Search This Blog

Search This Blog

Search This Blog

Translate

Google+ Followers

Friday, April 07, 2006

2nd Degree Murder and a Public Inquest Called!

April 7, 2006
T.O. grandparents who starved boy to death guilty of second-degree murder

TORONTO (CP) - A Toronto couple who allowed their five-year-old grandson to starve to death have been found guilty of second-degree murder.

Fifty-four-year-old Elva Bottineau and 53-year-old Norman Kidman were supposed to have saved their grandchildren from a life of abuse after they were taken from their birth parents. Instead, five-year-old Jeffrey Baldwin was confined to a locked, unheated bedroom for as much as 14 hours a day, breathing in the smell of his own urine and feces.

The details of his tragic life were outlined for the court Friday in a lengthy address by Justice David Watt that took much of the day.

Court heard he was treated like a dog, made to eat out of a bowl with his fingers and he often drank from a toilet when he was thirsty.

Immediately upon the verdict's release, Ontario's chief coroner announced that an inquest would be held.

"The circumstances surrounding Jeffrey's death have been a matter of public interest," Dr. Barry McLellan's office said in a release.

"Issues to be addressed at the inquest include the Toronto Catholic Children's Aid Society's involvement in Jeffrey's placement and the role that agency, and others, had in monitoring his well-being prior to his death."

Emergency crews were shocked when they found Jeffrey's frail body, weighing less than he did on his first birthday.

He was just 21 pounds when he died of starvation and pneumonia in November 2002, weeks before his sixth birthday.

When his sister was rescued from the house she too showed obvious signs of starvation with skinny limbs, a distended belly and open sores.

Although the children lived in squalor, the rest of the house was immaculately clean, court heard.

The couple was also found guilty of forcible confinement for the girl's care.

Bottineau's lawyer Anil Kapoor had argued his client did not deliberately kill her grandson. He cited a psychologist who testified Bottineau was mentally retarded with a personality disorder that prevented her from seeing Jeffrey waste away.

But another expert witness, Lisa Ramshaw, contradicted that assessment and said Bottineau had "a higher order of thinking than someone with mental retardation" and lied to protect herself.

Lawyer Catherine Glaister told Watt that Kidman did not plan to kill Jeffrey and had little involvement in the children's lives.

40 comments:

Anonymous said...

Posted a comment below
without going through more
than the few posts.

I commend all the people
here who are all trying to
do something - there are
wonderful ideas here,and
again, in any way that I can help to not that little angel die in vain,
along with the many other
young people that were abused and murdered by people that should have done exactly the opposite.

Justice for Jeffrey, for
sure and so that this doesn't happen again. Obviously l8,000 cases a year is not an excuse to
miss that these people should not have been even
allowed one moment with
these precious, precious
children.

Again, willing to help in
any way - Let me know -
dejavu3@shaw.ca - Cathi

Sorry this blog is even
needed for such an issue,
but I must commend you -
from what I read, I feel
that you are a kind, loving soul, that wants
to make a difference.

One voice joins with another, and so on, and
so on.

Tina said...

Any idea what we can expect from the sentencing. Still, all in all, this is a small victory for Jeffrey finally. Thanks Amanda for helping us put pressure in the right places. Things ARE happening.

Anonymous said...

CAS "regrets the death"? The hell does that mean. Sounds like a lawyer's apology to me. Where's the accountability??

Convictions in boy's death
Grandparents who starved boy to death guilty of second-degree murder
Apr. 7, 2006. 07:58 PM
CANADIAN PRESS

The grandparents of a 5-year-old boy who was locked up and left to wither and die in a cold, fetid room were convicted of second-degree murder Friday in what police described as one of the worst cases of child abuse Canada has ever seen.
Fifty-four-year-old Elva Bottineau and Norman Kidman, 53, were supposed to save Jeffrey Baldwin and his siblings from a life of abuse at the hands of their birth parents.

Instead, the pair used the children as a source of income, collecting government support cheques in their names while confining the young ones to what police described as “a horrible room” that was “harsh, dark, cold and damp.”

“This has been one of the most horrific child abuse cases involving murder that I’ve ever come across — in fact, I think, that this nation has ever seen,” said Toronto police Det. Mike Davis, the lead investigator on the case.

Other officers remarked that they’d seen nothing like it in three decades.

Court heard Jeffrey was hidden away in the unheated bedroom for as long as 14 hours a day, breathing in the stench of his own urine and feces.

Police described the child’s room as “extremely shocking,” with wet uncarpeted floors, mattresses soaked through and littered with stains, bags of filthy diapers throughout, and no toys in sight.

Jeffrey, who weighed just 21 pounds when he died in November 2002, was treated like a dog: he ate out of a bowl with his fingers and often drank from a toilet when he was thirsty.

Jeffrey and his sister — who cannot be named — were locked up so frequently that regular visitors to the home often had no idea they even lived there. Court heard it took several weeks of repeated visits until they finally learned of what was called “bedroom number two.”

Although the siblings lived in squalor, the rest of the house was normal, including the living quarters of other children living in the house, court was told.

The tragic details of Jeffrey’s short life were read once more into the record Friday in a lengthy decision by Justice David Watt, which took around six hours to read.

Emergency crews were shocked when they found Jeffrey’s frail body.

Years of malnutrition stunted his growth and destroyed his body, leaving him emaciated without body fat.

Paramedics said he didn’t look like any child they’d ever seen before. He was so small, had sunken eyes, and veins and bones jutted from his body. Doctors later said he had more bacteria growth on his skin than they had ever seen.

He died of starvation and pneumonia, weighing less than he did when he turned one year old.

