| Continuing updates page |
| September 24, 2005 Sunday I have not had much of a chance to get on line to update things, because I have finally been able to be with my daughter through a long battle in the court room and the "co-operation" of the ICPC that took from April to September, well, actually longer than that because we requested this last year in July and asked that our daughter be placed with family immediately when all this started. Now, finally, a year and a half later, my daughter is finally with family. I get to see her often as well as my husband. She has been here for two weeks now and she is doing just fine. One step over, now we can breathe for a little bit. The next step may take a while, but I hope to be a possitive one very soon. I pray for all of those that may be in a similar situation as I and hope that their pain is not as much as my own. |
| May 21, 2006 Sunday I have found out scientifically that I have been correct about my husband, the counselor that has determined this after observations, counceling sessions, and testing of the abel screening and the polygraph, not to mention other test that they use to determine things. She states and I quote "I am more worried about "him" with his health than I am of him reoffending." and "He does not fit the normal description of an offender in many other aspects." These things were told to us during a group session. June 11, 2006 Sunday The councelor has written a statement to give to the "offical" people stating her findings about my husband. We are waiting now for the court date to see what the "team" thinks of these results. I know that this "team" has been everything but professional and that they have been using their state given power to do things with this case, that in the words of "others", "this case should have never been opened to begin with" But for the record, my husband and I have fulfilled the case plans and he has been determined to be telling the truth in his convictions by scientific means of the polygraph. He has passed the abel screening, a test that determines sexual arousal patterns, he was determined to be normal for a 33 year old male.... so, I was right... if I was not right, I would have been more than happy to admit to it and divorce him. But the choice was mine to start with, I made an educated, God-guided decision to be with him, perhaps now others will be able to accept my choice.... not that it matters what others think, I am living my life for Jesus Christ. I had to bear the cross all this time as I will in the future, but at least I know that Jesus has always been on my side. Like the footprints poem... |
| July 27, 2006 Thursday I have just received word that the state of MO is still sitting on this case. It was unfortunate that my lawyer and my mom in law lawyer could not make the hearing. Apparently the DFS people made it recorded that my mom in law would be granted guardianship under FL supervision, but they have not released jurisidiction to FL completely. Not to mention that this was just words out of DFS mouth, not out of the judge, so no ruling, no court order. (DFS is department of family services) It was also decided that the case would be reviewed in five months! I don't know what is going on here, but I wish that something would be done about it! I want my children home, where they belong! |
| September 22, 2006 Friday Today we finally get official document from the courts. For the sake of legal issues, I am not going to post this document on this site, just as I have not in the past, nor have I used names in any of my postings. This document states that the case is now closed, terminated and that all files be not only sealed, but destroyed. This tells me that they have something to hide and they know it. We will be procecuting them now. The tables are going to be turned. My daughter is no longer under their jurisdiction, but she still is not home. The determination of this document was apparently a deal that my mother in law's lawyer and the judge worked out. It was agreed that if my mother in law was able to at least obtain a file number in the court for her to obtain legal guardianship, then they (MO) would release the case. This did happen after a long battle on my mother in laws end. She fought with the Department of Child and family here; they said that her filing the papers here was not necessary, that MO could do it on their end. While MO said that they would not do it for whatever reason. After fighting back and forth and MO saying that if it wasn't taken care of by a certain date, that they would demand my daughter back in MO. Well, she got what they were looking for and they upheld their end of the bargin. However, this is not finished. My daughters are still not home. My husband is getting a hold of the ACLU to notify them that they my proceed with this case to the fullest of extent. He is also getting in contact of the newspaper reporter froom the St. Louis Post to proceed with the story. I wish that I can get more media in this. The paper fromt he court also stated that I, and I alone, would be "taxed" for any court costs. I feel that they shoudl be paying me for all the pain and suffering that has incurred over the past three years because of htem.not me paying them for their "services". The fight continues........... |