Why Won't Linda Burney Answer These Questions !!! What Are You Hiding Minister for Child Trafficking?
- Details
- Category: Uncategorised
- Created: Wednesday, 19 May 2010 23:30
- Written by Alecomm
From: Preliminary Docs Complaints at Alecomm [mailto:This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.] 
Sent: Thursday, 20 May 2010 10:05 PM
To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Cc: New Complaints; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; 'Bankstown Community Resource Group Inc.'; 'NSW Ombudsman'
Subject: Emily Brown & Julie Brown
I am wondering if you could help us – on behalf of the public, the Australian Legislative Ethics Commission (Alecomm) and Emily Brown, Julie Brown (Emily Browns Mother) and NSGBD (New Stolen Generation By DOCs), and Mr Ajaka and Ms Ficcara (whom have both submitted unanswered Question Time questions in Parliament regarding Emily):
(1) In relation to the removal by the Department of Community Services of the child, henceforth referred to as 'E', from the care of JB on 6 September 1996:
a. Was 'E' well-nourished at the time that she was removed from JB's care?
b. When 'E' was removed from JB's care, was there physical evidence of either abuse or neglect, and if so, what evidence?
c. Given that 'E', in the 3 years prior to removal, attended a significant number of child support programs and interventions, on what evidence did the Department of Community Services determine that JB had failed to assist 'E's' developmental delay or autism?
d. What is the minimum threshold level of support that the Department of Community Services requires a caregiver to provide to a child with autism?
e. Was 'E' originally diagnosed in 1993 as having moderate autism, and subsequently re-assessed as having mild autism in 1995?
f. In 1996 and prior to the date of removal, does the Department of Community Services have any evidence that the police were ever called to attend the household in which 'E' resided with her mother, for reasons of violence, domestic disturbance or other unlawfulness?
g. What assumption did the Department of Community Services initially make in relation to the infected mosquito bite on 'E's' face at the time they accused JB of abuse in 1995?
h. Was this assumption disproved by a report from 'E's' medical practitioner?
i. Did the Department of Community Services ever have cause or reason to enter JB's house at any time other than on the date of 'E's' removal (6 September 1996) and at the time of the
incident with the mosquito bite?
j. On 6 September 1996, why did the Department of Community Services section JB in a mental health facility upon removing 'E' from her care?
k. Were the claims of abuse and neglect internal claims from the Department of Community Services? 2303 Legislative Council Questions and Answers No. 59— Thursday 19 June 2008
l. Was there any evidence to support the claims of abuse and neglect beyond the opinions of the Department of Community Services' staff or agents?
m. What were the conclusions of the Mental Health Report after 4 days of observation on JB's release?
(2) In relation to the court case concerning the removal of custodial care from Ms JB of the child who shall henceforth be referred to as 'E':
a. Upon what evidence did the Department of Community Services' (DoCS) agents base their statements to the Court, (during the 1997 hearing), that 'E' was or could be in danger of either neglect or abuse?
b. On what grounds have DoCS agents maintained, in all hearings and on all records, and contrary to the findings of independent psychiatrist reports, that JB is mentally ill?
c. Does DoCS have any medical evidence, based on clinical assessment of JB, as to her mentally incapacity?
d. At the hearing concerning the removal of JB's custody of 'E', did BK, a DoCS-employed clinical psychologist, testify that she had spent 1½ hours interviewing Ms B?
e. Did the documented report that BK submitted to Court state, contrary to her sworn statement, that Ms K only spoke to JB for 15 minutes during JB's visit to a DoCS office?
f. What weight did DoCS give to the allegations made by the father of 'E', who had not seen JB or 'E' for at least 3 years and had minimal contact in the preceding years?
g. Did DoCS or its agents write or assist with the father's depositions?
(3) In relation to Ms JB's petition for the custody of the child, henceforth referred to as 'E':
a. In the initial Court proceedings, did Magistrate Gilmore refuse to hear the testimonies of Ms B's witnesses?
(i) If so, why?
b. In the initial Court proceedings, did Magistrate Gilmore refuse Ms B's new solicitor time to familiarise himself with the case notes?
(i) If so, why?
c. In the years 2000 2003, how much access did JB have to 'E'?
d. How many times has JB petitioned the Courts to review the removal of 'E' or to change the custody arrangements?
e. How many times, while the father had custody of 'E', did JB inform DoCS that she believed the child 'E' was being neglected and abused by either her father or his wife?
f. Did DoCS use JB's allegations of abuse, concerning 'E's' father, as evidence of JB's mental instability and/or personality disorder?
g. Why did DoCS continue to support the father's custody of 'E', when Dr M's report showed that 'E' had been abused whilst in the care of the stepmother and father, and that there was domestic violence within their home?
h. Why did DoCS fight the petition sent to the Family Court by Chief Justice Alistair Nicholson, which stopped this case from being heard under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s69ZK?