When his sister was rescued from the house, she too showed obvious signs of starvation — skinny limbs, a distended belly and open sores.

Jeffrey’s paternal grandmother, Susan Dimitriadis, said she was relieved by the verdict, and had been expecting the worst.

“I was afraid they’d get away with it,” Dimitriadis said. ``They needed to be convicted of this because my grandson is now dead and I miss him.”

The grandparents were also found guilty of forcible confinement for the sister’s care.

Kidman spent almost the entire day in court hunched over with his head in his hands, looking down. Bottineau stared straight ahead for most of the proceedings but began to slump in her chair as the verdict was being read.

Her lawyer Anil Kapoor had argued his client did not deliberately kill her grandson. He cited a psychologist who testified Bottineau was mentally handicapped with a personality disorder that prevented her from seeing Jeffrey waste away.

But another expert witness, Lisa Ramshaw, contradicted that assessment and said Bottineau had “a higher order of thinking than someone with mental retardation” and lied to protect herself.

Lawyer Catherine Glaister told Watt that Kidman did not plan to kill Jeffrey and had little involvement in the children’s lives.

Immediately upon the verdict’s release, Ontario’s chief coroner declared that an inquest would be held, although no date was made available.

“The circumstances surrounding Jeffrey’s death have been a matter of public interest,” Dr. Barry McLellan’s office said in a release.

“Issues to be addressed at the inquest include the Toronto Catholic Children’s Aid Society’s involvement in Jeffrey’s placement and the role that agency, and others, had in monitoring his well-being prior to his death.”

The Catholic Children’s Aid Society released a statement saying it deeply regrets Jeffrey’s tragic death.

“Knowing that we could have done more to prevent Jeffrey’s death has been heartbreaking for everyone involved,” said executive director Mary A. McConville.

“The CCAS wishes to assure the public both that we have made substantial changes to our operating practices to prevent a tragedy like this from happening again and that we will co-operate fully with the coroner in the inquest into Jeffrey’s death.”

The case will resume on April 12 to discuss sentencing.

Anonymous said...

I was so disappointed we could not get a public rally together today -where was everyone?? I was in the courtroom and had to leave after the second degree murder convictions were read aloud by Justice Watt at 4:45 p.m. I commend the media for turning out in full force, however, and hope they will continue on with this important story.

While I appreciate there will be a coroner's inquest, IT IS NOT ENOUGH!!! This will not bring any justice in that the coroner has no ability to impose any penalty on anyone responsible for Jeffrey's death, we need to keep the pressure on. Coroner's inquests proceed regularly in this province and I have yet to see any reforms arising as a result, children are still dying like Jeffrey.

Please join me in a demonstration/rally on the murderers' sentencing date April 12, 2006 at the courthouse which I am hoping will be shorter in duration, so that we can conduct the rally. This apparently co-incides with the Fifth Estate program airing the same night on CBC titled "Failing Jeffrey".

I implore everyone come out and be heard and to try to make a difference because Jeffrey is not getting the justice he deserves without people putting ongoing pressure for more reform and for full and actual accountability of those agents responsible for Jeffrey's death.

Our government has failed us with the inadequacies of Bill 210, and we need to ensure that agents involved in Jeffrey's death are made to account with actual penalties.

Please respond!

Anonymous said...

How is an inquest conducted?
A coroner who has taken special training presides over the inquest, which is open to the public and news media and is usually held in a courtroom or court-like facilities. For the purposes of the inquest, the coroner can administer oaths and issue subpoenas to acquire evidence and to call witnesses who have information that would assist the jury in its duty.

The purpose of an inquest is not to place blame or legal responsibility. Criminal proceedings arising out of a death must be resolved before any inquest can be held. A court reporter records the proceedings and will transcribe the evidence, if requested, for a fee per page.

Anyone interested in participating in the proceedings can apply to the coroner for standing. This may be granted anytime before the end of the proceedings. Counsel or agents may represent persons in this application or they can apply on their own. Application for funding for an inquest can be made to Legal Aid. The Office of the Chief Coroner does not have funding for those participating at an inquest.

Jurors are chosen from the jury roll and swear or affirm to "diligently inquire into the death and determine on the evidence presented at the inquest his/her identity, how, when, where and by what means the deceased came to his or her death and without partiality or bias towards any person, render a true verdict."

The strict rules of evidence do not apply at an inquest but proper courtroom behaviour and protocol are required to protect the importance and integrity of the proceeding. Witnesses are summoned to testify about their knowledge of or involvement in the circumstances of the death. With the assistance of the crown attorney and the coroner, jurors may ask questions of witnesses. Physical evidence may be entered as exhibits for examination. Following the presentation of evidence, parties will be allowed to address the jury and make suggestions about their findings and possible recommendations. The crown attorney will make submissions and then the coroner will charge the members of the jury, reminding them of their oath and advising them of the law as it applies to their verdict.

No one is on trial at an inquest. The presiding coroner and the crown attorney assisting the coroner must protect the goals of the inquest - to bring out the facts relating to the circumstances of the death in a fair and balanced way and allow the jury to make useful and practical recommendations that may prevent similar deaths.

Anonymous said...

I am glad that they were found guilty, it would have been more of an outrage if they had not have been. To the poster that asked where was everyone - many do not live in the GTA and cannot travel on short notice it is not due to a lack of care for Jeffrey what so ever.

Anonymous said...

On City TV in the coverage of the nightmare of Jeffrey Baldwin they did an interview with a man who had been sexually abused for decades in foster care. This man had no dental care either in foster care and has had no teeth since the age of 14 years old. He is in a lawsuit with the CCAS from the report. I CREDIT City Pulse News for interviewing this man. His story is very common, and it is HIGH TIME that the real people affected by the CAS were heard over the idiots that operate this dysfunctional, inept system.

