5 ms·

Normally I would assume they had followed up and ensured they were not just accusations, but a confirmed history. But, this is CPS we're talking about. They ta

by mod 10y ago

Normally I would assume they had followed up and ensured they were not just accusations, but a confirmed history. But, this is CPS we're talking about. They take a lot of kids out of a lot of homes for a lot of sub-par reasons.

danieltillett 10y ago
I can’t imagine much investigation could have been done in one day.
- DanBC 10y ago
  You don't know if they already have a file on him. EDIT: Don't they have to go in front of a judge and persuade the court that nothing else will do?
  - danieltillett 10y ago
    Assuming the accusation was made in the past then yes they would have a file on him, but he appears to not have been convicted of the offence. I can’t see how it would have been possible to have had the case heard in court given CPS was unaware of the situation until the live streaming and took the baby one day later. As someone with children I would hope it would take a little more than an accusation from a potentially disgruntled ex-partner to have CPS to swoop in and remove my children from their mother.
    - DanBC 10y ago
      First of all this is likely to be a temporary removal to address immediate risk while an investigation and court case is ongoing. In England this could be voluntary, but would need to go in front of a judge if the parents did not agree to it. There's a reasonably high bar to do this, because of the child's convention rights. Also, I can't speak much about the US system, but in the UK it's possible to not be convicted of a crime and still have your children removed for that crime. (I'll find an English case that illustrates this later). This is because criminal courts use "beyond all reasonable doubt" and family courts use "balance of probabilities". (Yes, it's weird. There are some extra protections in place because of this. Removing children is a measure of last resort and should only happen when nothing else will do.) > I can’t see how it would have been possible to have had the case heard in court given CPS was unaware of the situation until the live streaming and took the baby one day later. In the UK there are emergency applications for temporary removals, and long drawn out cases for other removals. Judges are happy to refuse unless the standards have been met, even if the parents are difficult people. EDIT: very roughly: here's a case where the father was accused of sexually abusing his children; he was prosecuted for it and acquitted; the family court had a "finding of fact" session and said that he did in fact do it and child protection followed on. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2016/B95.html http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2016/B95.html
      - danieltillett 10y ago
        There is a huge difference between a court using the balance of probability in a case of sexual abuse and a third party accusation made against the father for domestic abuse and the CPS swooping in and removing the baby from the mother one day after birth.
        DanBC 10y ago
        Well, we seem to be talking past each other at this point. You seem to think this is a permanent removal based only on a single 3rd party allegation. I'm telling you that didn't happen. It's not a permanent removal; and they had more information than that.
        danieltillett 10y ago
        No I don't think it is permanent, I just think it should never have happened without a serious investigation.

by mod 10y ago

danieltillett 10y ago

I can’t imagine much investigation could have been done in one day.

DanBC 10y ago
You don't know if they already have a file on him. EDIT: Don't they have to go in front of a judge and persuade the court that nothing else will do?
- danieltillett 10y ago
  Assuming the accusation was made in the past then yes they would have a file on him, but he appears to not have been convicted of the offence. I can’t see how it would have been possible to have had the case heard in court given CPS was unaware of the situation until the live streaming and took the baby one day later. As someone with children I would hope it would take a little more than an accusation from a potentially disgruntled ex-partner to have CPS to swoop in and remove my children from their mother.
  - DanBC 10y ago
    First of all this is likely to be a temporary removal to address immediate risk while an investigation and court case is ongoing. In England this could be voluntary, but would need to go in front of a judge if the parents did not agree to it. There's a reasonably high bar to do this, because of the child's convention rights. Also, I can't speak much about the US system, but in the UK it's possible to not be convicted of a crime and still have your children removed for that crime. (I'll find an English case that illustrates this later). This is because criminal courts use "beyond all reasonable doubt" and family courts use "balance of probabilities". (Yes, it's weird. There are some extra protections in place because of this. Removing children is a measure of last resort and should only happen when nothing else will do.) > I can’t see how it would have been possible to have had the case heard in court given CPS was unaware of the situation until the live streaming and took the baby one day later. In the UK there are emergency applications for temporary removals, and long drawn out cases for other removals. Judges are happy to refuse unless the standards have been met, even if the parents are difficult people. EDIT: very roughly: here's a case where the father was accused of sexually abusing his children; he was prosecuted for it and acquitted; the family court had a "finding of fact" session and said that he did in fact do it and child protection followed on. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2016/B95.html http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2016/B95.html
    - danieltillett 10y ago
      There is a huge difference between a court using the balance of probability in a case of sexual abuse and a third party accusation made against the father for domestic abuse and the CPS swooping in and removing the baby from the mother one day after birth.
      - DanBC 10y ago
        Well, we seem to be talking past each other at this point. You seem to think this is a permanent removal based only on a single 3rd party allegation. I'm telling you that didn't happen. It's not a permanent removal; and they had more information than that.
        danieltillett 10y ago
        No I don't think it is permanent, I just think it should never have happened without a serious investigation.