Child protection workers are trolling DHS support forums and breaching UN obligations and various state laws!
- Details
- Category: Privacy
- Created: Tuesday, 12 March 2013 20:23
- Written by PID 604337/8
The thought of having DHS officers walking into Alcoholics Anonymous meetings to gather dirt on clients, would have to be as close to against the law as you can get. Not to mention its completely dispiccable. Its called Alcoholics Anonymous for a reason, to let people have the opportunity to open up about their issues, and to also provide support for the victims of the alcoholics, and to vent and help oneself in a safe and protected environment.
So where do victims of DHS (Child Protection) go to find assistance? They go to places such as Lukes Army, Alecomm, DocsBusters, and various other groups on Facebook, and they go there for support, for for advice and to be helped in recovering from the trauma of having your child forcibly removed from their care. They generally enter anonymously, so they can discuss their details and or misfortunes, and vent, in that exact same safe and protected environment as AA or NA. And furthermore, they expect that they have as much privacy to their conversations as persons at Alcoholics Anonymous are entitled. It is very obvious to anybody in there, what the groups are discussing, and as such it goes without saying, that unless you are a decent DHS worker, basically Piss Off. These people are entitled to such places for support, just as much as any persons are at Alcoholics Anonymous.
However, with DHS officers having nothing better to do with their time, and arrogant to the fact that Australia is treaty to many International obligations such as the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, they like to spend their time online, and in these exact same forums. They do this to get dirt on their clients, and to use such dirt in affidavits against the client to try to obtain eighteen year olders for the innocent child victims, of the parents whom have offended them. Many of these parents are innocent also, with DHS officers taking children for the most absurd allegations, that even once proven, makes no difference to those who profit from this system.
DoCS Wagga Wagga have just entered a sixty-seven page affidavit, sixty-two pages being cut and past of private forum conversations from such forums. Full conversations of peoples thoughts and venting, freely speaking as our international rights allow us to, and not breaking any child protection laws either. The officers involved are Amanda Credlin, Jennifer Bowden and MCW Morgan.
Why are these officers continually allowed to breach our basic human rights, without reprimand, or sacking - which is what most staff here at Alecomm believe should be happening. These officers know that what they are doing is pathetic and breaking the law, so why do they do it? How can you possibly go home at the end of the day, and say to your partner (if you have one), that you have worked to protect children today, when all you have done is try to ruin somebody's life even further because your own ego has been hurt?
Please find attached the affidavit itself written by DHS staff at Wagga Wagga, and used to try to obtain an eighteen year older on an innocent young girl who just wants to go home to her mummy and daddy.
Crimes Act 1900 No 40 - Section 545B- Intimidation or annoyance by violence or otherwise
(1) Whosoever:(a) with a view to compel any other person to abstain from doing or to do any act which such other person has a legal right to do or abstain from doing, or(b) in consequence of such other person having done any act which he had a legal right to do, or of his having abstained from doing any act which he had a legal right to abstain from doing,wrongfully and without legal authority:(i) uses violence or intimidation to or toward such other person or his wife, child, or dependant, or does any injury to him or to his wife, child, or dependant, or(ii) follows such other person about from place to place, or(iii) hides any tools, clothes, or other property owned or used by such other person, or deprives him of or hinders him in the use thereof, or(iv) (Repealed)(v) follows such other person with two or more other persons in a disorderly manner in or through any street, road, or public place,is liable, on conviction before the Local Court, to imprisonment for 2 years, or to a fine of 50 penalty units, or both.(2) In this section:Intimidation means the causing of a reasonable apprehension of injury to a person or to any member of his family or to any of his dependants, or of violence or damage to any person or property, and intimidate has a corresponding meaning.
Injury includes any injury to a person in respect of his property, business, occupation, employment, or other source of income, and also includes any actionable wrong of any nature.
Whosoever, where any offence is by this Act punishable on summary conviction, aids, abets, counsels, or procures the commission of such offence, shall, on conviction by the Local Court, be guilty in the same degree, and liable to the same forfeiture, and punishment, as the principal offender. (ie the lawyer who submits the affidavits on behalf of the DHS child protection worker).