This man looked like he has been through a war, and no doubt he has been - it was obvious that he cared about Jeffrey after all it was the same agency that failed him.

This reported lawsuit makes it God knows how many that are currently going on. The CAS agencies are under immense fire - the victims have had enough. This is why Bill 210 section 68 exists as they know an army of people will NOT BE SILENT ANY LONGER.

Anonymous said...

To Jeannette Lewis and Mary McConville who purported to make statements today after the verdicts were handed down: you are pathetic laughing stocks.

How stupid a statement it is to say that CASs will "learn something" from what happened to Jeffrey. I am also sure that CCAS has "regret" over this incident - so much so, they continue to resist independnet oversight by the Ombudsman or any accountability for that matter.

If CCAS did not get it before this tragedy, and those similar tragedies preceding it, they never will.

It is obvious that Jeffrey's circumstances should never have arisen in the first place.

To Jeannette and Mary: The clock is ticking on CASs, make no mistake about it, and your untouchable mandate will end, I am certain. The public cannot tolerate you or your organizations any more and you are not smarter than we are.

Anonymous said...

BRAVO AND WELL SAID to the last poster you are right no these idiots are not smarter then we are. Both of those culprits should be fired immediately. A child is dead as he was given to convicted child abusers, but again he is the tip of the iceberg.

They will not escape the scrutiny and it is the beginning as there will be a full legal inquiry into these agencies one day.

Anonymous said...

I also want to give credit to CITY TV for interviewing and reporting on the man who is suing CAS as a result of his abuse in foster care. I know that this man provided his information to virtually every media outlet in the courtroom and CITY was the only one that I saw actually add this their report.

Kudos to CITY TV, please keep it up!!!

Anonymous said...

And furthermore I think that anyone who has survived the system should use their voice to help those who cannot - stand beside the fellow victims, change the system for those who no longer have voices, like Jeffrey a sweet, darling little boy.

Anonymous said...

I am glad that City TV had the "guts" to tell the truth. You know this man was in so much pain during the interview that he compared himself to the walking dead, and actually almost in a way envied Jeffrey as he died. Not in a hateful way but as this man's life was DESTROYED by the CAS. The media would do well to interview more people like him. They are human beings that the system discarded and it is long overdue that we heard them, and supported the victims of this GODFORSAKEN system.

Anonymous said...

The statement by the CCAS has no emotion, it is a plastic, fabricated response from the culprits that allowed this to happen. It is a disgrace!!!

Anonymous said...

Jeffrey Baldwin has the spirit of a giant, let us not let this little sweetheart die in vain, he was a beautiful, innocent and precious child.

The CCAS SHOULD BE ON TRIAL FOR HIS DEATH - THEIR INEPTITUDE AND STUPIDTY ORCHESTRATED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!

Anonymous said...

s. 745.4 of the Criminal Code:

... at the time of the sentencing under section 745 of an offender who is convicted of second degree murder, the judge who presided at the trial of the offender, having regard to the character of the offender, the nature of the offence and the circumstances surrounding its commission, and to the recommendation, if any, made pursuant to section 745.2, may by order, substitute for ten years a number of years of imprisonment (being more than ten but not more than twenty-five) without eligibility for parole, as the judge deems fit in the circumstances.

LET'S PRAY JUSTICE WATT GIVES THEM 25 YEARS WITHOUT ELIGIBILITY FOR PAROLE although convicted of 2nd degree murder... This case cries out for it!!!!

Anonymous said...

YES IT DOES LOCK THESE MONSTERS UP AND NEVER LET THEM SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY THEY TORTURED THAT DARLING LITTLE BOY, AND THEY SHOULD PAY!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

On CBC they had pictures of Jeffrey that I have never seen. He was absolutely darling. The face of an angel - that they killed this little sweetheart is enraging!

An innocent lamb, sent to a slaughter.

Anonymous said...

I honestly do not know how anyone could not have cried seeing this little boy's face. A sweet, little angel - rest in peace Jeffrey you will NOT die in vain. Your spirit is huge, and your story will teach us all.

Anonymous said...

Children in our society have the greatest need to be loved, it is that simple. What they crave above all is the love of their own parents. The CHILD ABDUCTION SOCIETY is an abnormal and strange company. They see strangers as being safe, when no child wishes to be taken from nature.

Anonymous said...

The CAS will be held to account one day despite all events here and now. Jeffrey was a true hero, his spirit is huge.

He will not die in vain, and those who have suffered due to the child abduction society will be heard above the culprits of that filthy industry.

Jeffrey's Law said...

All of your posts are fantastic! I'm just on my way out to get all the newspapers as I couldn't be in court yesterday...

It is because of everyone who wrote to coroner's Jim Cairns and Barry McLellan that an inquest is being called. Poor Mr. Cairns was the man who performed Jeffrey's autopsy... I sincerely am sorry to anyone who had to see him as he was whn he died, the image must be excruciating!

I ask all of you to please, please write the Chief Coroners office to thank them for calling the inquiry. Although it will do nothing with regards to criminal charges or people being fired, it will demonstrate to the public the responsibility the CCAS had in Jeffrey's death to the public. I have faith the media will cover it as intensly as they covered the trial. I hope that the information that comes out at the inquiry will spark even more rage against this monster and the ombudsman will finally get the power to investigate.

Please keep writing your letters. It seems to be working and it's all because of strength in numbers. They won't beat us! We ARE smarter and stronger than the CCAS. The shift of power is going to happen. They use our money and use up our children and we can do nothing?? It has to change.... for all children 'in care' now and in the future!

Anonymous said...

