you neglect to state the reasons why the judge ruled in favor of the other family. i would like to know.

For clarification: The judge didn't rule in favor of the other family. DHS did, last January.

In Oregon, that's how it goes. Smith had the right to ask the judge to review the decision, but she didn't. Smith claims she didn't know that.

The DHS hasn't ever given its reasons, publicly, for choosing the other family. It says the case is confidential.

Therefore, naming the defendants is violating confidentiality laws.

Why isn't this woman retaining the services of a competant lawyer? That's why she lost this procedural case. The judge made the only ruling that she could.

In response to Graham: I agree, she needs a lawyer. We've put out a couple of appeals for one here on Blogtown, but to no avail.

Roger Weidner is a senile old freak. He has no business being in that courtroom. I have no doubt he disrupted the proceedings. I have no idea about Ms. Smith's case, but having Weidner around is NEVER a good thing.

Didn't take long for someone to Godwin the courtroom, eh?

Is the DHS's main beef really that she is 63 and has five kids already or is there something about their position you aren't telling us? Does this woman have some kind of criminal history or something? I have a hard time believing that the DHS is just being a bunch of big meany poopyheads. Although, I could believe that the DHS has a culture of "we know better than parents" what with the whole nanny state mentality that these agencies tend to develop.

How did the KBOO reporter manage to get a recorder into the court room? That's what I want to know.

Hi, I'm the KBOO reporter.
I've never had any trouble getting through the front entrance of the building with recording equipment. As far as getting equipment into the courtroom goes, I just went into the courtroom. I was a few minutes late, and apparently before I got there, the judge said that audio/video recording devices were not allowed (however, I think they use recording devices). I started recording when I got there, and some time later, the judge told me to stop recording, which I did.

When court was finished, a sheriff just came up to me and, like an animal, started grabbing my equipment. He didn't grab me, he grabbed my equipment. He looked like a maniac and I could only imagine him doing bad things to the equipment. I didn't know what to do because it wasn't mine, nor was it KBOO's for that matter; it belongs to the public. It was really wierd, because I thought that property was 9/10ths of the law, and here was "the law," trying to destroy property!! When someone in the group (the public) suggested that I hand it over, then I did.

The sheriff who tried to grab the equipment never said anything about illegal audio. He took the equipment to the judges chambers and emerged about two minutes later with the the judge, who requested that I delete the audio. Which I agreed to.

Previously, a different sheriff with blond hair gave me a hard time about recording. He insisted that I knew how to delete audio in the field, and became really angry when I said I didn't know how to delete audio in the field.

...We can only guess at why information from a public hearing makes our civil servants so angry...
******************************************************
But the real story is about Kofi and C'Lynn, and their family, headed by Carollynn, and the black community, and anyone who has or cares about children.

The reason that DHS says they took her grandchildren is because 1)Her house is too small; 2)She's too old; and 3)She can't protect the kids from their mother.
Well, Carollynn has a four bedroom house which passed a state inspection. Claiming that she's too old is illegal. And as far as protecting her kids from their mother.....I have asked Carollynn what that's about and she said that there's nothing there. In all the news articles and such about this story, I have never found anything about it either. It appears to be pure speculation, or something, on the part of DHS. So, folks, these appear to be the best "charges" that the state has against Carollynn, and, they are just air. I can't go into detail, but I have reason to believe that the "real" reason is a vendetta. I was hoping that I could find out more at the hearing, but the judge never said anything about why the state took Carollynn's grandchildren....

For anyone interested, it was actually the Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) who stood in the way of the children coming home. I'm not sure what they objected to....but they had enough power to reverse everything. The way this court system works is to give all the power to the agencies. This is based on the theory that the various agencies are the "closest" to the issues, and so know more. The role of the judge is mainly just to make sure that the laws are followed. However, at this 10/30 hearing, the judge said that it was her goal to push in the direction of keeping the kids in the strangers' home....

Slavery is a very serious word/concept, which is most serious to those most affected. The word "slavery" is not used lightly, especially by the black community. But in covering this story, I have heard it referred to FOUR times, each time with clear humility.

This doesn't happen in a void. This town is loaded with similar stories, as well as Philadelphia (black children removed from homes at high rates), and also South Dakota (Native children removed from home at high rates).

I would like what I'm hearing about slavery to not be true, but to date, I haven't seen any real reason why Kofi and C'Lynn were snatched.
Yvette Maranowski