help
collapse
Press one of the expand buttons to see the full text of an article. Later press collapse to revert to the original form. The buttons below expand or collapse all articles.
expand
collapse
Politically Incorrect Family Destroyed
February 12, 2010 permalink
The two children of a Manitoba couple, victims of a shotgun divorce after discovery of neo-Nazi behavior, have become wards of the province. Earlier stories: June 9, 2008 and May 27, 2009.
expand
collapse
Foster care approved for kids in neo-Nazi case
Last Updated: Thursday, February 11, 2010 | 1:23 PM CT, CBC News
The Manitoba government has won permanent guardianship of two children whose parents were accused of teaching them neo-Nazi beliefs.
A Court of Queen's Bench judge has ordered that the boy and girl remain in the custody of Child and Family Services (CFS), which has placed them in foster care with a relative.
The court also dismissed a constitutional challenge from the father, who argued the government violated his right to raise the children according to his beliefs. He is the stepfather of the girl, now nine, and the biological father of the boy, now four years old.
To protect the identities of the children, no one involved in the case can be named.
The children were removed from their home in 2008 after the girl showed up at her elementary school with racist writings and symbols on her skin.
The government agency argued the children were emotionally harmed and were also being raised in squalor and suffering from neglect.
Girl described how to kill: social worker
During the trial of the custody issue last year, social workers testified the girl had said her parents hated people who were not white and talked of racial violence.
Social workers testified she used racial epithets to describe blacks, Asians, aboriginals and other minorities. One worker told the court the girl calmly described how black people could be killed with a ball and chain.
The father admitted to using Nazi salutes and telling the children that only white people belong in Canada. But he told the court his beliefs do not amount to racism and he never preached violence.
The mother, who now lives in another province, attended court infrequently, saying she could not afford the travel. In June, she testified that her estranged husband wasn't fit to be a parent, saying he was a heavy drinker and had been suicidal.
She also accused social workers of putting words in her daughter's mouth and said she never preached hatred to her children. The mother testified she wanted to co-operate with CFS officials in an effort to one day regain custody.
At one point, the mother appeared in court in shackles after being charged with a number of fraud-related crimes.
Appeals planned
In an email to CBC News on Thursday, the mother said she supported the decision not to grant custody to the father, but does not support a permanent order. She intends to appeal the decision.
"I deny any allegation of abandonment and will state that based on the judge's writings that she had made up her mind prior to the final arguments," she wrote.
"If she had paid attention to the evidence as opposed to [hearsay] from third parties speaking for a child that had no voice at the trial [and who were] never present in my home, then I believe her decision would be different.
"This is communism, state-sanctioned theft of children to punish their parents based solely on an alleged belief system. The social workers have stated that it is not their job to investigate the accusations through evidence, that [hearsay] is all that they need.
"Apparently the judge was in agreement with that. I am already working on my appeal."
The father's lawyer said they will review the judge's decision and plan an appeal. She described her client as being "very disappointed" with the verdict.
The father immediately loses any visitation rights with the children. Up until Thursday, he was allowed one supervised two-hour visit a week with them.
With files from The Canadian Press
Source: CBC
Alice Daniels comments:
February 12, 2010
I find this decision extremely distasteful, and very upsetting. This judge has now set a precedent where any child services can remove children based on religion, and beliefs, it is a very slippery slope this is.
I am very familiar with the case, and I have seen the apartment they say was in squalor and that is a bunch of crap, there is no way it was in that much of a disarray. You will always find something never mind how big or small if you are the one looing to ensure that you find something.
The mother has never preached violence to these children, the father may have as I have had next to no contact with him, but I do agree that he isnt in a position to parent the children but not because of his belief's but because of his behaviour around alcohol and other things.
I am thinking we are going to have to be extremely watchful over the next few months to see how many other provinces child welfare services jump on this band wagon and start kidnapping children based on the parents beliefs.
Source: email from Alice Daniels
Addendum: Appeal denied.
expand
collapse
Neo-Nazi custody case appeal refused
Manitoba's highest court has refused to allow a father accused of teaching his kids neo-Nazi beliefs to appeal a custody order giving the state permanent custody of them.
A Court of Queen's Bench justice granted Child and Family Services (CFS) guardianship of the father's nine-year-old stepdaughter and four-year-old biological son in February after a lengthy and high profile trial last year.
The father was seeking permission from the Manitoba Court of Appeal to get more time to file the necessary paperwork to fight the custody order, but the court refused that request saying the arguments he planned to make in his appeal had no merit.
"In short, none of the arguments raise an arguable ground of appeal," Justice Freda Steel ruled in a 15-page written decision released to the public Tuesday.
The children were removed from their Winnipeg home in 2008 after the girl showed up at her elementary school with racist writings and symbols on her skin.
Lawyers for CFS argued the children were emotionally harmed and were also being raised in squalor and suffering from neglect.
A sweeping ban on the case prevents the publication of any information that could lead people to identify the children, who now live in the care of their aunt, a social worker.
In her decision, Steel noted that the father missed the deadline to file his appeal by three days, and many other parties in the case weren't served with a notice of his intention to fight the lower court's order until well after that.
The father told court the delay in filing was inadvertent, but also complicated by a delay in getting legal funding. Legal Aid Manitoba only agreed to pay for his appeal on June 30, about three months after the missed deadline.
Steel wrote the court had to take into account the welfare of the children when deciding whether to allow the appeal to go ahead.
"Delay is of particular concern in child-protection proceedings where an expeditious resolution and permanency planning are in the child's best interests," she wrote. "Such a consideration is no different than considering prejudice would result to the other party, except here, that party is not the opposing party, but the children involved in the case," she stated.
Parents talked of racial violence: social workers
During the trial of the custody issue last year, social workers testified the girl had said her parents hated people who were not white and talked of racial violence.
Social workers testified she used racial epithets to describe blacks, Asians, aboriginals and other minorities. One worker told the court the girl calmly described how black people could be killed with a ball and chain.
The father admitted to using Nazi salutes and telling the children that only white people belong in Canada. But he told the court his beliefs do not amount to racism and he never preached violence.
Steel wrote that the trial judge's decision to grant custody to the state was the correct one in the case.
There was "abundant" evidence to show the father is unfit to care for the two kids, she said.
"In deciding that the children were in continuing need of protection, the trial judge reviewed [the father's] history of violence, criminality, neglect of the children, drug and alcohol abuse, the living condition of the children … and his proposed parenting plan," Steel stated.
"A review of the reasons and references to the evidence supporting them make it clear there was abundant evidence to support the trial judge's conclusion."
Source: CBC