TORONTO, April 7 /CNW/ - With the verdict rendered in the criminal
proceedings arising from Jeffrey Baldwin's death, the Catholic Children's Aid
Society of Toronto ("CCAS") is now able to respond with respect to the case.

JEFFREY'S DEATH
The Catholic Children's Aid Society deeply regrets Jeffrey's tragic
death. Knowing that we could have done more to prevent Jeffrey's death has
been heartbreaking for everyone involved.
The CCAS wishes to assure the public both that we have made substantial
changes to our operating practices to prevent a tragedy like this from
happening again and that we will co-operate fully with the Coroner in the
Inquest into Jeffrey's death.

BACKGROUND
After the apprehension of the surviving siblings and cousins, and as a
result of the background check, the CCAS found old records that contained the
criminal convictions of Jeffrey's grandparents, Elva Bottineau and Norman
Kidman in the 1970's. We then realized that we had not checked records on
these grandparents in the 1990's. The grandparents, who were not receiving the
services of the CCAS during this period, were reporting concerns to the CCAS
about the treatment of their grandchildren by their parents. On more than one
occasion they participated in case conferences to discuss their concerns. In
the absence of record checks to detect the history of these grandparents and
their advocacy for the welfare of their grandchildren, the grandparents came
to be viewed by CCAS staff as allies in the protection of their grandchildren.
The grandparents brought forward private applications to family court, seeking
custody of Jeffrey and his older siblings, with the backing of Jeffrey's
parents and the approval of the Catholic Children's Aid Society. Later,
through Child Welfare Court, a younger sibling was placed with the
grandparents with the approval of the CCAS.
We would most certainly have acted differently had the background of the
grandparents surfaced and in particular, the information about their criminal
convictions.
Further, in the summer of 2000, an investigation was initiated during a
strike and completed shortly thereafter. The investigation occurred in
response to an allegation made by an on-line acquaintance of an adult in the
Bottineau/Kidman home and, although a record check was done, it was not
extensive enough to detect the historical record. A visit was made to the
home. Jeffrey and the other children were seen by a CCAS Supervisor. The
effects of maltreatment were not evident at this time, which was more than two
years prior to his death. This was the last contact the Society had with the
family until Jeffrey's death.

CCAS RESPONSE
In 2003, we moved quickly to address inadequacies in our practices that
were revealed in the wake of the tragedy, particularly the need for mandatory
background checks and comprehensive home studies of potential family
caregivers.
We asked Susan Abell, an expert in the field of child welfare and the
review of child deaths, to conduct an external review. The Executive Director
of the Society consulted with the Office of the Chief Coroner and the Ministry
of Children and Youth Services about the scope of the review before
proceeding.

The recommendations of the external review supported the operational
changes made by CCAS in 2003. Through these changes, we have increased our
protection capacity and have done our very best to reduce the risk that such a
situation could happen again in the future. The changes to our practices
include:

- mandatory record checking and assessment of all persons including
family members who come forward as potential caregivers as an
alternative to placing children in foster care
- re-training for existing staff and mandatory training for new staff in
conducting comprehensive record checks, and reviewing family histories
- improvements to our record keeping system to simplify record retrieval
by eliminating multiple systems, creating a master database, and
making historic records accessible from various CCAS branch offices
on-line

Along with these improvements, the external review identified the need
for systemic change and the establishment of provincial standards and
protocols regarding background checks and the assessment of kin homes - homes
where family members come forward as potential caregivers. The CCAS provided
the Coroner's Office and the Ministry with the recommendations of the external
reviewer and advocated for government regulations to standardize record
checking and home study practices.

PROVINCIAL STANDARDS AND PRACTICES
Children's Aid Societies have a responsibility to protect children from
neglect and from physical, sexual and emotional abuse. Although the purpose of
the Child and Family Services Act has always been to protect children, the
legislative framework and the focus of child welfare intervention in the
1990's and earlier was on family preservation, including consideration of
extended family members (kin) as potential caregivers.
During that time, and to this day, Ontario's Children's Aid Societies
follow standardized protocols and practices for considering all applicants for
fostering and adoption of children, including extended family members of
children admitted into the care of a Children's Aid Society. However, there
were no such provincial standards for assessing extended family as caregivers
for children in need of protection and who were not in the care of a
Children's Aid Society.
Major reforms to child welfare practices were entrenched in legislation
in 2000, but the gap in the regulations and standards to assess extended
family of out of care children were not addressed.
In June 2005, proposed amendments to the Child and Family Services Act
set the stage for new government regulations announced this year that have
standardized the practice of all Children's Aid Societies with respect to
background checks and comprehensive home studies of extended family members
(kin).

CONCLUSION
The CCAS deeply regrets Jeffrey's terrible death and the harm done to his
surviving siblings. For an agency committed to the ongoing protection of
thousands of children and families in our community annually, this has been a
heart wrenching experience. The CCAS has learned from this tragedy and has
significantly improved its protection capacity. We have shared the lessons
learned so that the child welfare system can benefit as a whole.
The safety and well being of children must always be the first
consideration in protective services. We trust that the significant
improvements we have made to our operating practices and our co-operation with
the Coroner will assure the community that we are doing our best to minimize
the risk of a similar tragedy in the future.

Sincerely,
Mary A. McConville
Executive Director


Backgrounder
------------

Review of the Catholic Children's Aid Society - Jeffrey Baldwin Case
Author: Susan C. Abell, MSW
Management Resources

Key Recommendations:
--------------------

Catholic Children's Aid Society of Toronto:
-------------------------------------------

1. Family history to be emphasized in performing a comprehensive risk
assessment.

2. Catholic Children's Aid Society continue to develop the information
system with the focus on integration and access to current and past
client information.

