Girl in swastika case abandoned, grandmother testifies

Woman feared for safety of grandchildren, Manitoba court hears

Patrick White

From Saturday's Globe and Mail, Friday, May. 29, 2009 11:38PM EDT

The woman in the witness box said she wasn't a bit surprised to hear her 7-year-old granddaughter had been sent to elementary school scribbled with swastikas and other white-supremacist markings.

In fact, she told a Manitoba court Friday, she feared much worse harm would eventually come to her granddaughter and the girl's toddler brother considering the heavy-drinking, white-supremacist company her daughter kept and the urine-soaked conditions in which the family lived.

“I lay in bed at night and just worried sick about whether they're going to drink and drive with them, whether they are going to have some friends that were inappropriate into their house – things that could harm the children because they weren't always in a safe environment.”

Manitoba Child and Family Services is vying for permanent custody of the girl and her brother over concerns about the family's home life. Under Manitoba law, no one involved in the case can be named.

For much of the fifth day of testimony, the grandmother described in detail the couple's recent history of neglect.

During one four-month stretch, the grandmother said her daughter abandoned the 7-year-old to run off with a man she'd met through a white-supremacist website. She would eventually marry the man, but during that 4-month period, which included Christmas, the little girl was left in the care of the grandmother and other relatives.

“[Her] heart was just broken,” the grandmother said of her granddaughter. “She was just a sad, sad girl ... I couldn't believe how broken-hearted she was.”

As sad as she was separated from her mother, the little girl was in much more danger when she was reunited, the grandmother said.

During afternoon testimony, she described a series of apartments the family inhabited that became soiled with rabbit and dog feces, cat urine and kitty litter.

She detailed one rural mobile home the couple lived in as “kind of like from the Trailer Park Boys ” with a falling-down garage, holes in the floors, and a yard covered with feces from the couple's bull mastiff, which was fed only raw meat “to help its killer instincts.”

“I was really worried for the kids because here you're training the dog to be a killer and you have two small children.”

She said she often found white-supremacist literature around the couple's home. One poster claimed that “black people were carriers of AIDS,” she said. More alarmingly, during the little girl's kindergarten graduation, the father showed up wearing a red T-shirt emblazoned with “Full of 88.” Among white-supremacist movements, ‘8' refers to the eighth letter of the alphabet, and ‘88' is shorthand for Heil Hitler .

“He didn't seem to care that that was inappropriate,” the grandmother said.

She also testified that the father often bragged of fights he'd been in. During a conversation with her granddaughter, she found out that the family had been involved in a “big fight” at a bowling alley, sparked when the mother referred to someone as a “nigger.”

Finishing up her testimony, she bristled at the thought of the father being awarded custody.

“[The father] has no means of supporting them,” she said. “I don't think he can provide a clean or a safe place for them to live. I don't think he could be a good dad to them.”

The hearing was adjourned until June 4.




Commentary by the Ottawa Mens Centre

6/1/2009 7:28:34 PM
Maternal Grandmother's make great witnesses, providing there are no contradictions.

Lets wait till we hear the rest of the story, even though its all pointing towards the children going to live with their maternal grandmother and that's the only problem that can be seen from the news, the maternal grandmother may be, or might be saying what she thinks the court wants to hear and may be also hoping to gain custody.

If all the allegations were false, then so would the maternal grandmother's comments.

The trouble is, so far, the evidence against the parents gets more damming by the day.

And, just in case you get revolted by the dog's poo all around, that can be said for many many homes of children who never get investigated by the CAS.

Now lets wait to see or hear all that "collateral evidence" that has not made the news , yet. Lets hope its what the judge needs in order to make the right decision. Anyway you look at it, the evidence to date is not positive for the parents.



6/1/2009 7:47:54 PM
Thanks Buck Russell2 for your accurate quote, even if it is going to generate a lot of negative feedback, but negative feedback is often the sign of a population at large that finds the subject, too hard or too simple and draws inappropriate conclusions without knowing the facts-

"Lawyers and judges have a good saying: "Hard cases make bad law."

Yes, the parents' views are sickening, and the "thin edge of the wedge" has already been enshrined into law already, its a legal presumption that mothers get children regardless and that fathers should be treated with a reverse onus that they are child abusers and a danger to children.

If we don't like Nazi attitudes and Nazi tactics, we should first consider that those with those very attitudes comprise of what is called "the underbelly of the judiciary". Almost daily that small crowd of judges make draconian rulings that criminalize men, on next to NO evidence, without a trial, on summary judgment or after 'striking pleadings" or after ordering "security for costs" to "end the litigation.

Family Court judges have allready turned the Family Courts into a Mockery of Justice that has a fairness that often equates to about the same objectiveness as a court of Hitler's Third Reich.

The "State" has already given "absolute power" to a few judges who flagrantly abuse that power with criminal intent and criminal actions. But those same underbelly judges believe they have total immunity and zero accountability. They react to posts like this with the most horrific examples of abuse of power.

To make it even worse, the Attorney General of Ontario, the Chief Justice of Ontario, the Regional Senior Judges all, turn a blind eye to very obvious illegal decisions. A classic example of such vile corruption is Ontario Superior Court Judge Allan Sheffield who orders "A fine payable personally" or terminates access on "summary judgment" when FOUR other judges ordered a trial.

Click Thumbs UP pse.