9 Year Old Begs to go Home

[Supernovae]

He hasn't been out for five years yet.

 

[Supernovae]

I don't know the full background but having a child go off the rails isn't the same as having an extensive criminal history yourself, including in the child's early years plus a longstanding history of dysfunction across multiple (most?) family members. In any case none of this addresses the point that it was the authorities who approved the placement with the Hodgin's for years on end and were presumably responsible for making sure background checks were done, or the point that uprooting her at the age of nine can't have been in her interests unless the Hodgins were apocalyptically bad parents. It just illustrates your desire to romanticise the birth family based on a very short hiatus in criminal activity and dysfunction.

 

[GoBrewers]

People need to give up the idiotic stance on "blood is thicker than water." I'm adopted and am thankful every day i spend time with my true parents. Nearly anyone can have a kid, but taking care and giving them an environment to succeed in is something that is earned. The justice system fails on a morality obligation that makes no sense. My mom didn't give birth to me, but she loves me and cared for me better than anyone else ever could have. Love is better than blood.

 

[MyBelle]

I posted on night shift, I also saw a post made by you saying go on John Mccaul commit a crime. You stated what the chances of reoffending within 5 years, well he has not done that. It looks like fighting to get and keep his daughter is making him change and be a good father. Something David Hodgin wasn't with his daughter Brandi.

The court didn't release the details as to why the state of Tennessee has decided the Hodgins are not suitable foster parents but it could have something to do with their own failures as biological parents. Until they release more, I can't form an opinion about their parenting skills but I think their campaign is vilify Mr. McCaul has failed to impress the court. The idea that he must be persecuted because he's managed to clean up his act is laughably extreme and is in the same category as those getting twisted over the parade float depicting Obama in an outhouse. No foster agency would intentionally place a child in such a household.

I'm baffled why anyone would spend so much time opining how dangerous John McCaul is when he hasn't committed any offense in years but if that's how some wish to waste their time, they have the right to do so. afaik, the sky still isn't falling....

JMO

 

[Supernovae]

The court didn't release the details as to why the state of Tennessee has decided the Hodgins are not suitable foster parents but it could have something to do with their own failures as biological parents. Until they release more, I can't form an opinion about their parenting skills but I think their campaign is vilify Mr. McCaul has failed to impress the court. The idea that he must be persecuted because he's managed to clean up his act is laughably extreme and is in the same category as those getting twisted over the parade float depicting Obama in an outhouse. No foster agency would intentionally place a child in such a household.

I'm baffled why anyone would spend so much time opining how dangerous John McCaul is when he hasn't committed any offense in years but if that's how some wish to waste their time, they have the right to do so. afaik, the sky still isn't falling....

JMO

BBM.

He's been in prison for most of those recent years. And he could be a model saint but that doesn't make uprooting a nine year old from the only home she can really remember in her interests.

 

[MyBelle]

BBM.

He's been in prison for most of those recent years. And he could be a model saint but that doesn't make uprooting a nine year old from the only home she can really remember in her interests.

BBM. Should a child be kept in a foster home that child protective services has determined isn't suitable?

The Judge concluded removal of the child from foster parents the state of Tennessee has determined are no longer suitable. I can't find fault in the Judge's decision.

JMO

 

[kittymeow]

Big day in court tomorrow. The Hodgins get to see an old friend Judge Jackson. He isn't happy with them. Very interested to see how things will go.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Big day in court tomorrow. The Hodgins get to see an old friend Judge Jackson. He isn't happy with them. Very interested to see how things will go.

Should prove interesting...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MyBelle]

Should prove interesting...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jurisdiction is moving to Nebraska, where the child has been living for months.

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2014/09/02/judge-sends-sonya-case-nebraska/14971045/

 

[PaulaSB]

on the 16th September Judge Burch denied the Hodgins fourth attempt to tpr and adopt Sonya Mccaul on the 1st October the BSH group asked for more donations then said the adoption had failed again. They also petitioned to have the 29th January verdict overturned on the technicality over the words Custody and placement despite the fact that this had been sorted out at the request of their lawyer on 5th february

With all the lies floating around, we think it's time for a Public Service Announcement to help warn those good hearted people with good intentions who might be tempted to donate money to BSH. While it is their business to donate to whomever they like, we think they should at least be given FULL DISCLOSURE and warned that their money will be used to try and force a little girl into an adoption she neither wants, nor needs. In fact, according to the UCAPA, it looks like the Hodgins actions (and anyone who assisted them in playing "keep away" for the last 8+ years) fall under the definition of "abduction", so in essence any money donated to BSH for the Hodgins, is supporting the "abduction" of SJM.