3. Monitor the use of the policy implemented in 2004 to assess extended
family placements.

4. Training to emphasize the importance of family history and assessment
of caregivers. Mandatory training practice to continue with focus on
understanding child neglect.

5. When there are grounds to bring a child before the court as being in
need of protection, this intervention to be considered before plans
are completed for transfer of custody. Transfer of custody, based on
assessment of the alternate caregivers, to be part of the case plan,
i.e. court order. This is particularly applicable in cases of ongoing
child neglect.

((*)Note from CCAS to journalists: If a worker is faced with a
decision to remove children from their parents and has the option to
either allow the children to live with extended family or place the
children in foster care, according to this recommendation, if the CAS
chooses the option of extended family, the matter should still be
brought before child welfare court rather than simply withdrawing
once custody is transferred.)

6. Legal training for new workers to include preparing family history
for the court, particularly in cases of child neglect.

7. Issues, recommendations and changes the agency has made to be
communicated to the wider field of child welfare as part of the
"lessons learned".

Ontario Child Protection Training Program:
------------------------------------------

1. To ensure that future training and curricula models adhere to
standards of content that place sufficient emphasis on family
history, assessments of alternate caregivers and child neglect. This
includes the need to reassess the training for new and authorized
workers with regard to the content on child neglect.

Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies:
------------------------------------------------

1. Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies to receive the
recommendations from the review and use it for presentation and
discussion with various parties, in particular the member agencies
and the Ministry.

Ministry of Children and Youth Services:
----------------------------------------

1. The Ministry to deliver on promise of the comprehensive information
system for Children's Aid Societies.

2. Fast Track to be reviewed with regard to the capacity to provide
relevant past history.

3. Retention of records, confidentiality and information sharing need to
be examined and direction given in relation to Part 8 of legislation.

4. The Ministry to develop policies supporting protection of children in
kinship care arrangements.

5. The Ministry to initiate discussions regarding the integration of
custody applications with past records of child protection findings.

6. The review of child protection standards and their use needs to be
completed to ensure that the focus and balance are in place to
provide appropriate interventions for children and their families.

Office of the Chief Coroner:
----------------------------

1. The Coroner's Office to consider developing a capacity for
consultation with the Pediatric Death Review Committee on those child
deaths which are not covered under the present protocol.

2. Review the protocol for its effectiveness with emphasis on the
purpose and use for internal reviews.

3. The Coroner to give consideration to means to support Children's Aid
Societies, workers and related professionals to review and examine
their practices, in an environment that encourages being open,
without the threat of prosecution.

WITHOUT THE THREAT OF PROSECUTION
the bottom line THEY MAKE CHANGES THAT ALSO MAKE THEM LESS AND LESS ACCOUNTABLE, I DO NOT SEE ONE THING ABOUT MOTHERS AND FATHERS IN THIS, NOR DOING BACK GROUP AND CHECKS ON PEOPLE WORKING FOR THE INDUSTRY, THE FOSTER FAMILIES, AND THERE KIN AND FRIENDS, THAT HAVE KILLED MANY, AND ABUSED HUGE NUMBERS OF CHILDREN, THE CROWN WARDS, THE WALKING WOUNDED,