(4) In relation to the teenage years of the child who shall henceforth be referred to as 'E':
a. Given that the care plan document of 2005 is inconsistent with other documents, did the Department of Community Services (DoCS) strike a deal with 'E's' father, such that DoCS would refrain from pressing abuse or neglect charges if he would:
• Give custody of 'E' to DoCS;
• Submit to the Court a document containing allegations in regard to Ms B's application for custody of 'E';
• Stop having contact with the child 'E'?
• Give custody of 'E' to DoCS;
• Submit to the Court a document containing allegations in regard to Ms B's application for custody of 'E';
• Stop having contact with the child 'E'?
b. Is 'E's' father's still employed working with children?
2304 Legislative Council Questions and Answers No. 59— Thursday 19 June 2008
c. What contact has 'E's' father and his wife had with 'E' since custody was awarded to DoCS?
d. Have reports since the time of the father's relinquishment of custody mentioned the likelihood of abuse, neglect and possible sexual assault during the years in which E was in the custody and care of the father and stepmother?
e. Why would DoCS not provide 'E' with an advocate who was independent of DoCS?
f. How many foster carers did 'E' reside within the 2-year period between the time at which DoCS sought custody and the placement of 'E' in a group home with Bankstown Children's Centre?
g. Why did DoCS and 'E's' advocate argue against an independent assessment of 'E' on many occasions?
h. How much access did DoCS allow Ms B to have to 'E' in the time between 'E' leaving the care of the father and 'E's' placement in a group home?
i. On how many occasions did DoCS refuse Ms B access to 'E' during the years of foster care, notwithstanding Court Orders that awarded her visitation rights?
j. Did 'E' become a voluntary mute during the years spent in foster care?
k. Did 'E' become difficult to manage?
(i) If so, what behaviours did 'E' exhibit?
l. Why did 'E' stay in the care of DoCS after the age of 16, given that DoCS stated to the Woods Inquiry that it does not have the capacity or expertise to care for children with disabilities?
m. Prior to 'E' becoming the responsibility DoCS, had 'E' been progressing well at school?
n. How many days has 'E' attended school since the age of 14?
o. At any point in the past 12 years has DoCS ever tried to restore the child 'E' to the natural mother JB in keeping with DoCS policy directives?
(5) In relation to the teenage years of the child 'E', spent in the care of the Department of Community Services (DoCS):
a. Was 'E' refusing to talk to anyone from DoCS or its agents when she was placed in the Christine Street, Northmead group Home in 2005⁄2006?
b. How many times throughout the period that 'E' resided in the Christine Street House, run by the Bankstown Children's Centre, were the police called to attend this address because of violent incidents?
c. How many times were the girls residing in the Christine Street House arrested and/or removed by police for violence?
d. How many times were charges laid on the girl called 'H'?
e. How many times did 'E' attend or get admitted to hospital because of physical injuries sustained whilst trying to escape, emotional breakdowns, or as the victim of assault while residing in the Christine Street House?
f. Has the Minister read the 9-month detailed diary entries of the next-door neighbour, CS, logging the police visits and tales of abuse and neglect of the occupants within the Christine Street House?
g. Was 'E' removed from the Christine Street House because she had started to talk to the neighbour CS?
h. On what factual basis did a DoCS employee inform CS, in writing, that the assaults and volatile living conditions in the Northmead house were simply a matter of sibling-like rivalry over clothing, television etc?
i. Did one of the occupants assault 'E's' mother when she made an access visit on 'E's' 16th birthday?
j. Did DoCS document this alleged assault as Ms JB assaulting the girl 'H'?
k. Did the neighbours tell the police and swear a deposition that it was 'H' assaulting Ms B?
l. Was only plastic cutlery used in this house?
(i) If so, why?
m. Did DoCS document that when 'E' smashed a bathroom at the Miranda Fair Shopping Centre upon being told that her access visit with her mother was finished, her conduct being attributable to the impact of seeing her mother, rather than a reaction to going back to the DoCS-funded group home?
2305 Legislative Council Questions and Answers No. 59— Thursday 19 June 2008
n. Had the access visit prior to the aforementioned incident gone without problems until 'E' was told she had to go?
(6) In relation to the medical and psychological history of 'E':
a. Why did DoCS elect not to give 'E's' medical history in the form of medical files when seeking reports from the Developmental Disability Clinic that were to be used as evidence in the Guardianship Tribunal?
b. From whom did Dr L obtain the information upon which she based her opinion that child 'E' had a mentally ill mother and a bi-polar father, as stated in her report used for the Guardianship Tribunal?
c. How many hours has Ms JB spent with her daughter since she came under the physical auspices of DoCS in 2002, excluding the five days in September⁄October 2007?
d. How many 24-hour days access visits has Ms B had with the child 'E'?
e. When and how was it reported in medical evidence from Dr W that 'E' threw plates at her mother as a reaction to stop access visits, given that Ms B had not entered a residence that 'E' lived in since her removal at the age of 6?