That being said, here's the facts:

On or about January 29, 2014, Judge Jackson placed SJM back with her father in Nebraska.

On or about February 5, 2014 there was a hearing due to the Hodgins attorney filing a Motion for Clarification because of a concern in wording used during Judge Jackson's Oral & Written rulings.

On or about August 28, 2014, Judge Jackson ruled that the Hodgins KNEW that reunification was always the plan for SJM & for them to say otherwise is a falsehood; that SJM's grandmother was going to get SJM, but the Hodgins "went down the hill" to prevent it; and that Tennessee never had jurisdiction over SJM and transferred custody of SJM from the Tennessee Department of Children's Services to the Nebraska Division of Children and Family Services;

On or about September 16, 2014, Judge Burch DISMISSED the Hodgins petition to terminate Mr. McCaul's parental rights & adopt SJM, stating "Plaintiffs do not have standing to bring this action."

On or about September 26, 2014 Judge Burch ruled that the transfer of SJM to Nebraska was illegal and "must be vacated" because of a contradiction in the words' custody" and "placement" in Judge Jackson's Oral & Written rulings. The interesting thing about this ruling, is that the Hodgins & their attorney presented this Motion to Vacate Judge Jackson's January 29th ruling to Judge Burch, KNOWING FULL WELL THAT JUDGE JACKSON HAD ALREADY CLARIFIED HIS RULING ON THE RECORD on February 5, 2014! Let's lay that out again... the Hodgins and their attorney filed a Motion to Vacate Judge Jackson's January 29th ruling (trying to get it thrown out so they could get their hands on SJM again) KNOWING it had already been clarified ON THE RECORD by Judge Jackson on February 5, 2014, so they INTENTIONALLY MISLED Judge Burch into making this ruling based on their DELIBERATE failure to inform him that the matter had already been CLARIFIED AND SETTLED for SEVEN MONTHS!

https://www.facebook.com/634232666614703/photos/pcb.735714293133206/735713676466601/?type=1&theater

 

[MyBelle]

Attorneys play these games with jurisdiction and it is the children in the middle who suffer. The Judges will sort it out. While the child went to Tennessee with her father's permission, he did not give the babysitter permission to keep her or to hand her off to someone else. It puzzles me why federal kidnapping charges have not been applied.
JMO

http://www.wowt.com/home/headlines/Custody-Battle-in-Legal-Limbo-278861791.html

 

[gitana1]

And yet here we are 5 years later he is still not arrested she is a straight a student and dcs ont thin being with the hodgins is good for her
http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...n-judge-rules-year-old-stay-nebraska/9182089/
Originally she wanted to visit them but no she doesn't I amsure by now she has found out the lies they have been telling people the fact that the HODGINS who claim to love her have put her in danger and tht they broke rules saying foster parents cant do what they have make money on her spash her name and face all over the media how is that helpful to her. The only people the H's think about are David and Kim which is probably why he did such a crap job of raising Brandi

The child has been with hhim for only months. He has only been out of prison for about a year. Not sure where you are getting five years from. He went to prison for 7.5 years. He's only been out awhile. He has plenty of time to reoffend.

That being said, recidivism rates may be skewed when looking at age. Older ex-cons don't commit as many crimes as younger ones from what I've read over the years.

 

[K_Z]

Attorneys play these games with jurisdiction and it is the children in the middle who suffer. The Judges will sort it out. While the child went to Tennessee with her father's permission, he did not give the babysitter permission to keep her or to hand her off to someone else. It puzzles me why federal kidnapping charges have not been applied. JMO

http://www.wowt.com/home/headlines/Custody-Battle-in-Legal-Limbo-278861791.html

BBM. Kidnapping charges have never been filed because S**** was never kidnapped. She was found to be abandoned (and neglected) by her custodial parent by DCS and the court before the Hodgins legally adopted her. She was in the custody of the State of Tennessee due to abandonment and neglect, followed by John McCaul being sentenced to prison for 15 years (which allows statutory termination of parental rights for children under age 8). John McCaul's consent was not required for the State of Tennessee to take custody.

http://tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2009/sjm_112309.pdf


Hopefully, the Tennessee appeals court will make a decision soon.