THIS INDUSTRY SHOULD BE TAKEN DOWN,
FROM THE RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS, THE SPECIAL NEEDS, CHILDREN THAT ARE MURDERED, AND PLACED IN CAGES, DRUGGED, RAPED, AND MORE, A PARENT WHO CAN NO LONGER TAKE CARE OF THERE SPECIAL NEEDS CHILD AT HOME IS TREATED LIKE A CRIMINAL, YET THE FOSTER FAMILY IS PAID TO CARE FOR THEM , WHY NOT GIVE THAT MONEY AND SERVICES TO THE FAMILY, SO THEY CAN KEEP THE CHILD AT HOME, IT MAKES NO SENSE, AND STILL PARENTS GO TO COURT TO PLACE CHILDREN, AND LOSE PARENTAL RIGHTS, ON A MADE UP PROTECTION ISSUE, ( LIES IN THE COURT, LIES BY THE CCAS AND CAS, LIES TO GET CARE , HOW ON EARTH DO THEY GET AWAY WITH IT, THEY HAVE BEEN DOING IT FOREVER AND KNOW NO TRUTH.
MESSY HOUSES AND A CHILD IS MURDERED IN CARE. WHERE IS THE MEDIA, HIS NAME IS MATTHEW REID.
PARENTS, BEING FALSELY ACCUSED ON A DAILY, COMING TO THE UNDERSTANDING, THAT THIS SYSTEM IS CORRUPT TO THE CORE. WE ALL KNOW IT, EVEN THE GOVERNMENT KNOWS, YET NOTHING CHANGES. JEFFERY WOULD HAVE SHOWN SIGNS OF THE ABUSE TWO YEARS BEFORE HIS DEATH, FOR ANYONE TO SAY OTHER WISE IS AN OUT RIGHT LIE, THE SOCIAL WORKER THAT MADE THAT VISIT, SHOULD BE FIRED, A CHILD DOES NOT END UP IN THAT CONDITION OVER NIGHT IT TOOK YEARS OF ABUSE TO KILL HIM. THE LOST RECORDS HELLO!!!!!!
YET THEY PLAN ON STEAM LINING THE ADOPTION PROCESS, MAKE IT EASIER FOR PARENTS THAT WANT TO ADOPT.
GREAT, KIN IN JEFFERY'S CASE WERE NO KIN TO HIM, WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER CHILDREN, THE WOUNDS WILL NEVER HEAL CCAS WILL SEE TO THAT. NOT ONLY DID JEFFERY DIE THAT DAY, BUT SO DID HIS SIBLINGS, SO DID THE OTHER GRANDMOTHERS AND AUNTS, LIVES FOREVER CHANGED AND LOST, BECAUSE OF THIS SYSTEM. THE GOVERNMENT WONT TAKE ACTION, IT TIME WE DID.
AND BE THE PUBLIC WATCH DOGS ON THIS INDUSTRY, LISTEN TO WHY CHILDREN ARE BEING REMOVED, IS IT TRULY NECESSARY, WOULD JEFFERY BE DEAD TODAY IF LEFT WITH HIS MOTHER AND FATHER, THEY MAY HAVE NOT BEEN THE CLEAVERS, BUT THE CHILDREN WOULD NOT HAVE SUFFERED THIS FATE.
JEFFERY YES BEAUTIFUL AND TRAGIC, BUT HIS FACE ALSO TELLS ME SOMETHING ELSE THIS CHILD WAS INJURED BEFORE HIS BIRTH WITH ALCOHOL, HE HAS THE CLASSIC FEATURES OF AN FAS CHILD, WHY DID THE CCAS NOT SEE IT,????????
AND KNOW BEFORE PLACING HIM , WITH ANYONE, HE WOULD REQUIRE VERY SPECIAL PEOPLE TO TAKE CARE OF HIS NEEDS, NOT THE POPULAR THING TO STATE I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IT IS OFTEN CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS CHILDREN WITH BIRTH DEFECTS OR FAC, AUTISM AND THE LIKE THAT END UP ABUSED AND KILLED BY PEOPLE OTHER THEN THERE NATURAL PARENTS, BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO HANDLE THE BEHAVIOUR. AND IN THIS CASE, I BELIEVE THAT JEFFERY AND HIS ONE SIBLING WERE LOCKED UP, BECAUSE THEY NEEDED SPECIAL CARE AND THE GRANDPARENTS THE MONSTERS DID NOT HAVE THE INTELLIGENCE TO SEE IT,
NOR DID THE CCAS FOR THAT MATTER.
WHY ELSE DID THEY TREAT THE OTHER TWO DIFFERENT,??
DID THEY SEE HIS BEHAVIOUR , AS BAD, WHEN IT WAS A BRAIN INJURY, NO I AM NOT LETTING THEM OFF. THIS IS HAPPENING IN ADOPTED HOMES, PARENTS RETURNED CHILDREN, DAMAGED OR AT A ABUSE THEM OR BLAME THEMSELVES, THIS SHOULD BE PART OF THAT INQUEST. DID JEFFERY HAVE FAS, AND HOW AND WHY THE CCAS DID NOT SEE IT AND UNDERSTAND WITH NO EXCUSE THIS WAS A CHILD THAT WOULD REQUIRE , PARENTS WITH AN UNDERSTANDING OF THAT DISORDER. AND IF THEY KNEW, WHY WAS NOTHING MORE NOT DONE FOR HIM, WHY WERE SERVICE NOT PUT INTO ANY HOME HE WAS PLACED IN???? NOT BE THREATEN WITH PROSECUTION CCAS,
THEN STOP KILLING CHILDREN AND, STOP THREATENING THE PUBLIC. THEY ARE NOT LIKED OUT HERE, NO ONE TRUST THIS SYSTEM, ONLY THE VERY FEW YOU THEY HAVE THREATENED WITH PROSECUTION FOR NOT REPORTING RISK OF ANY THING. SOME ONE IS LIABLE IT IS THE GOVERNMENT FOR BEING SO SHORT SIGHTED AND STUPID, WHEN IT COMES TO CHILDREN AND FAMILIES.


For further information: Anne Rappé, Manager, Communications at
(416) 395-1500 or mailto:pr@ccas.toronto.on.ca

I HOPE WE DONT READ THE LAME EXCUSE IN THE PRESS

Anonymous said...

I may be wrong but it seems to me April 12 is the date to SET the date for sentencing...the date the sentence will be delivered is probably months away.

I also wonder where all of these "Bloggrs" with their big ideas were.....all talk and complain but no action.

Anonymous said...

Anyone can understand ones inability to get to the court for various reasons. This court date has been looming for months.

The thing is some said they would protest and Amanda likewise informed the media. Then no protest.

Imagine how this looked to the media? CCAS must have had a good laugh.

Anonymous said...

Ms.Lewis in press ( the self protectors) said they would be placing SW to work with the Coroners office, how nice. Let the ombudsman have oversight and perhaps you would gain the publics trust, instead you have shown us all, your have a great deal to hide, and not just in this case.

Anonymous said...

Nothing in CAS' statement suggests it plans to alter its practice of removing children from loving families and destroying their lives through the system. CAS and those who support them have consistently demonstrated they have no understanding of children's best interests. They are an Orwellian nightmare of unimaginable evil.

Lisa said...

I did attend a wedding with Richard and Yvonne while she was pregnant with Jeffrey and I was pregnant with my son. I didn't see her drinking nor was I ever aware of her ever drinking before then. I knew them both very well at that time and never seen them drink any alcohol up till then. Richard had a few at the wedding. I even have the video of that day. Jeffrey didn't look slow to me, he reached all his mile stones on time and was very sweet. I think you might be jumping to conclusions with his pictures. He looks like his paternal family, he had his uncles beautiful cheeks and dad's curly hair and big eyes. He was just angelic.

Anonymous said...

You know what is the saddest fact of all - Jeffrey was larger then most babies his age, and heavier. It was that darling baby fat that we see in the earlier pictures of him that actually allowed is body in later years to sustain the starvation. I am convinced that had he not have been as big as he was when a baby, that he would have actually died well before he did. Because he was bigger it actually helped him to live a bit longer then most children would have been able to. Had he have been a tiny child I would guess that he would have died much earlier.