f. Was Dr L given the records of 'E's' sexual assault counselling, police interview and allegations that 'E' had made, so as to assist in the formulation of her report for the Guardianship Tribunal?
g. Was Dr W given the records of 'E's' sexual assault counselling and police interview in order to assist her in making her report for the Guardianship Tribunal?
h. Were Dr L and Dr W given reports on 'E's' assessment as mildly disabled in 2002, prior to DoCS taking custody, to compare 'E's' downhill spiral from that date?
i. Were either Dr L or Dr W given police reports on the near daily violence to which 'E' was subjected whilst 'E' was residing in Northmead?
j. Why does Dr W's report for the Guardianship tribunal only make mention of sexual assault counselling without any reference to when, why or how this sexual assault asserted by 'E' occurred; and without reference to the nature and extent of its impact on 'E'?
k. Given that Dr L stated that 'E' was able to read and write (even upside down), had good literacy skills, and did not have auditory hallucinations, why did DoCS submit that 'E' was incompetent to speak for herself during court proceedings concerning the care order?
l. Why did DoCS steadfastly deny the need for independent assessments over a period of 12 years?
m. Has 'E' received electric shock therapy in the past 4 years?
(7) In relation to the police statement of interview by the child henceforth referred to as 'E':
a. Did DoCS document the incident of September 2007, where 'E' ran away with her mother Ms B to seek refuge with the Outreach Ministries as kidnap?
b. Did the 17 year-old 'E' go with her mother of her own volition, as stated in independent testament?
c. Did 'E' begin to talk during the 5 days spent away from the care and control of DoCS?
d. Did the Minister personally read the letters and files that Reverend C wrote, stating that 'E' bloomed over the five days spent out of the care of DoCS and that this case was a grave miscarriage of justice?
e. Have DoCS documented, in a report submitted to the Guardianship Tribunal, that the shoulderlength haircut which Ms B gave 'E' was intended to disguise her as a boy?
f. Did witnesses say 'E' presented to Outreach Ministries as generally unkempt in terms of her personal hygiene as well as her dress?
g. When the child 'E' was picked up by police, was she clean and well presented?
h. In the oral statements that 'E' made to the police over a 2-3 hour period, did she state that:
(i) DoCS workers or their agents were sexually abusing 'E'?
(ii) 'E' was frightened of DoCS and/or their agents?
(iii) 'E' wanted to live with her mother?
(i) If 'E' did make a statement that she was being abused by DoCS workers⁄agents, did the police interview these workers?
(i) If not why not?
(ii) If so, has anyone been charged by police?
i. Was the child 'E' coherent and capable of giving the 2-3 hour police interview?
2306 Legislative Council Questions and Answers No. 59— Thursday 19 June 2008
(i) Did DoCS agents tell the police that they would conduct their own investigation?
(ii) If so, what was the outcome of this investigation?
j. Did DoCS return the child 'E' to the same house with the same care workers after the police interview?
k. Is the house in which 'E' was placed funded by the Bankstown Children's Centre?
l. Has the child 'E' been counselled and/or treated for sexual assault since the police interview?
m. Has the child 'E' since returned to the state of elective mute, again refusing to talk to DoCS or its agents?
(8) In relation to the guardianship of the child 'E':
a. Has DoCS recently had the child 'E' re-assessed as being mentally ill or moderately disabled because 'E' chooses not to communicate with DoCS or its agents?
b. Did Dr L express doubts in her report as to 'E's' assessment?
c. Why did DoCS, in their petition for adult guardianship of 'E', seek all functions including access⁄contact arrangements?
d. Did DoCS have one of 'E's' caseworkers seek guardianship control of 'E' because DoCS itself cannot be the guardian of an 'adult'?
e. Have the Guardianship Tribunal been given a copy of the oral police interview - incident number E31737704 with 'E', dated October 2007, to assist them in reaching their decision?
f. Why did Ms C from DoCS write to the Guardianship Tribunal asking for guards to be provided at the hearing because "E's mother 'could' become aggressive towards tribunal members if they make a decision with which E's mother does not agree"?
g. Is there any police evidence that E's mother has ever assaulted anyone?
(9) In relation to the adult future of 'E':
a. Would the highly respected child and family psychiatrist, Dr AM, who is on the NSW Criminal Indictable Experts List for child and family matters or Australia's leading intellectual disability psychiatrist, Dr PW, be deemed suitable to treat 'E' and to give an independent assessment of 'E's' future needs,
(i) If so, would DoCS seek to have the report by Dr AM or Dr PW presented to the Guardianship Tribunal before it reaches a decision?
b. Why has DoCS determined that the Bankstown Children's Centre is a more appropriate custodian of 'E' than the Outreach Ministries, when 'E' has made allegations to the police against the Bankstown Centre's staff?
c. Why has DoCS not given its assent to the independent monitoring of contact between 'E' and Ms B by an expert such as Dr AM or Dr PW?
Kindest Regards,
Marney MacDonald