I'm glad to hear Judge Andy Jackson is no longer on the job. That's somewhat encouraging, IMO.

 

[MyBelle]

BBM. Kidnapping charges have never been filed because S**** was never kidnapped. She was found to be abandoned (and neglected) by her custodial parent by DCS and the court before the Hodgins legally adopted her. She was in the custody of the State of Tennessee due to abandonment and neglect, followed by John McCaul being sentenced to prison for 15 years (which allows statutory termination of parental rights for children under age 8). John McCaul's consent was not required for the State of Tennessee to take custody.

http://tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2009/sjm_112309.pdf


Hopefully, the Tennessee appeals court will make a decision soon.

I'm glad to hear Judge Andy Jackson is no longer on the job. That's somewhat encouraging, IMO.

Judge Jackson had a duty to enforce the provisions of the federal uniform child custody act. I'll be shocked if the Appellate Court disagrees with him.

The child was abandoned in Tennessee by a babysitter, not by her parent. At the time she was taken to Tennessee by the babysitter, both of the child's parents lived in Nebraska.

Removal of the child from her custodial parent could be a kidnapping according to the federal statute found at Title 18, United States Code, Section 1201. That statute applies to any person, "except in the case of a minor by the parent thereof" who kidnaps, abducts or carries away another person.

http://www.uniformlaws.org/Act.aspx?title=Child+Custody+Jurisdiction+and+Enforcement+Act

The kidnapping took place prior to Tennessee DCS getting involved. The babysitter and her mother are lucky they were not prosecuted.

The Judge determined Tennessee DCS should not have gotten involved in the first place because at the time, the child was living with her custodial parent in Nebraska.

Under the UCCJE Act, the custodial state is where the child resides with a parent, not the state someone absconds to and then gives the child away to strangers.

The Court overturned the adoption. That's a done deal. The appellate court is determining state jurisdiction of custody. Two very different things. The child remains in Nebraska and is in the custody of Tennessee DCS, who have told the court they will never return the child to the foster parents. Tennessee DCS wants to hand over custody to Nebraska DCS.

JMO

http://www.wowt.com/home/headlines/Custody-Battle-in-Legal-Limbo-278861791.html

 

[MyBelle]

The child has been with hhim for only months. He has only been out of prison for about a year. Not sure where you are getting five years from. He went to prison for 7.5 years. He's only been out awhile. He has plenty of time to reoffend.

That being said, recidivism rates may be skewed when looking at age. Older ex-cons don't commit as many crimes as younger ones from what I've read over the years.

I think this is why the child is living with her father but still in the custody and being monitored by the state.

JMO

 

[PaulaSB]

Judge Burch has refused to reconsider his denied adoption petition

http://wdkn.com/judge-refuses-to-re...etition-to-terminate-mccauls-parental-rights/
A judge denied a motion to reconsider his previous rejection of the latest petition to terminate the parental rights of Sonya McCaul’s biological father, saying there was nothing new to argue. At a hearing in Dickson County Chancery Court last week, retired Chancellor Robert Burch said all of the claims in a motion to amend or alter his previous ruling against the petition by Kim and David Hodgin have already been litigated. Attorneys for the former foster parents filed a motion asking Burch to reconsider his denial based on elements they claimed had not been considered in his previous ruling. Despite having retired Sept. 1, Burch still has several dates to return to the bench to rule on issues regarding cases over which he has presided. In a very brief hearing last Thursday in Charlotte, Burch said he is not going to continue hearing arguments over the same points and denied the petition to amend his previous ruling dismissing the Hodgins’ request to terminate John McCaul’s parental rights based on his original prison sentence and to allow the Dickson County couple to again adopt the 10-year-old girl who lived in their home for eight years. As of Wednesday, the Hodgins have not filed a notice of appeal of Burch’s latest ruling. Sonya remains in Nebraska with her father where a McCaul family attorney told an Omaha television station she is “excelling as a student and is socially well adjusted.” A Douglas County juvenile judge has delayed a hearing on a petition by the Hodgins seeking standing in the Nebraska courts until the Tennessee Court of Appeals rules on an appeal regarding Judge Andy Jackson’s August decision to transfer custody of Sonya from Tennessee to Nebraska.

