't know anything about the case, since he'd only been working there three days. He said he'd find out and call back with the requested info.
The parents walk over to the Juvenile Courthouse, since they were in the neighborhood, and discovered that the second adopted daughter was on a separate case. They also find out the names of their court-appointed representatives from the information desk. (NOTE that this information is supposed to BE PROVIDED TO them, they're not supposed to have to GO AND GET IT!)
At a little before noon, the second daughter gets a call back from "Mr.. Almost-Reasonable", the new supervisor. He tells her that "Ms. Doesn't-like-Kids" should have called by now (but she hasn't). The second daugter gets a chance to ask a couple questions, like, "Can I go and see my siblings now??" He tells her that they have to do a background check before she can see the kids ((A BACKGROUND CHECK FOR A *SUPERVISED* VISIT WITH YOUR OWN SIBLINGS?!!!))
At noon, the parents FINALLY receive a call that the first hearing for their kids is set for 2 pm the next day. They have still not received a copy of the petition at this point. An hour or two later, they receive a fax. An 88 page fax, which is the Petition for Dependency.
That 88 page fax says on the first page that "There are supposedly 3 adult children over age 18" and the rest of the 88 pages is filled in a like manner with a whole host of other deliberately misleading interpretations and "information" and outright lies and slander, all starting with the line "According to Information and Belief."
Apparently, it is "common practice" for CPS to fill the petition with this kind of misinformation with the deliberate intent that all or most energy be diverted to refuting each and every ridiculous claim, because if you don't, they will take the lack of response as "evidence" that the "information" is "true" because you "fail to refute" it.
Note, here, that the parents have visitation with the kids At 10 AM to 1230 PM scheduled for the next day. In order for their affidavit to be valid, they MUST get several copies notarized, and the affidavit MUST be filed before noon. Directly after the visitation, they must go to the courthouse, and be there before 130 PM, because being late is an automatic termination of the parents' rights. They have MUCH less than 24 hours to get through the whole 88 pages, and document every error or peice of deliberate misinformation.
Friday the 12th. One of the girls' birthday. The parents spend the morning getting affidavits notarized, court papers filed, and then race over to where the kids are supposed to meet them for thier daughter's little birthday party. The second daughter and her husband meet them at the little makeshift "party." They party is short, and they soon head off to the court hearings.
When they get to the courthouse, they are informed that they were put on one of the children's case by "Mistake" because they don't actually have a "material interest" in the case, seeing as how they have "no rights" in her case, because they weren't her legal parents yet. They are "allowed to watch" the hearing, which was confidential. The parents were told they had no more business in the case and would not be informed of any further developments in the case, nor were they allowed to see thier almost-adopted daughter any more. They were told that there were "no rights to terminate" in this case.
They had another hearing, but again we run into that "CPS has to protect itself" thing.
Monday May 15. The oldest boy calls and tells us his last hearing was vacated because they failed to indict him. He has another hearing set for the morning of 17th. He has still not talked to a lawyer.
Tuesday May 16. The parents, second daughter, her husband, and four character witnesses for the parents go to the courthouse. Just before the hearing, they are approached by CPS with a bit of blackmail which they called a "deal": If they cancel the hearing, they can have the breast-fed baby back that night, and the toddler on Thursday, after a forensic exam to "make sure he's not perpetrating any abuse and has not been abused" (even though their main point of contention is that they don't want him "abusing" the baby, they've been KEEPING THOSE TWO TOGETHER this whole time.) The other kids should also be returned as they complete thier interviews. The parents, at this point seriously concerned for the baby's health, considering he's still extremely sick, agree. This deal is explained to the judge, who is told that the CPS investigation has not yet been completed.
After the hearing, The parents rush to the home to meet the baby. They later get a call from "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" that she "cant find the foster mother, because she's not at home." It was too close to 5 to "do anything" about it, so they'll have to wait until the morning, when CPS would drop the baby off at the house.
Wednesday May 17. The father and second daughter go to the courthouse for the oldest boy's hearing. They are informed there that the venue for the hearing has been changed, and the hearing is now in the central courthouse. They rush to the other courthouse, but are still a little late. They are in time to hear the oldest boy's "Hearing" which consisted entirely of "State your full legal name and date of birth, , , I'm entering you for a not-guilty plea. Your court date is such and such at blah time, and your judge is such and such. Next!"
