Posts Tagged ‘Children’s Rights’
In CFSA Case, Nickles Plays Defense
This morning, D.C.’s Child and Family Services Agency was once again the subject of a U.S. District Court hearing. The issue before Judge Thomas F. Hogan: Whether to hold the city in contempt for violating his court order and failing to meet stipulated benchmarks.
The plaintiff’s, Children’s Rights, a New York-based advocacy law firm which specializes in exposing troubled child welfare agencies and turning them around, was in its element. The District’s lawyers were no match for Children’s Rights founder and executive director Marcia Lowry. While both sides disputed whether or not the agency met those benchmarks—with the city attorney lamely complaining that some of the benchmarks were too difficult to meet—Hogan seemed most annoyed with point No. 4 of his stipulated order. It stated that the city must consult with the assigned court monitor as well as Lowry’s group during the selection of a new CFSA director.
Lowry had contended that Children’s Rights was not consulted. Hogan stated from the bench that the city had “blatantly” failed to comply with this aspect of his court order.
This evening, Loose Lips (aka Mike DeBonis) reached AG Peter Nickles and asked him to comment on Hogan’s statements. Let’s just say Nickles argument was less than legalistic. His response was all about feelings.
Judge Hogan Critical Of CFSA Director Selection Process
This morning in U.S. District Court, Judge Thomas F. Hogan took up the on-going legal battle over the District’s Child and Family Services Agency. At issue was whether or not the agency could be held in contempt. Hogan devoted much of his consternation on the how the District went about picking Dr. Roque Gerald (pictured) to head up CFSA.
At the time of Dr. Gerald’s selection, City Desk questioned whether the District violated Hogan’s order. We wrote:
Read More “Judge Hogan Critical Of CFSA Director Selection Process” »
Banita Jacks Case: Breakdowns, Lies, And Laziness
Yesterday, more than a year after Banita Jacks was arrested for murdering her girls, the D.C. Inspector General has issued its comprehensive report. The full report is available online and is a must read for anyone who actually thinks CFSA needs less oversight, less court involvement.
The IG’s office provides a timeline of events. Here’s what caught my eye:
- May 1, 2007: A CFSA “Investigations Worker” and a D.C. cop visit the Jacks house. No one answers the door. But old junk mail is observed—the same junk mail from a previous visit—in front of the door. Also still at the door: a letter previously left by the CFSA worker.
- May 2, 2007: The CFSA worker goes to the house. Again, no one answers the door.
- May 16, 2007: Investigations Worker erroneously believes that the family has relocated to Charles County, Maryland. This came from another government worker. “Therefore recommends to his supervisor that the investigation be closed,” the report states. “CFSA closes the case, and the Investigations Worker then sends a fax to Charles County Child Protective Services…”
Read More “Banita Jacks Case: Breakdowns, Lies, And Laziness” »
Did CFSA Director Search Violate Court Order?
In July, Children’s Rights, the New York-based group behind a long-standing lawsuit against the District over its handling of children filed a contempt motion in U.S. District Court over the pre-and-post-Banita Jacks troubles at CFSA. The court battle over CFSA continues to be hot.
Last fall, U.S. District Court Judge Thomas F. Hogan issued an order stipulating a series of directives. One of those stipulations involved the future selection of a permanent director at CFSA. On Tuesday, Fenty announced his selection of interim director Roque Gerald to take over in a permanent capacity. Hogan had stipulated that “the Court Monitor and Plaintiffs will be included in the selection process for the permanent Director.”
It is that order that is now being seriously questioned. When appointing top posts, Fenty isn’t known as a big outreach guy. His appointment of Chief Cathy Lanier is exhibit A. Now his selection of Gerald is coming under scrutiny.
The Plaintiffs–Children’s Rights–say they were never consulted during the selection process. “We were not included in the process and I think given the problems the agency has had over the last several years the choice of the director was critically important,” says Children’s Rights Executive Director Marcia Robinson Lowry. She adds that this violated the court order.