 

[K_Z]

Finally, some good news in this nightmare of a case. This is from Oct 31.

A new judge reviewing Sonya's case wants her returned to Tennessee. He said the ruling in January that sent her to Nebraska was illegal.

Circuit Court Judge Robert Burch recently ruled that sending Sonya to Nebraska without a hearing was illegal. Burch said Sonya should be returned to Tennessee.

State Rep. Sherry Jones said DCS also acted illegally.

"They were totally wrong on that and I hope they get themselves together and finally do the right thing for Sonya," Jones said.

Jones said DCS would never do what they did to Sonya to one of their own family members.

DCS said Sonya will remain in their custody in Nebraska until the state decides whether to take the case or give it back to Tennessee. That should happen in a few weeks.

Channel 4 reached out to McCaul's attorney, Lynn Coffinberry. She did not provide a statement by deadline.

Read more: http://www.wsmv.com/story/27170033/...attle-could-return-to-tennessee#ixzz3IWLQtMdA

I would be so great just to get Sonya back to Tennessee-- even if it was with a different foster family, and not the Hodgins. It would be a beginning to ending this nightmare, and righting all these tremendous wrongs, IMO.

I am still so appalled that such a thing could even happen. Obviously, the laws written to terminate parental rights for parents with sole custody, and lengthy prison sentences, were well intentioned, and morally just, IMO. No one wanted those children sentenced to their entire childhoods in foster care. It is f@#! ups this this that make the general public nervous about adopting kids out of foster care, IMO. As a foster to adopt parent, you can do everything right, legally, and by the book, and then some stupid loophole screws it all up for the child. It seems like children have no rights, despite the lip service.

A loophole that allows a career criminal to give previously withheld information (lies of omission) to solve a murder, that shortens his prison sentence, should never have been a foundation upon which to rip a child from the only home and family she had ever known, who was legally fostered and legally adopted, and deliver her into the arms of a career felon with multiple episodes of incarceration. It's beyond injustice, IMO. The best interests of the child were never considered.

I hope very much that there is a court order bringing Sonya back to Tennessee. Anything is better than where she is now, IMO.

 

[PaulaSB]

She was not legally adopted, she has stated through her GAL that she is happy and loves her family and doesn't want to go back. So after the move and how she has been helped to settle you want her moved to strangers.

 

[tiredblondy]

Dear Lord, please protect and bless this little girl, because it is obvious the adults who are responsible for protecting and taking care of her can not! ( I'm talking about the legal processes and DCF !)

On another note I cannot believe she was moved from one state to another without the complete legal hearing processes. That is unbelievable...I personally don't care what the circumstances were, a precious child was taken from a stable loving environment and moved away from all her support to another state.

When my ex husband and I were trying to adopt we were told we would get a little 6 yr old girl. Once the foster family realized she was going to be adopted they could not bear to lose her and wanted to adopt her. We stopped the process immediately because that child was in an environment were she was loved and stable.

The adoption agency was upset but I did not hesitate to explain from my experience working with children that the child was my utmost priority not us. If it could be worked out that she could be adopted by the foster family who had had her for 4 years they had my blessings. So happens it did.
The feelings of the adults are the last thing I care about. That child needs a GAL and close monitoring.

In my opinion she should have never been uprooted without a year of visitations and planning. This is not about the foster parents or the dad and his extended family! This is about uprooting a child suddenly and dropping her in a situation where she knows no one without any preparation! It not about whether she's happy now or was happy. It's about who and where her future is secure. It's about where she can be safe and loved, no matter what comes her way. Why in Heaven if she is in a stable situation and it is true she does not want to go back would she be uprooted and sent back? She has been uprooted once....the legal system making the decisions better make sure and understand she is their responsibility.

This is my opinion and that's all I have to say.

 

[Jan]

If the girl is happy and doing well where she is now and wants to stay there, then I think that is where she should stay.