Sorry, I think that if two people would have smelled the amount of gas fumes in that house, they would have validated their impressions with one another and decided to kick the door in. Especially, after hearing one of the children crying and screaming.
Nowhere is it reported that either child was screaming. Crying, yes, but not screaming. I'd like to not see that unless supported by MSM because it gives me nightmares.
I've seen a couple of references that this lady was "not a social worker." Where is that information coming from?
The term "social worker" is often mis-used. A social worker is someone who has a degree in social work. He/she is then subject to licensure. It is a profession, not a particular job.
Social workers work in many areas, including supervised visitation, including contractual situations. So because someone is contracted with CPS to supervise visitation, that does not mean he/she is not a social worker.
Much MSM has referred to this lady as a "social worker." Of course, they may be wrong, but if they are, where is the link correcting this information?
My family (father, brother and mother) were and are social workers. I am a family law attorney. So, I am sadly, ridiculously familiar with supervised visitation, in various forms, as well as the centers that provide it.
I have never heard of a licensed social worker working for a visitation center. The workers at such places get paid little more than minimum wage. Maybe about 10 bucks an hour. Here's more:
Shortly after noon Sunday, authorities were called to Powell's Graham rental house for reports of a fire. A contract worker hired by the state to provide transportation and monitor the visits between Powell and his sons was among the first 911 calls, and reported to police and her supervisors that Powell whisked the children in and slammed the door in her face moments before the fire erupted.
The worker has not been identified by Child Protective Services, but is described as working with Powell and the Cox family for several months. Foster Care Resource Network, which contracts with the state to work with foster children, adoptive parents and caregivers in Pierce and Kitsap counties, did not return calls Monday.
The worker drove the two boys from the Cox house to visit with Powell for four hours every Wednesday and Sunday, Hill said. The Sunday visits were at Powell's home. During the visits the worker took notes about the boys' interaction with their father and was required to submit her notes to Child Protective Services within five days of the visit.
"When they have supervised visits, they [the worker] must be within sight and sound of the child and all parties during the visit," Hill said.
The state requires that all contract employees hired to handle such supervised visits have a minimum of 20 hours of training on child abuse, neglect, domestic violence and family dynamics, Hill said.
BBM.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/avantgo/2017443129.html
I truly don't mean to be disagreeable, but this situation started with the judge who put JP before the kids.
CPS was FORCED to carry out the judge's orders. And that is sad.
Not exactly true. I'm going to defend this judge. Is everyone aware that the coward had custody for almost two years after he murdered his wife? No one grabbed custody from him. The police were very concerned as was Susan's family, but DSHS did not step in.
It wasn't until the creepy father got arrested that DSHS felt there were any grounds at all to yank custody. But that arrest gave the judge the ability to act. She did. She took custody and gave it to the Coxes. She ordered supervised visits ONLY. She ordered a custody evaluation, which included psych evals of the coward.
But she, as someone else on the thread stated, has to rely on the statements of the social workers and the psychs. According to various news reports, the psych evaluating the case and DSHS felt the coward was NOT a threat to his children. That finding tied the judge's hands to a large degree. Any ruling refusing visits would have been easily appealable at that point. In fact, the coward may have been able to appeal a ruling that he not maintain custody, the way the law works today.
Even so, the judge went a step further and ordered something that is very, very rare. So rare, that I have never seen it ordered in any case I have been familiar with: A psychosexual eval. That is a very intrusive and humiliating test and the law is very careful when ordering such intrusions. The judge did it despite the risk of being appealed.
I think the judge could have done more. But she would have been at even greater risk of appeal. I feel I would have taken that chance but I feel she already took big chances with that psychosexual eval order. I think she was desperate to keep the kids from him but couldn't go too far due to reports from professionals evaluating the case. Nevertheless, she did go far and ordered this eval despite the professionals telling her the coward was safe. As a family law attorney, I can see she was bending to do what she thought she could to keep them from going back to dad.
I'd say it was a lack of critical thinking.
IMO, it was a lack of compassion and professionalism (this is in relation to the 911 dispatcher).
I must be dense.
I am going under the assumption (and yes I know that "*advertiser censored*=u=me") that this "judge" dropped the ball BIG time.
Those pics from last Wednesday with JP and his hollow and dead eyes were scary enough last Wednesday.
They became even scarier when he murdered his kids on Sunday.
Seriously....that judge was in the courtroom. IF she was paying an ounce of attention at all, she would have seen those DEAD eyes of JP.
She SHOULD have seen the evil emanating from those dead eyes that indicated he was just forming his plan to take those two boys out of this life.
I won't say more about myself and premonitions I have because I'll be criticized or it.
The coward has had those dead eyes since he murdered his wife. Yet, no one took his kids away from him for two years. He had those dead eyes in other custody hearings as well. I saw no real change in his demeanor.
You're far from dense Basmat! I think we just see it differently (and that's okay). While we as parents or careproviders of children need to learn to hone in on and use our gut instincts when it comes to the safety of our children, a judge is not entirely free to do so. They have to follow the law and abide by guidelines AND they depend very heavily on the word/evaluations of any/all therapists', GAL's, and caseworkers involved in these sort of cases. I don't think we want judges to base thier "subjective" decisions by the look on someone's face or in their eyes - JMO~
That's right. Ultimately, the coward is the person to blame. But there was a perfect storm that enabled him to act on his evil intentions.
Pretty much all of us looking at this case for two years knew he was a serious danger, from the beginning, to his kids. We talked about the possibility of him disappearing them or a murder-suicide scenario, for TWO YEARS. How could psychologists or DSHS workers NOT see that? The judge had to rely on their findings in large part and their findings were based on their subjective analysis of the situation and the amount of research and work they put into the case:
DSHS spokeswoman Sherry Hill said state social workers had no evidence that Powell was a danger to the children or himself.
"If we have a case [where] we believe someone was very dangerous, it would have been handled differently," said Hill. State child-welfare officials could have required the visitations occur in a DSHS office, or even with a police officer present.
Thomas Shapley, senior director of public affairs for DSHS, told The Salt Lake Tribune that Powell's visits with his sons initially took place at the network's offices but had been in Powell's home since Nov. 2. A decision was made that it was appropriate to have the visits in that setting, he said.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/avantgo/2017443129.html
Charles and Judith Cox knew what the professional psychologists said -- that their grandsons would be safe with their father, that Josh Powell would present no threat during the boys' court-ordered visits.
And yet. Could the professionals not see what the Coxes saw? That their daughter had been missing since 2009, and Powell was the leading person of interest in the case? What about the family stories that Powell, as a teenager, had smashed his sister's hamster to death, had threatened his mother with a knife?
The Coxes say they want to know why the boys were allowed to visit their father with only a single female social worker present, and why state officials allowed visits to occur in Powell's home.
"The psychologists said he's strange but not threatening to the children," Charles Cox said in an interview. "But I felt sure. I knew he was capable of killing himself and the children if he felt cornered enough. I was afraid of that, and I think the police were afraid of it. The plan was we would get the kids before they arrested him [if a case were made connecting him to Susan Powell's death] so he couldn't hurt them.
"But the [Child Protective Services workers] said, 'Don't worry, we've got it covered.' Well, they didn't."
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/07/nation/la-na-powell-explosion-20120207
Ultimately, it was DSHS who made the day-to-day decisions about visitation and how it would be handled and those were based in part on psych reports and opinions. The judge ordered supervised visits. They assessed the case and determined what form those visits would take. Not a danger? Huge fail, IMO.