How could those disgusting pig monsters have done this to that sweet little boy. They should be hung for this.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps Lisa could clarify one point for people who don't know the family. From news reports, I'm aware of only two reasons Jeffrey was removed from his family: a) a security guard witnessed her shake him in a welfare office. b) she engaged in a verbal arguement on the street outside her home. Is that it - or are there credible reasons to believe she was a danger to her children in the way Bottineau and Kidman proved to be?

Anonymous said...

This was from Nick Pron's article in the Toronto Star

"Dimitriadis's husband, Paul, was blunt in his criticism of the society.

"I believe the Catholic Children's Aid Society lives in a big castle with high walls and when they come out they are guarded by pit bull terriers called lawyers who are ready to tear anyone apart when they try to question them," he said, trembling with rage. "There's a whole bunch of shattered, destroyed lives because of this. Changes have to be made."

THIS STATEMENT SUMS IT UP RATHER NICELY. Their lawyers are pit bulls, they do live in a castle and think they are above everyone, and they have never been accountable. Now another CAS agency is being sued as was mentioned on this site. The system is a disaster!!!

Anonymous said...

Where are Lewis' and McConville's apologies to John Dunn, the man interviewed on City TV and tens of thousands of others who have had their lives destroyed in CAS foster homes. What did Lewis and McConville learn from that?

Anonymous said...

This article was EXCELLENT BY VIVIAN SONG!!! It is very real, and depicts what is all too often the norm for those who were fostered.....


Forgotten Children (Part Two): Long road to recovery

One man battles to overcome a childhood full of abuse and loneliness

By VIVIAN SONG, TORONTO SUN

Changes in protection for kids praised
They need a better chance




All John Dunn remembers is the feeling of cold metal against his bare penis.

As punishment for being a 6-year-old bed wetter, his foster father stood in front of him, held pliers to his penis and threatened to clamp it down.

When he accidentally flooded the toilet after a large bowel movement, as punishment, his foster father grabbed his little head, pushed it down into the bowl, and flushed the toilet.

"I thought I was going to die," Dunn, 35, says from his Ottawa home.

Dunn was 3 when he and his two older sisters and older brother were placed in the child welfare system. Their mother suffered from depression and alcoholism and had attempted suicide.

The former Crown ward speaks openly and earnestly about his experiences as a byproduct of the system himself, but also as the founder of afterfostercare.ca, a website he created for children living in foster care.

The comprehensive site is a one-man show for now, born out of a crisis in his adult life.

But the child advocate has lofty ambitions for his work-in-progress, Foster Care Council of Canada, hoping to empower children in the system with their legal rights and perhaps spare some of them the pain he endured.

Like thousands of youth in care before him, Dunn, now 31, grew up against the odds of a loveless and lonely childhood.

AN INNER RESILIENCE

Happy memories are scarce but inextricably linked to prolonged periods of stability in a caring home, be it months or a few years.

Like thousands of children before him, Dunn survived by summoning a resilience and courage unique to lost, marginalized children.

But eventually, as he would come to discover in his adult life, the towering buildup of anger and abuse most often ends in a fantastic crash that can threaten to crush its victim.

In 2001, Dunn went to the Toronto Catholic Children's Aid Society to retrieve his personal files and retrace his life steps as a child. When the agency refused to hand them over, saying he could only see them on site, he succumbed to a nervous breakdown.

"I thought I was going crazy," he says. "Normally I'm a happy-go-lucky guy but I spent a month crying. It just made me snap ... It set me off because that's how I was always treated by the CAS."

Dunn equates the importance of his files to the importance of a family photo album -- the only tangible record that connects him to his past.

"That's like saying I had to schedule my reminiscing time," he says. "Seeing files -- handwritten files -- are proof you existed. You can hold it in your hands and say, look you existed."

INVISIBLE CHILDREN

The notion of confirming one's existence is a common motif among children of the welfare system, many of whom grow up feeling invisible, full of self-doubt.

In a stirring documentary, Wards of the Crown, released last month by the National Film Board of Canada, Emily, now 20, echoes Dunn's sentiment, when she describes life on the streets and the rush it can provide for a lost, fading girl.

"Men care," she says matter of factly. "And that's okay, even if it's in a bad way. It makes you feel alive. Your heart actually beats whether it's beating so fast because it's dangerous or because you think they do care."

To draw attention to his plight, Dunn embarked on a little-noticed protest walk in 2001 from Toronto to Charlottetown, which took a month to complete. During that time, he created a documentary about his life in foster care, which aired on a CBC radio program four years ago.

Before his journey, he set up a website that would eventually morph into a resource for other children of the welfare system.

Because he was uprooted so many times in his childhood and lost countless friends along the way, Dunn developed a habit of detaching himself from potential relationships, attaching himself instead to geographic sites.

"I miss locations more than people: Parks, highways. I never missed people and I still have that pattern today."

The pattern of instability is another trap for children of the welfare system. In his adult life, Dunn worked hundreds of "joe jobs" and moved countless times, including to the streets of Toronto.

"The effects of instability were I never learned to stick with anything," Dunn says.

"Nothing's stable. I had problems working because when people treat you the way you were treated in group homes, you weren't able to handle authority. Today I can handle authority but it took one year of therapy and lots of time."

13 HOMES IN 15 YEARS

Dunn was placed in 13 different homes between the ages of 3 and 18. He and his older brother were nearly adopted from the foster father who abused them in Trout Creek.

According to the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies, there is no standardized system of screening potential parents, nor are the eight to 12 training sessions standardized among the province's 53 CASs.