When they get out of the courtroom, the second daughter has a message on her phone: "It's mom. They called me and said that they took the baby to Urgent Care at the hospital last night. They said I have to go to the office to pick him up. your husband is taking me there."
The parents, second daugter, and her husband meet at the CPS office. When they got there, the mom was already breastfeeding the baby. His face, head, and nose and mouth were all discolored and bruised. He had a lump on the side of his head, a bruise on his arm, and bug bites all over his head and arms. [I can't show you the pictures. Again it's that CPS-has-to-protect-itself thing.] His eyes are not tracking/focusing properly, and he does not balance properly. The paper that they gave the mother for a record that he was in medical care says nothing about the reasons why the child was admitted. It also spells his name incorrectly. The parents took pictures, call the good-for-naught court-appointed lawyer, and set up an appointment for him at the doctor's office. The injuries are worrisome enough for the Dr to call for several scans to rule out concussion, subdermal hematoma and skull fractures. Thankfully, the baby was battered and traumatized but otherwise fine. The hospital and Dr keep the parents at the hospital for 7 hours, because they thought the mother or father had beaten the baby. The hospital called the CPS office several times, but received no answer and no call-backs.
The baby almost didn't leave his mother at all. He kept going back to nurse every few minutes.
The people taking care of him didn't feed him ANY of the breastmilk that was delivered. 3 or 4 insulated lunchbags full of 6-8 bottles of breastmilk each, were returned with the baby, still frozen and unused. No one knows what they fed the baby during the time they had him.
The second daughter and her husband completed an interview for a background check so they could try and take the kids. The parents received a letter addressed to the biological mother of the daughter they were trying to adopt. By this action they have taken it upon themselves to countermand a court order. "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" has in the petition that was filed, a copy of the court order terminating the biological mother's rights, and here she is, trying to supercede that court order.
Thursday May 18th. The parents could get no calls back from cps or anyone to answer the phone that morning. There was supposed to be visitation scheduled for the afternoon, but it was cancelled and rescheduled. That afternoon, "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" called and told the mom that she didn't think the mom would be getting ANY of the other children back, and she didn't think she should have gotten back. She denied that she told the judge she would be giving the toddler or any of the other kids back after their interviews, telling the mom that she had made no such deal.
Friday the 19th. The baby was forcibly removed just after the mom had her visitation with the children. The father was prevented from going to this visitation by the detective involved in the case. This removal is on audio tape, CPS was told to repeat what they had said because the mom was going to record it, then the removal occurred. "Ms.. Doesn't-like-kids CPS Investigator" and one other individual are heard quite clearly. Including the second woman's statement "I AM removing him from your breast" then you can hear the baby screaming, the mom crying and then begin left alone, she then calls her good-for-naught court-appointed lawyer and leaves a message. You can hear them on the tape, saying that "there are new allegations and we are removing the baby" the mom offers to have the father stay out of the house, since the new allegations are now aimed at the father. "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" replies "that can be discussed later." the mom demands to know when, they give her a date of June 5 or 6th when another hearing is scheduled for. The mother demands to know where the baby is going, if he is going back to the foster parents that abused him. yes he's going back there was the reply, along with laughter. the mother says again, "the people who put a lump on his head, gave him a black eye and we had to spend all day in the hospital fending off allegations tat we did this? The hospital wanted to take the baby from US." "Ms. Doesn't-like-kids" claims the hospital has no such authority. The mom argues back, "they were going to hold us until CPS responded or until they spoke with a social worker or something."
This is the text of a letter my mother wrote to the AZ state legislature.
Dear Sirs and Madams,
The text of this letter is nearly identical to letters I have sent to Sheriff Joe Arpaio and to Attorney General Andrew Thomas.
I am contacting you because of a situation in my family which has led to multiple offenses by MCSO and CPS in our opinion, ie "Maricopa County" and the "State of Arizona". I am very scared and nervous as I write, for many reasons, but primarily because I fear the injustice of the system and have already been victim, as have my children, to the misuse of power in this situation. I fear for the safety of my children more than anything and one of my children especially, who is herself a victim, is bearing the brunt of this.
It seems that our State has deemed it possible, and in fact preferable, to decide that parents are guilty, and not presumed innocent, in direct opposition to our United States Constitution. Under the Guise of the "Multi Disciplinary Protocol for the Investigaion of Child Abuse", if there has been an allegation of abuse, children are taken from their parents under the assumption that we "should have known". In our case, an ARMED, UNIFORMED, MALE Sheriff's Deputy, came to take our [age deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itself"] daughter "away" for questioning in a marked car. He was unaccompanied and our daughter was very much intimidated by a grown man with a gun! He had NO, *absolutely NO* paperwork to take our child from school- yet he was Allowed to do so??!!
I have seen numerous situations where there is actual, visible or admitted abuse, by the parents themselves, where nothing is done and children are left in the home, yet in our situation, when there is no proof and only allegations *against another party* , the extent of which we are not being informed of, we are being accused and treated as if guilty.
I am sorry this letter does not flow well, but please let me back up and explain:
My husband and I have been married for 25 yrs. We have 12 children, 1 who is adopted, one whom we have guardianship of. 3 Children are married.
We have *always* had one parent stay at home with the exception of about a 3 month period which was over 18yrs ago. We keep a tight reign on our children, or at least we have tried to. We do primarily family activities, including religious education and attending church services weekly, and 2-3 week times during the Lenten Season when possible.
I don't remember all the facts, but recently we were told our [age deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itslef"] daughter c/o being molested by our [age deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itslef"] son. He has been in jail since that time and is obviously not allowed to come back home.
We have repeatedly told everyone involved we had no knowledge and no idea of the possibility of any molestation happening, until after our son was in jail.
Despite that, at the direction of the MCSO, CPS was told (per [name deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itself] at DES Family Advocacy) that our children should be removed. They say we are being charged with "failure to protect". They are using a clause from the ARS, Section 8 that states they can take the children away in "situations in which the parent knew or REASONABLY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN that a person was abusing or neglecting a child"
Even if sexual abuse is conclusively shown at the end of all this- it is widely known that children to not typically tell their parents, the CPS people, [name deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itself"] even admitted this. We have made every effort to cooperate, and we have made countless statements to the FACT that we had no idea anything even remotely abnormal was happening in our household. How many other families are Intact? How many intact families have one parent stay at home? How much more could we have protected our children? We even drive them to and from school in our personal vehicles.
Since we had no knowledge of anything prior to my son's arrest, and since we have repeatedly told everyone we can think of this, we are at a loss to understand how our children could be taken from us. None of our children, aside from our [age deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itself"], has made any accusations as far as we understand. We are not however being told the truth, let alone the whole truth about many things.
MCSO has directly lied during statements to my husband and probably myself. CPS has lied and has admitted to it. We have not been given a court date and time as of this letter, and from what I can tell from reading the "Guidelines" , even if they decide to put our case eventually in the "basket" they can review it every 30 days INDEFINITELY. The guidelines clearly state there is NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. Even if our daughter was to come forward and admit fabrication, the charges against us stay. That is what has been written by our state government. Additionally, if the children are kept from the home via a dependency, and later returned to us, ANY OF OUR CHILDREN CAN BE TAKEN a second time and our parental rights TERMINATED, *without any reason, without any proof of anything at any time*. All the "state" needs, (in this case a childless, single young woman, aged 25) is someone who thinks something is "not normal". I can tell you that as a mom of a large family, there are LOTS of people who think that, in and of itself, is not normal.
I want to know WHAT the charges are against my husband and myself and how, for each individual child, these charges apply. I don't want a global "failure to protect" statement, I want concrete examples and proof.
We HAVE NOT EVER failed to protect our children and I resent that they have been taken from us and placed in harms way. My children have not been fed, have been mistreated, are being denied the company and pleasure of their family, siblings, friends and parents. They are being denied their religious rights to attend church services and to receive communion.
The social worker/case worker and the manager have not returned our calls the vast majority of the time.
I only want to protect my children, as does my husband. To be accused of failing to do so, and then having our children taken from us on those grounds cuts us to the very core. My little [age deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itself"] son was totally breastfed when he was taken. I can't even get the CPS department to call us back to tell us if he still has breastmilk to drink. To know that my children have at times not even been fed while in CPS/MCSO custody is very disturbing.
I intend to pursue this as far as need be because I KNOW we have done nothing wrong and I fear for the safety and well-being of my children. I am under the assumption that you are a fair and honest and I hope you will endeaver to help us rectify this situation.
Thank you
[name deleted per "CPS-has-to-protect-itsef"] RNC, CNM, MSN
posted by God watches over the children | 5:32 PM
|
0 comments