More than Dunn, it was his older brother who bore the brunt of abuse from their foster father.

When he played with fire as a child, their foster father burned his hands with matches and would drag him down the stairs by his hair.

Finally, when Dunn was 9 years old, he and his older brother decided to run away.

"My brother said, 'That's it,'" Dunn remembers. "(My foster dad) was sleeping so we snuck in the house to get our allowance money from the jars and snuck out."

The two little boys walked along Hwy. 11 all afternoon and into the evening.

But at about 9 p.m., a family member found the pair and drove them back home.

For the next nine years, Dunn and his brother would move through other abusive foster and group homes.

The only time Dunn brightens when speaking of his childhood is when he speaks about the time he spent with his biological mother. She had been sober for six years and was allowed to be reunited with her children for visitations.

"I remember sitting in the main lobby of the Toronto Catholic CAS, and beside me was a lady. She knew (who I was) and flew over to me and gave me a big hug. It was pretty wild," he says. "It was a good moment for me, the first time I felt any good care."

MOTHER'S SUICIDE

She committed suicide in 1998.

"I loved her like crazy," he says. "The only time I felt loved was when I was with her."

A chance meeting with his older brother in Toronto years later would confirm the scars of abuse are too overpowering for some to recover from.

"He's in too far," Dunn says of his brother's drug and alcohol problem. "I was too young to (understand) but he was old enough to be affected and missed mom. He was devastated."

For Dunn, defeat isn't an option. He's now studying at Algonquin College to be a law clerk, with the ultimate dream of becoming a lawyer. He wants to learn how to use the law and know his rights.

"If I can't beat them, might as well be them," he says. "I see a future now whereas I didn't see one before."

Anonymous said...

I'm beginning to wonder if Jeanette Lewis is on drugs. Her latest transparent attempt to shift blame, as reported by the Globe and Mail is:

Jeanette Lewis . . . said the “devastating” case illustrates the need for families, neighbours and the public to be aware of potentially abusive situations.

Here, she conveniently forgets that CCAS refused to facilitate access with relatives that would have saved Jeffrey's life.

Lewis continues her attempt to evade accountability by stating, "children's aid societies are not in a caregiver's home 24 hours a day, seven days a week.”

In fact, they were never in the caregivers home - the convicted child abusers they assigned for that role were with the children 24/7.

Is there any limit to the denial and incompetence this individual demonstrates each time she opens her mouth?

Anonymous said...

Hey everyone,the 12th is only to set a date,I can inform you of the date I will be there!The police officer is going to let me know and then I will post.Amanda where were you a couple of people from the media were asking for you and wondering where the rally was.Everyone knew months before what the date was where was everyone?I seen only one gentleman that I had met on Nov.30th.Elayne

Lisa said...

To whom ever wanted me to clairify what I know about the removal of the children. The first born daughter was removed due to a domestic dispute, which were common as Yvonne is a violent and insane individual. Yvonne chased Richard out of the basement appartment with a knife leaving the baby on her own at only a few months old. They were outside arguing until the police arrived and were giving statements to the police for quite a length of time before the officers realized that they had a baby inside all this time. CCAS were called and she was moved to the Kidman house hold.And Jeffrey and his older sister were removed due to Yvonne shaking Jeffrey and throwing him on top of his sister in a single stroller at a welfare office on Queen St. East. It was witnessed by a social worker and it was over the fact that she couldn't get her cheque as she wanted to buy a gold necklace downtown. That is the kind of things that were and always will be important to this b***h. She is a carbon copy of her mother, evil, manipulative white trash who's only way to get $ is to pop out children for our taxes to pay for. She has no motherly instincts whatsoever and has no idea how to stop breeding. She has an almost munchousen type affliction for wanting to be pregnant and all the attention that follows. But when the child is born and removed she goes back to the drawing board to figure out how to get Richard when shes ripe again!

Lisa said...

Sorry that I didn't make it to the courthouse, I got into an accident and from what I've been told yesterday my car is a write off. I will be there on the 12th though with signs in hand. Elayne please let your family know that I am happy for them that this trial ended as well as it did.

Anonymous said...

Lisa don't go on the 12th it is just to set a date for the sentencing,you can call Kim O'toole at 55 ,she will tell you the same thing.But go when they do get sentenced it should be the following week I hope.Thanks Lisa see you at the sentencing,Elayne.

Anonymous said...

I hope that the family of Jeffrey's siblings will able to visit them and to monitor the CAS. Given their sheer stupidity and ineptitude it is scary to think of where those siblings are. I think Jeffrey's cousins and the folks posting on this blog should band together and demand that they know where the siblings are and that they be able to see them to ensure that they are safe. As well the siblings should be with each other it is all the more evil that the CCAS has taken them from each other. They have lost their brother and now each other as well.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you I think of those angels every second of the day,I am so worried about them!I am trying my hardest to see these angels and I'm not giving up!!!!!!!!Elayne

CL said...

I agree with the poster who pointed out that besides just being very young children, Jeffrey and his sister most likely required special care because of pre-existing problems/conditions. I have been thinking about this a lot and it makes sense that Jeffrey and probably his sister too had behavioural problems (abused by birth mother, FAS, who knows what else)and that is why they were singled out as the BAD children. They had the terrible misfortune of landing in the hands of extremely evil and stupid people.
Thank God they weren't evil and smart, or else those poor children might still be living (if you want to call it that)in that despicable house.
It is a shame that such menaces to society are often the ones having child after child. And on and on it goes, creating more human wreckage generation after generation.
I only hope that the three remaining siblings (and those other two children living in the house) can have relatively normal lives. Jeffrey's younger brother who was favoured and called the "Prince" worries me...